Driving Under the Influence of Drugs: When the Law Misses the Mark. Issue 2 (1st October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tiscione, Nicholas B; Alford, Ilene K; Miller, Russell; Shan, Xiaoqin; Yeatman, Dustin Tate
• Is Part Of: Journal of analytical toxicology. Volume 43:Issue 2(2019)
• Page Start: 138
• Page End: 143
• Publication Date: 2018-10-01
• Subjects: Drugs -- Analysis -- Periodicals; Drugs -- Toxicity testing -- Periodicals; 615.907
• DOI: 10.1093/jat/bky070
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0146-4760

Abstract

Abstract: According to Florida law, an individual is not guilty of driving under the influence of drugs unless impairment is observed and is due to one or more controlled drugs listed in the Florida Statutes. Many prescription drugs, over-the-counter drugs and novel psychoactive compounds that can cause significant impairment are not included in this list. Five other states within the USA including Alaska, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York and Oregon have similar or other restrictive language in their impaired driving statutes. From January of 2007 to February of 2018, 1, 344 blood specimens and 1, 796 urine specimens were analyzed for drugs in impaired driving cases in Palm Beach County, Florida. Over the past 11 years, 21% (212 out of 1, 028) of all drug-positive blood specimens and 47% (711 out of 1, 527) of all drug-positive urine specimens contained at least one non-controlled drug, often mixed with controlled drugs. Despite documentation of observed impairment with the concurrent identification of impairing drugs, an impaired driving charge could not be supported due to the phrasing of the law in Florida. If the intent of drug-impaired driving laws is to improve safety by removing impaired drivers from the road, a more all-encompassing "any impairing drug" law would be more appropriate. Linking the charge to a drug possession law framework or using other restrictive language is not the most effective means to improve road safety.