Drink and Driving: A Review
| Published date | 01 June 1965 |
| Date | 01 June 1965 |
| Author | Arthur Chapman |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X6503800610 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
DET.
CHIEF
INSPECTOR
ARTHUR
CHAPMAN
Durham County Constabulary and Police Liaison Officer,
Northern Forensic Science Laboratory
DRINK
AND
DRIVING:
A
REVIEW
Unfitness to Drive
Over the past few years volumes of scientific literature have been
produced dealing with the ability of alcohol to impair the efficiency
of the driver of a motor vehicle.
It
is indeed doubtful whether any
other single offence, not only in British law but in that of many
other countries, has been subjected to such a thorough considera-
tion by so many eminent scientists, clinicians and lawyers. Yet in
spite of the many bewildering and contradictory publications, state-
ments, allegations, and theories, there are a number of clear points
which emerge.
It
is with regard to these that I venture to place
before the reader some simple commonsense aspects, unconfused,
I hope, by scientific or legal jargon.
In
Britain"
unfitness to
drive"
is now described as that condition,
brought about by drink or drugs, when a person's ability to drive
properly is impaired for the time being. The majority of prosecu-
tions for this offence are, in the first instance, instituted as a result
of the observations of the behaviour of an accused person by a
police officer. What qualifications has an average police officer to
recognise this condition? Possibly none better than that of experi-
ence. Who but perhaps a licensee has more experience and oppor-
tunity than the average policeman of assessing whether an individual
is showing the apparent effects of over indulgence of alcoholic
liquor? However, the question of unfitness to drive does not rest
with one man, for invariably the reasons which lead the police
officerto make an arrest are placed before a senior officer who makes
his own assessment of the accused as to his behaviour and condition
before accepting a charge.
The Medical Examination
Following immediately upon this we come to the part played by
the medical practitioner. There are many conflicting opinions as
to his functions in these cases. The progressively minded believe,
and in my opinion correctly,
that
it is to ensure that the symptoms
displayed by the accused at the time of the offence as described by
the arresting officer can be attributed to the effects of drink or
drug and
not
to physical disabilities, and furthermore that he, the
accused, is not injured and is sufficiently fit to be held in custody.
To those who subscribe to the school of thought that adoctor's
opinion on fitness to drive is necessary (which is invariably given
some time after the commission of the offence) I would ask them
June 1965 287
To continue reading
Request your trial