A study published this week by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety looks at the long-term impact of first-time DUI offender laws in the state of Washington, which as of 2004 mandated a year of interlock for all first-time offenders.
The results are impressive, and are consistent with a trend in first-time interlock research that shows the potential for the technology to substantially change behavior for first-time DUI offenders. Overall, Washington saw a 12% reduction in the rate of recidivism for first-timers who installed the interlock for the required year versus those who were ordered to, but did not. Overall 34% of those sentenced to interlock installed the system during the time of the study.
Interlocks and recidivism: the history
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, a number of studies evaluating the long-term impact of interlock use on recidivism showed substantial reductions in repeat alcohol-related traffic violations while interlocks were installed, but virtually no impact long-term on recidivism. Those who had interlock were equally as likely to reoffend in the years post monitoring as those who never had it.
So why the shift? It may come down to the behavioral tendencies of the offenders being evaluated. Ten and 15 years ago, the offenders sentenced to interlock were predominantly repeat/hard core drunk drivers. And according to The Century Council, 98% of hard core drunk drivers test positive for alcohol dependence issues. In other words, the addiction is driving the repeat illegal behavior.
Today, the focus is on the first-time DUI offender. According to the IIHS study, 75% of the DUI offenses during the time of the study were first-timers.
Bottom line: The deterrent and behavior modification effect of the interlock can be powerful for those who aren’t necessarily alcohol dependent, but lack the knowledge and judgment of how much they can drink before hitting the legal limit for driving.
What about the Hardcore Drunk Drivers?
The IIHS report includes reference to a 1999 study out of Maryland on interlock recidivism, reported to be one of the only randomized control studies. The study focused exclusively on offenders with multiple alcohol-related traffic offenses. Qualifying offenders were assigned to an interlock program for 1 year, while participants in a control group were eligible for the usual license reinstatement coupled with the conventional treatment program. During the 1 year, the interlock group saw a 64% reduction in repeat alcohol-related traffic violations compared to the treatment control group. But during year two, there was a substantial 36% reduction in the re-arrest rate for the group in treatment—not the interlock group.
What do you think? Is there a place for interlocks with Hardcore Drunk Drivers? Should first-time DUI offenders also get treatment?
