Profile of women detected drink driving via Roadside Breath Testing (RBT) in Queensland, Australia, between 2000 and 2011

Background Drink driving among women is a growing problem in many motorised countries. While research has shown that male and female drink drivers differ on a number of characteristics, few studies have addressed the circumstances surrounding women’s drink driving offences specifically. Aim To add to previous research by comparing apprehension characteristics among men and women and to extend the understanding of the female drink driving problem by investigating the drink driving characteristics that are unique to women. Results The sample consisted of the 248,173 (21.5% women) drink drivers apprehended between 2000 and 2011 in Queensland, Australia. Gender comparisons showed that women were older, had lower levels of reoffending, and were more likely to be apprehended in Major Cities compared to men. Comparisons of age group and reoffending and non-reoffending among female drink drivers only revealed that higher BAC readings were more common among younger women. Moreover, a substantial minority (13.7%) of women aged 24 years or younger were apprehended with a BAC below0.05%, reflecting a breach of the zero tolerance BAC for provisional licence holders in Australia. Older women were more likely to be charged with a ‘failure to provide a test’ offence as a result of refusing to provide a breath or blood sample, indicating that drink driving is associated high levels of stigma for this group. Reoffending occurred among 16.2% of the female drink drivers and these drivers were more likely than non-reoffending drivers to record a mid to high range BAC, to be aged 30-39 or below 21years, and to be apprehended in Inner Regional or Remote locations. Conclusion Findings highlight the unique circumstances and divergent needs of female drink drivers compared to male drivers and for different groups of female drivers.

Who are the real “first offenders”?

Drink driving causes more fatal crashes than any other single factor on Australian roads, with a third of crashes having alcohol as a contributing factor. In recent years there has been a plateau in the numbers of drink drivers apprehended by RBT, and around 12% of the general population in self report surveys admit to drinking and driving. There is limited information about the first offender group, particularly the subgroup of these offenders who admit to prior drink driving, the offence therefore being the “first time caught”. This research focuses on the differences between those who report drink driving prior to apprehension for the offence and those who don’t. Methods: 201 first time drink driving offenders were interviewed at the time of their court appearance. Information was collected on socio-demographic variables, driving behaviour, method of apprehension, offence information, alcohol use and self reported previous drink driving. Results: 78% of respondents reported that they had driven over the legal alcohol limit in the 6 months prior to the offence. Analyses revealed that those offenders who had driven over the limit previously without being caught were more likely to be younger and have an issue with risky drinking. When all variables were taken into account in a multivariate model using logistic regression, only risky drinking emerged as significantly related to past drink driving. High risk drinkers were 4.8 times more likely to report having driven over the limit without being apprehended in the previous 6 months. Conclusion: The majority of first offenders are those who are “first time apprehended” rather than “first time drink drivers”. Having an understanding of the differences between these groups may alter the focus of educational or rehabilitation countermeasures. This research is part of a larger project aiming to target first time apprehended offenders for tailored intervention.

Trends in impaired driving in Australia in 2010 : a status report

This paper reviews the status of alcohol, drugs and traffic safety in Australia, with particular emphasis on developments in the period 2008-2010. Australian jurisdictions have made impressive improvements in road safety since the early 1970s. Enforcement and public education campaigns that specifically target drink driving have been successful, with resultant long-term reduction in alcohol-related fatalities. There is a high level of community disapproval of drink driving and strong support for countermeasures. Many best-practice countermeasures targeting impaired driving are in place, including general prevention/ deterrence programs such as random breath testing (RBT), random roadside drug testing legal alcohol limits, responsible service of alcohol programs, public education and advertising campaigns and designated driver programs, and offender management programs such as driver licensing penalties and fines, alcohol ignition interlocks and vehicle impoundment for high risk drink drivers, and offender education programs. There continue to be enhancements occurring, particularly in the areas of drug-impaired driving and offender management, but also in addressing the fundamental policy and legislative framework to address impaired driving (e.g., a current national debate about lowering the permissible blood alcohol for all drivers from 0.05 to 0.02 or 0.00 gm/100 ml BAC). However, there are major challenges that may be impacting on programs targeting impaired driving, including the rapid development of a binge drinking culture among young Australians, the extension of trading hours of licensed premises, continued problems with secondary supply of alcohol to minors, and increases in the marketing of alcopops and ready-to-drink spirit-based beverages. This paper addresses the question: Are impaired driving countermeasures in Australia continuing to achieve reductions in road traumas and rates of offending, or are they plateauing? If they are plateauing, is this due to declining effectiveness of countermeasures or the need to ‘hold the line’ against societal influences encouraging impaired driving?

Impaired driving countermeasures : an Australian perspective

The prevalence of impaired driving in Australia  Regulatory approaches used to manage: – Alcohol impaired driving – Other drug impaired driving  Key countermeasures – Lower blood alcohol limits – Random breath testing (RBT) – Random drug testing (RDT)  Ongoing challenges and future directions

Random Breath Testing in Australia: Is there an Optimum Level of Intensity?

Background: Random Breath Testing (RBT) is the main drink driving law enforcement tool used throughout Australia. International comparative research considers Australia to have the most successful RBT program compared to other countries in terms of crash reductions (Erke, Goldenbeld, & Vaa, 2009). This success is attributed to the programs high intensity (Erke et al., 2009). Our review of the extant literature suggests that there is no research evidence that indicates an optimal level of alcohol breath testing. That is, we suggest that no research exists to guide policy regarding whether or not there is a point at which alcohol related crashes reach a point of diminishing returns as a result of either saturated or targeted RBT testing. Aims: In this paper we first provide an examination of RBTs and alcohol related crashes across Australian jurisdictions. We then address the question of whether or not an optimal level of random breath testing exists by examining the relationship between the number of RBTs conducted and the occurrence of alcohol-related crashes over time, across all Australian states. Method: To examine the association between RBT rates and alcohol related crashes and to assess whether an optimal ratio of RBT tests per licenced drivers can be determined we draw on three administrative data sources form each jurisdiction. Where possible data collected spans January 1st 2000 to September 30th 2012. The RBT administrative dataset includes the number of Random Breath Tests (RBTs) conducted per month. The traffic crash administrative dataset contains aggregated monthly count of the number of traffic crashes where an individual’s recorded BAC reaches or exceeds 0.05g/ml of alcohol in blood. The licenced driver data were the monthly number of registered licenced drivers spanning January 2000 to December 2011. Results: The data highlights that the Australian story does not reflective of all States and territories. The stable RBT to licenced driver ratio in Queensland (of 1:1) suggests a stable rate of alcohol related crash data of 5.5 per 100,000 licenced drivers. Yet, in South Australia were a relative stable rate of RBT to licenced driver ratio of 1:2 is maintained the rate of alcohol related traffic crashes is substantially less at 3.7 per 100,000. We use joinpoint regression techniques and varying regression models to fit the data and compare the different patterns between jurisdictions. Discussion: The results of this study provide an updated review and evaluation of RBTs conducted in Australia and examines the association between RBTs and alcohol related traffic crashes. We also present an evidence base to guide policy decisions for RBT operations.

Are more city dwellers caught drink driving than country folk? An analysis by random breath testing apprehension rates

Background Random Breath Testing (RBT) remains a central enforcement strategy to deter and apprehend drink drivers in Queensland (Australia). Despite this, there is little published research regarding the exact drink driving apprehension rates across the state as measured through RBT activities. Aims The aim of the current study was to examine the prevalence of apprehending drink drivers in urban versus rural areas. Methods The Queensland Police Service provided data relating to the number of RBT conducted and apprehensions for the period 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2011. Results In the period, 35,082,386 random breath tests (both mobile and stationary) were conducted in Queensland which resulted in 248,173 individuals being apprehended for drink driving offences. Overall drink driving apprehension rates appear to have decreased across time. Close examination of the data revealed that the highest proportion of drink driving apprehensions (when compared with RBT testing rates) was in the Northern and Far Northern regions of Queensland (e.g., rural areas). In contrast, the lowest proportions were observed within the two Brisbane metropolitan regions (e.g., urban areas). However, differences in enforcement styles across the urban and rural regions need to be considered. Discussion and conclusions The research presentation will further outline the major findings of the study in regards to maximising the efficiency of RBT operations both within urban and rural areas of Queensland, Australia.

Random breath testing in Queensland and Western Australia : Examination of how the random breath testing rate influences alcohol related traffic crash rates

In this paper we explore the relationship between monthly random breath testing (RBT) rates (per 1000 licensed drivers) and alcohol-related traffic crash (ARTC) rates over time, across two Australian states: Queensland and Western Australia. We analyse the RBT, ARTC and licensed driver rates across 12 years; however, due to administrative restrictions, we model ARTC rates against RBT rates for the period July 2004 to June 2009. The Queensland data reveals that the monthly ARTC rate is almost flat over the five year period. Based on the results of the analysis, an average of 5.5 ARTCs per 100,000 licensed drivers are observed across the study period. For the same period, the monthly rate of RBTs per 1000 licensed drivers is observed to be decreasing across the study with the results of the analysis revealing no significant variations in the data. The comparison between Western Australia and Queensland shows that Queensland's ARTC monthly percent change (MPC) is 0.014 compared to the MPC of 0.47 for Western Australia. While Queensland maintains a relatively flat ARTC rate, the ARTC rate in Western Australia is increasing. Our analysis reveals an inverse relationship between ARTC RBT rates, that for every 10% increase in the percentage of RBTs to licensed driver there is a 0.15 decrease in the rate of ARTCs per 100,000 licenced drivers. Moreover, in Western Australia, if the 2011 ratio of 1:2 (RBTs to annual number of licensed drivers) were to double to a ratio of 1:1, we estimate the number of monthly ARTCs would reduce by approximately 15. Based on these findings we believe that as the number of RBTs conducted increases the number of drivers willing to risk being detected for drinking driving decreases, because the perceived risk of being detected is considered greater. This is turn results in the number of ARTCs diminishing. The results of this study provide an important evidence base for policy decisions for RBT operations.

Optimising the length of Random Breath Tests : results from the Queensland Community Engagement Trial

Research suggests that the length and quality of police-citizen encounters affect policing outcomes. The Koper Curve, for example, shows that the optimal length for police presence in hot spots is between 14 and 15 minutes, with diminishing returns observed thereafter. Our study, using data from the Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET), examines the impact of encounter length on citizen perceptions of police performance. QCET involved a randomised field trial, where 60 random breath test (RBT) traffic stop operations were randomly allocated to an experimental condition involving a procedurally just encounter or a business-as-usual control condition. Our results show that the optimal length of time for procedurally just encounters during RBT traffic stops is just less than 2 minutes. We show, therefore, that it is important to encourage and facilitate positive police–citizen encounters during RBTat traffic stops, while ensuring that the length of these interactions does not pass a point of diminishing returns.

Catching drink drivers in Queensland through Random Breath Testing : what does the last decade of data tell us

Background Random Breath Testing (RBT) has proven to be a cornerstone of enforcement attempts to deter (as well as apprehend) motorists from drink driving in Queensland (Australia) for decades. However, scant published research has examined the relationship between the frequency of implementing RBT activities and subsequent drink driving apprehension rates across time. Aim This study aimed to examine the prevalence of apprehending drink drivers in Queensland over a 12 year period. It was hypothesised that an increase in breath testing rates would result in a corresponding decrease in the frequency of drink driving apprehension rates over time, which would reflect general deterrent effects. Method The Queensland Police Service provided RBT data that was analysed. Results Between the 1st of January 2000 and 31st of December 2011, 35,082,386 random breath tests (both mobile and stationary) were conducted in Queensland, resulting in 248,173 individuals being apprehended for drink driving offences. A total of 342,801 offences were recorded during this period, representing an intercept rate of .96. Of these offences, 276,711 (80.72%) were recorded against males and 66,024 (19.28%) offences committed by females. The most common drink driving offence was between 0.05 and 0.08 BAC limit. The largest proportion of offences was detected on the weekends, with Saturdays (27.60%) proving to be the most common drink driving night followed by Sundays (21.41%). The prevalence of drink driving detection rates rose steadily across time, peaking in 2008 and 2009, before slightly declining. This decline was observed across all Queensland regions and any increase in annual figures was due to new offence types being developed. Discussion This paper will further outline the major findings of the study in regards to tailoring RBT operations to increase detection rates as well as improve the general deterrent effect of the initiative.

A follow up sample of first time drink driving offenders : how many drink drive post offence?

Background Drink driving remains an important issue to address in terms of health and injury prevention even though research shows that over time there has been a steady decline in drink driving. This has been attributed to the introduction of countermeasures such as random breath testing (RBT), changing community attitudes and norms leading to less acceptance of the behaviour and, to a lesser degree, the implementation of programs designed to deter offenders from engaging in drink driving. Most of the research to date has focused on the hard core offenders - those with high blood alcohol content at the time of arrest, and those who have more than one offence. Aims There has been little research on differences within the first offender population or on factors contributing to second offences. This research aims to fill the gap by reporting on those factors in a sample of offenders. Methods This paper reports on a study that involved interviewing 198 first offenders in court and following up this group 6-8 months post offence. Of these original participants, 101 offenders were able to be followed up, with 88 included in this paper on the basis that they had driven a vehicle since the offence. Results Interestingly, while the rate of reported apprehended second offences was low in that time frame (3%), a surprising number of offenders reported that they had driven under the influence at a much higher rate (27%). That is a large proportion of first offenders were willing to risk the much larger penalties associated with a second offence in order to engage in drink driving. Discussion and conclusions Key characteristics of this follow up group are examined to inform the development of a evidence based brief intervention program that targets first time offenders with the goal of decreasing the rate of repeat drink driving.

Final report : Estimating the extent of unlicensed driving: Roadside licence check survey - Wave2. Report to Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

This report documents a second, revised roadside licence check survey undertaken by the Queensland Police Service (QPS) in conjunction with roadside random breath testing (RBT) traffic operations. The methodology utilised was devised by the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q), Transport and Main Roads (TMR) and QPS, after consideration of a number of options.

Random Breath Testing Operation and Effectiveness in 1987

• In December 1986 funds were approved to double the intensity of random breath testing (RBT) and provide publicity support for police efforts. These changes were considered necessary to make RBT effective. • RBT methods were changed in the metropolitan area to enable block testing (pulling over a block of traffic rather than one or two cars), deployment of police to cut off escape routes, and testing by traffic patrols in all police subdivisions. Additional operators were trained for country RBT. • A publicity campaign was developed, aimed mainly at male drivers aged 18-50. The campaign consisted of the “cardsharp” television commercials, radio commercials, newspaper articles, posters and pamphlets. • Increased testing and the publicity campaigns were launched on 10 April 1987. • Police tests increased by 92.5% in May – December 1987, compared with the same period in the previous four years. • The detection rate for drinking drivers picked up by police who were cutting off escape routes was comparatively high, indicating that drivers were attempting to avoid RBT, and that this police method was effective at detecting these drivers. • A telephone survey indicated that drivers were aware of the messages of the publicity campaign. • The telephone survey also indicated that the target group had been exposed to high levels of RBT, as planned, and that fear of apprehension was the major factor deterring them from drink driving. • A roadside survey of driver blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) by the University of Adelaide’s Road Accident Research Unit (RARU) showed that, between 10p.m. and 3a.m., the proportion of drivers in Adelaide with a BAC greater than or equal to 0/08 decreased by 42%. • Drivers under 21 were identified as a possible problem area. • Fatalities in the twelve month period commencing May 1987 decreased by 18% in comparison with the previous twelve month period, and by 13% in comparison with the average of the previous two twelve month periods (commencing May 1985 and May 1986). There are indications that this trend is continuing. • It is concluded that the increase in RBT, plus publicity, was successful in achieving its aims of reductions in drink driving and accidents.

Random Breath Testing Operation and Effectiveness in 1985

Random breath testing (RBT) was introduced in South Australia in 1981 with the intention of reducing the incidence of accidents involving alcohol. In April 1985, a Select Committee of the Upper House which had been established to “review the operation of random breath testing in this State and any other associated matters and report accordingly” presented its report. After consideration of this report, the Government introduced extensive amendments to those sections of the Motor Vehicles Act (MVA) and Road Traffic Act (RTA) which deal with RBT and drink driving penalties. The amended section 47da of the RTA requires that: “(5) The Minister shall cause a report to be prepared within three months after the end of each calendar year on the operation and effectiveness of this section and related sections during that calendar year. (6) The Minister shall, within 12 sitting days after receipt of a report under subsection (5), cause copies of the report to be laid before each House of Parliament.” This is the first such report. Whilst it deals with RBT over a full year, the changed procedures and improved flexibility allowed by the revision to the RTA were only introduced late in 1985 and then only to the extent that the existing resources would allow.