First-time DWI offenders are at risk of recidivating regardless of sanctions imposed.

OBJECTIVE: Research demonstrates that punitive approaches to DWI employed by the judiciary have failed to significantly reduce recidivism. However, little is known about the deterrent effects of administrative and diversion sanctions. We examine whether such sanctions deter first-time DWI offenders. METHODS: We grouped combinations of administrative, judicial, and diversion sanctions routinely employed in the state of Maryland for processing drivers arrested for DWI into one of eight mutually exclusive disposition sequences. We applied this classification to Maryland drivers who had been licensed in the state and had precisely one DWI on their record prior to January 1, 1999. We then used a proportional hazards model to estimate the probability of remaining free of a new DWI during a 6-year period (January 1, 1999 - December 31, 2004) as a function of the disposition of the index violation, and of selected factors that could affect that probability. RESULTS: Drivers with a prior DWI were at relatively high risk of recidivating regardless of how they were sanctioned. Those who received administrative and alternative sanctions had a risk of recidivating similar to that of drivers who were convicted. CONCLUSION: All dispositions sequences, not just convictions, indicate that first-time DWI offenders are at high risk of recidivating.

Risk of alcohol-impaired driving recidivism among first offenders and multiple offenders.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the statewide impact of having prior alcohol-impaired driving violations of any type on the rate of first occurrence or recidivism among drivers with 0, 1, 2, or 3 or more prior violations in Maryland. METHODS: We analyzed more than 100 million driver records from 1973 to 2004 and classified all Maryland drivers into 4 groups: those with 0, 1, 2, or 3 or more prior violations. The violation rates for approximately 21 million drivers in these 4 groups were compared for the study period 1999 to 2004. RESULTS: On average, there were 3.4, 24.3, 35.9, and 50.8 violations per 1000 drivers a year among those with 0, 1, 2, or 3 or more priors, respectively. The relative risks for men compared with women among these groups of drivers were 3.8, 1.2, 1.0, and 1.0, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The recidivism rate among first offenders more closely resembles that of second offenders than of nonoffenders. Men and women are at equal risk of recidivating once they have had a first violation documented. Any alcohol-impaired driving violation, not just convictions, is a marker for future recidivism.

High-risk drinking among college fraternity members: a national perspective.

This survey, with its 85% response rate, provides an extensive profile of drinking behaviors and predictors of drinking among 3,406 members of one national college fraternity, distributed across 98 chapters in 32 states. Multiple indexes of alcohol consumption measured frequency, quantity, estimated blood alcohol concentration levels (BACs), and related problems. Among all members, 97% were drinkers, 86% binge drinkers, and 64% frequent binge drinkers. On the basis of self-reports concerning the 4 weeks preceding the time of survey, the authors found that members drank on an average of 10.5 days and consumed an average of 81 drinks. Drinkers had an average BAC of 0.10, reaching at least 0.08 on an average of 6 days. These fraternity members appear to be heavier drinkers than previously studied fraternity samples, perhaps because they were more representative and forthright. All 6 preselected demographic attributes of members and 2 chapter characteristics were significantly related to the drinking behaviors and levels of risk, identifying possible targets for preventive interventions.

The effects of closer monitoring on driver compliance with interlock restrictions.

This randomized controlled trial of 2168 DWI multiple offenders assigned to a state-wide ignition interlock program in Maryland compared non-compliance with interlock requirements among drivers who were closely monitored (by Westat staff) and drivers who received standard monitoring (by the Motor Vehicle Administration). Compliance comparisons relied on datalogger data from MVA's interlock providers plus driver records that contained demographic information, prior alcohol-related traffic violations, their dispositions, and interlock duration. Measures for quantifying non-compliance included rates per 1000 engine starts for initial breath test failures at varying BAC levels and time periods, retest failures, retest refusals, interlock disconnects, startup violations, and summation measures. Regression analysis estimated the effects of closer monitoring on non-compliance, using linear mixed models that included random driver effects and fixed effects for study-group assignment, prior alcohol-related traffic violations, and months of continuous datalogger data with a quadratic function that assessed changes and rates of change in interlock non-compliance over time. All the separate non-compliance rates and summary measures derived from them were lower for closer monitored than control drivers for continuous data series of at least 6, 12, or 24 months. The differences for initial test failures and the two summary measures were statistically significant. Most measures of non-compliance decreased significantly as continuous time on the interlock increased. Parallel trends in each study group indicated that drivers learned to improve their compliance over time. Thus, this study convincingly demonstrates that closer monitoring substantially enhanced compliance with requirements of the ignition interlock and that regardless of group assignment, compliance increased over time.

Latency periods between alcohol-related traffic violations: implications for recidivism.

OBJECTIVE: Before October 1, 2002, Maryland's regulations for relicensing drivers with 2 recorded alcohol-related traffic violations distinguished between offenders with 5 or more years between their first and second violations and those with less than 5 years. Our research examined whether this policy was supported by differential probabilities of recidivism and violation-free survival. METHODS: We compared recidivism rates and survival probabilities among the 2 latency subgroups and 2 control groups (first offenders and drivers with no previous alcohol-related traffic violation). Data were extracted from Maryland's driver record database and segregated files and analyzed by age quintiles using Cox proportional hazards models containing identifiers for risk factors, including prior violations. All drivers (N = 64,536) were matched on age quintile, gender, and month of offenders' index violations. Effects of violation histories on survival and recidivism probabilities were measured by contrasts of regression coefficients. RESULTS: Among second offenders, the shorter latency subgroup consistently had higher recidivism and lower violation-free survival than the longer latency subgroup, whose rates fell between those of first offenders and the shorter latency subgroup. Although highly significant, the subgroup differences were small and paled by comparison to differences between first and zero offenders in probability of a subsequent violation. CONCLUSIONS: An earlier study that showed similar overall recidivism for these latency subgroups helped encourage Maryland to change its regulations governing license reinstatement. New regulations issued October 1, 2002, focused on 2 alcohol violations "during any period of time" where investigation indicated alcoholism or unaddressed alcohol problems. To obtain relicensure, these offenders could be required to enter or complete a lengthy certified alcohol treatment program. Our current results are consistent with these requirements. License reinstatement should be primarily guided by the extent of alcohol impairment, especially because both latency subgroups showed higher risks of recidivism than first offenders, who themselves had comparatively high risk.

Avoiding DWI Among Bar-room Drinkers: Strategies and Predictors.

We examined the prevalence and predictors of 11strategies to avoid driving when feeling intoxicated among 561 bar-room patrons in two medium-sized Maryland communities. Logistic regression analyses identified demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal predictors of avoidance strategies and interactions among predictors. Overall, 89% reported one or more DWI avoidance actions in the past year, and 38% reported driving intoxicated during that time. Average frequencies of avoidance behavior and intoxicated driving increased significantly as drinking level increased. However, the higher the drinking level, the smaller the ratio of avoidance actions to DWI experiences, highlighting the vulnerability of heavy drinkers who had driven intoxicated.Using a sober driver or one who allegedly drank less than the respondent were the most popular and frequent strategies, but paying for a cab, walking, and using a bus or free cab were relatively unpopular. Higher drinking levels predicted significantly higher odds of using avoidance approaches, as did intoxicated driving. Confidence in driving safely when intoxicated was positively related to drinking level and intoxicated driving, but it tended to predict lower odds of avoidance actions. Similarly, marital status, age, gender, and location influenced the odds of avoidance behaviors. Interventions should be strategically tailored to exploit or counter drinker predilections among avoidance options.