Doctors Urge Chemical Tests For Drivers

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30277, 1 November 1963, Page 10

Doctors Urge Chemical Tests For Drivers

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, October 31. Chemical tests for drinking drivers are advocated in a report from the New Zealand branch of the British Medical Association to the Road Safety Council today. It is proposed also that there should be a change in the legal definition of unfitness to drive, based on impairment of ability to drive safely.

The B.JLA. does not propose that such tests shall be compulsory, but that if the person charged reuses to consent to the taking of a speesmen for analysis, has refusal shall be regarded as supporting the evidence given by the prosecution. Blood tests are preferred by the association. As a result of the consideration of information now available, said the report, the committee wias of the opinion that the presence of alcohol in the body, even in relatively small amounts, impaired the ability to drive a motor-vehicle with safety. It was further held that dtoical tests were comptementary in estimating the degree of impairment in driving ability and that the level of alcohol in the body fltads was cißoeely related to the degree of impairment.

At the international conference on alcohol and road accidents in Landon in 1962 it was agreed that there was a napid and dangerous impairment of driving ability as blood alcohol levels rose above 0.08 per cent

The committee said it fully endorsed the comments made

by the British Medical Association of the United Kingdom in 1060 that a concentration of 0.05 per .cent was the highest that could be accepted in a driver that was entirely consistent with the safety of other road users.

“Whilst in some cincumstances and in some individualis, driving ability may not depreciate to a significant extent by the time that the level is reached, the committee is impressed by the rapidity with which deterioration occurs at blood levels of over 0.1 per cent, a fact which is even true in the case of hardened drinkers and experienced drivers.

“The committee cannot conceive of any circumstances in which it would be safe for a person to drive a motor-vehicle on the public roads with an amount' of alcohol in the blood greater than 0.15 per cent”

The committee favoured a change in the legal definition of unfitness to drive, with the suggestion that a person is taken to be unfit to drive if his ability to drive properly is for the time being impaired. This definition was includ-

ed in the new Road /ict, 1982, in the United Kingdom, replacing the former definition “under the influence of drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of a motor vehicle.” Clinical Examination

It was now accepted that clinical examination contributed little in the assessment of driving impairment.

No clinical tests could be devised which could reflect the degree of co-ordination and mental alertness required to enable a person to drive a vehicle with safety.

Clinical examinations were, however, essential to exclude the presence of injury or of any medical disorder which could stimulate the effect of alcohol or drugs.

The analysis of urine alcohol levels could be accepted as an alternative, but the committee on the whole favoured blood alcohol estimations.

Where a specimen of blood or urine had been taken for analysis the examining doctor should not give a final certificate regarding fitness to drive until the result of the analysis was available to him.

The committee also made the recommendation that post-mortem examinations should be ordered for all fatal accidents, and that part of the examination Should consist of an analysis of a specimen of blood or urine.

“Whilst accepting that there would not be legal difficulty about the admissibility of blood alcohol level in a person accused of being drunk in charge, no matter how the specimen was obtained, the committee accepts that the taking of a specimen of blood without the consent of the suspect would constitute a legal assault and would be potentially actionable as well as being inconsistent with ethical standards,” said the report. Obtain Consent "The committee feels that before a medical officer takes a specimen of blood he must obtain the consent of the accused and inform him that the sample will be analysed and the results of the analysis may be used as evidence for or against him.

“This position would, of course, result in many allegedly intoxicated drivers refusing permission for removal of a blood sample for examination.

“It is felt essential that some type of legislation must ultimately be introduced which would result either in the withdrawal of the licence to drive a vehicle from a person who refused to have a test, or in the acceptance of evidence in court that a person refused to have such a test done, that such refusal would be used as evidence against the accused unless he could show reasonable cause for refusing such a test.”

The consequence of the general acceptance of blood alcohol tests would be the protection of the allegedly intoxicated driver who had not taken alcohol in significant quantities, said the report.