Drinking and driving, the facts and the consequences
-
-
img
Napa Valley Register copy desk chief Michelle Choat is given a horizontal nystagmus test, a test that may be administered during a field sobriety test, during a demonstration showing the effects of alcohol on blood alcohol levels. The test shows the amount of bounce in the eye’s gaze as it follows an object.
J.L. Sousa/Register |
Buy photos
-
-
-
img
California Highway Patrol Officer Jon White explains some of the test procedures that American Canyon Eagle Editor Mike Waterson, left, and Michelle Choat, Napa Valley Register copy desk chief, will undergo during a demonstration of the effects of alcohol on blood alcohol levels. J.L. Sousa/Register |
Buy photos
-
img
After two five-ounce glasses of wine, American Eagle Editor Mike Waterson had a blood alcohol level of .011 at the demonstration of the effects of alcohol on blood alcohol levels. J.L. Sousa/Register |
Buy photos
-
img
Napa Valley Register Editor Bill Kisliuk measures out five ounces of wine, the amount considered one drink, during a "wet lab" demonstration in the Napa Valley Register conference room. The lab showed the effects of alcohol on blood alcohol levels. |
Buy photos
-
img
Napa Valley Register Copy Desk Chief Michelle Choat does a coordination exercise that is used in field sobriety tests. She was participating in a "wet lab" demonstration in the Napa Valley Register offices showing the effects of alcohol on blood alcohol levels.
|
Buy photos
-
By ALISHA WYMAN
Register Staff Writer
November 26th, 2009
November 18th, 2009
November 11th, 2009
November 6th, 2009
November 3rd, 2009
November 26th, 2009
November 25th, 2009
Drinking and driving. Many of us have done it. Some of us have gotten busted for it. A few of us have been in life-altering accidents because of it.
Newspapers publish stories about DUI drivers nearly every day. But what does it take to reach the legal limit, and how does alcohol affect us?
We decided to conduct an experiment. Under the watchful eyes of the California Highway Patrol, two Register newsroom employees became inebriated. Along the way, they took tests, interacted with cops and coworkers and talked about their condition.
One participant was Register columnist and copy desk chief Michelle Choat, in her late 20s, of average height, with a slim build. The other was American Canyon Eagle Editor Michael Waterson, who is taller and larger than Choat, of average height and build, and in his late 50s.
The law enforcement presence included CHP officers Jaret Paulson and Jon White, along with Napa Police Sgt. Tom Pieper.
The drink of choice was syrah, a full-bodied red wine which in this case had an alcohol content of about 14 percent.
Register staffers, some there for the duration, others drifting in and out, witnessed what Paulson called the “wet lab” in the conference room at the Register.
The lab included field sobriety tests the CHP administered, as well as an eight-second blow into a Breathalyzer after the participants consumed each 5-oz. glass of wine. The Register added a brief editing test and asked Waterson and Choat to display their dexterity by playing Operation, using tweezers to remove the bones of the patient in the old board game.
Beforehand, both Choat and Waterson ate normally.
They said they expected to reach .08 percent after only a couple of drinks. In fact, their results varied widely.
Choat passed the legal limit, a blood-alcohol level of .08, after drinking three glasses of wine in about 90 minutes.
To the untrained eye, even after three glasses she performed her field sobriety tests reasonably well. The officer conducting the tests, however, spotted tell-tale signs of impairment after two glasses, when Choat’s blood-alcohol level was about .05.
After three drinks, Waterson’s blood-alcohol level had crept up to only .03. Still, he struggled with some of the tests after two glasses.
The experiment was not designed to display what falling-down drunk looks like. “Anyone can see that person and say, ‘That person should not be driving,’” Paulson said.
The officers said the test shows that drinking alcohol impairs us all, but that precise levels of intoxication vary for many reasons. When police make a DUI stop, they use several tools — the breathalyzer, the field sobriety tests, the person’s answers to questions and their appearance — to determine whether to make a DUI arrest.
Here’s what happened in our test.
Baseline
As soon as officers make contact with an apparently impaired driver, they take in a number of factors in deciding whether to make an arrest, Paulson said.
How was the person driving when pulled over?
Did he or she seem scattered or repeat phrases? Did the person have trouble finding his or her driver’s license, registration and proof of insurance? How well did he or she follow directions and perform on the tests?
All this leads officers to ask themselves a common-sense question, said Paulson: “Long story short, would I feel comfortable with this person driving down the road next to me?”
Choat and Waterson took several tests before they started drinking.
Waterson proved his sobriety when an officer asked him to follow his finger with his eyes — the so-called horizontal nystagmus test. But he faltered while asked to balance on one leg to a count of 10. In the field, his performance on that test alone might have falsely indicated that he was impaired, said Officer White, who conducted most of the tests. “That’s a prime example of why we do so many tests,” he said.
Even sober, performing the tests was unnerving, Choat said afterward.
“I can see failing some of those tests out of pure panic,” she said.
Most people are nervous when they are pulled over, Paulson acknowledged. But he said that puts nearly all of them on the same playing field.
Waterson and Choat both caught all seven grammatical, spelling and punctuation mistakes introduced into a couple paragraphs of text.
One drink
After consuming one five-ounce glass of wine in 25 minutes, the color already had begun to appear in Choat’s cheeks. She grew more expressive, but she spoke clearly and coherently.
Waterson’s poise all but masked his first glass.
Both said they felt relaxed as the warming effects of alcohol took hold.
Choat caught all the mistakes in the second editing test, but also corrected one item that wasn’t a mistake. Waterson missed one of the errors in the text.
They took turns blowing into a Preliminary Alcohol Screening Device, commonly known as a Breathalyzer.
Waterson’s blood-alcohol content was .018 percent. Choat’s was .027 percent.
The difference didn’t surprise Paulson or White.
Many factors play into people’s blood-alcohol content.
Their gender, how much they’ve eaten, their height and weight, their metabolism, the kind of alcohol consumed, when they finished their last drink and what medications they use are among the influencing factors, White said.
One person’s results could vary from one day to the next, said Paulson.
“There’s so many subjectives in the entire process,” White said. “It really comes down to individual cases and individual investigations.”
Two drinks
After two glasses of wine, Waterson said he was feeling mellow. He could tell he’d been drinking but felt like he would be capable of driving, he said.
Choat wasn’t sober, but didn’t feel drunk, she said. She said she was at the point where she still might decide to drive home after a dinner party, but with hesitation.
White had Waterson perform a hand-pat test, instructing him to slap one hand, alternating between palm up and palm down, into the open palm of the other hand while counting “one, two, one two” and speeding up as he went.
Waterson started out smoothly, but after he sped up, he stopped counting. White pointed out that he wasn’t turning his hand completely, instead “chopping” his open palm with the side of his hand.
Waterson was asked to touch his thumb to each fingertip on one hand, counting from one to four, forward and then backward. White told him to perform the test three times. White stopped Waterson after he had kept going, repeating the test nine times.
Choat was asked to balance on one leg while counting “one thousand one, one thousand two.” She performed the test without problems, but admitted it helped that she had heard the officers previously explain the directions to Waterson. Still, the signs of alcohol were evident: bloodshot eyes, flushed cheeks and a slight blur of the edges of her words.
“If I just looked down, and made a quick observation, I can see she’s been drinking,” Paulson said.
Choat’s blood-alcohol level had doubled to .053 percent. Surprisingly, Waterson came in at .011 — lower than his first test. Waterson’s body was absorbing the alcohol faster than he was drinking it, Paulson said.
But Paulson predicted Waterson would reach “maximum absorption” and his blood-alcohol content would begin to climb again.
Three drinks
After one more glass of syrah and about 100 minutes into the test, both Waterson and Choat knew they were too impaired to drive.
“I feel like I should not drive anywhere,” Choat said. “I feel very giddy.”
Redness had crept into both people’s eyes, and the scent of fermented grapes permeated the conference room.
The same happens inside a car, Paulson said, though people accustomed to the space may not notice it.
Choat blew a .085, while Waterson was only at .03.
White asked Choat the questions he would pose on the shoulder of the highway — where she had been, how much she had to drink, what her medication regimen was and how she felt.
She second-guessed her own answers and asked questions about the questions. Although Choat knew she was in a test and her responses reflected confusion on whether to answer as a test-taker or a would-be driver, this behavior is typical of people who have been drinking, Paulson said.
Choat followed the officer’s finger with her eyes. She did the palm slap. She tilted her head back, closed her eyes and estimated 30 seconds.
She walked a line, stepping from heel to toe, pivoted and walked the line again.
Choat and observers thought she performed the tests well.
White agreed there weren’t significant problems, but said there was plenty of evidence she’d been drinking.
She swayed slightly while walking the line, shifting her weight too much.
She missed the tip of her nose the first couple times she tried to find it. She raised her arms to balance while holding one foot up.
Her impairment was most obvious in the test she could not control at all, where her eyes followed his finger as we waved it slowly across her field of vision.
A sober person’s eyes follow smoothly, but the eyes of someone under the influence tremble involuntarily, especially at the peripheries.
“The eyes can’t lie,” White said. “There’s nothing you can do about it.”
Choat thought she did well on the tests, but said they were more difficult than they had been earlier.
“I felt that I was thinking a lot more,” she said. “I was really focussed on everything that he said because I knew that every step counted.”
Choat missed two errors on the editing test and introduced one of her own. Waterson caught four of the seven mistakes.
Overall, Register Editor Bill Kisliuk said the pair did pretty well on the editing tests, but their performance had deteriorated, especially after two glasses.
“I think the change had more to do with the social effects of the alcohol, chattering and not concentrating, than it did with any loss of brain power,” he said.
Although Waterson wasn’t technically over the legal limit, he knew he had crossed another line.
“I would be very reluctant at this point to get behind the wheel.” Waterson said.
One more
It was 2:50 p.m., more than two hours after the test started, when each finished their fourth glass of wine.
Observers guessed Choat was maybe .10, but she blew a .122. Waterson, ever quieter, was still below the legal limit at .06 percent.
Neither had many problems playing Operation throughout the lab.
In only a couple instances did the buzzer sound, indicating the surgery had gone awry.
The officers pointed out that people often can concentrate on a single task when impaired. But when asked to do more than one — perform a physical test and remember exactly how many times to perform it, for example — they falter.
The test was over. The bottle of Napa syrah was empty.
A glass or two remained in the bottle from Santa Barbara County.
Paulson and Pieper made some additional points and showed a brief, but gruesome, video of what can happen in an accident if even one passenger doesn’t wear a seat belt.
Co-workers drove Waterson and Choat to their Napa homes, and the pair promised not to go out for the rest of the day.
The morning after
In the following days, both participants said the lab was a wake-up call, despite their varied results.
Waterson called it a “sobering experience.” He said he will think twice before having a second glass of wine when he must drive.
He was surprised at how poorly he did at the field tests although he was well under the legal limit. “That has to give you pause ... Wow, if I’m that bad at being able to clap my hands and touch my nose, what’s that do to my ability as a driver?” he said.
Choat said she wonders how often she may have approached the line to impairment. “I need to be much more careful in real life,” Choat said.
Paulson noted that the experiment also shows the limits of bystanders’ abilities to judge others. Choat’s performance on the field tests, even when she was .085, didn’t scream that she was impaired.
Paulson said he was not sure he would have been “running over to stop her” if she went to drive.
“Just because someone isn’t tripping or stumbling doesn’t mean someone is OK to drive a car,” he said.
Waterson, although he never reached the limit, still might have been a candidate for a drunk driving arrest, Paulson said.
“Looking at him, I don’t know if I would have felt comfortable with him driving,” he said.
In the real world, each case is a judgment call, the officers said.
A driver blowing a .08 makes an arrest a sure thing — whether you are in your own driveway or miles from home — but officers look at all the factors before making a decision in cases where the line is blurred.
There’s too much at stake, including the safety of the drivers and others, to let impaired drivers go.
“This is a big decision,” Paulson said. “This potentially could change this person’s life ... I think we’re going to err on the side of caution.”
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
ambonizay wrote on Nov 1, 2009 5:48 AM:
Napan since 1965 wrote on Nov 1, 2009 8:49 AM:
This article, as well as the second one (DUI: Paying the Cost), are excellent documentaries of a too-often taboo subject.
Those who choose to read both of them with an open mind can't help but gain an education based on facts, not suppositions.
In addition, kudos are due for the two staff members who were willing to offer themselves as "guinea pigs." "
ambonizay wrote on Nov 1, 2009 9:41 AM:
vocal-de-local wrote on Nov 1, 2009 11:23 AM:
However, I kindof doubt that police can always tell the difference between a fatigued person who just got off of an eight hour shift or someone who has had a few glasses of wine.
I don't know what the real statistics are, but if you were to pull twenty vehicles over, perhaps one driver would be under the influence of alcohol but there might be another two people who APPEAR as though they are under the influence when they are not.
I have friends who have been pulled over, heading home from work, and failed many of the tests due to fatigue alone. Not everyone knows how to follow directions all that well either. I wonder, what are the percentage of people pulled over "suspected" of being drunk because they failed the motor tests but passed the breathalyzer?
Police should not treat everyone who fails the balance/fine motor skill tests, has bloodshot eyes, and/or an appearance of not being entirely alert as suspects. There are legitimate reasons, besides alcohol related ones, for failing these tests. AFTER the breathalyzer test proves positive, that's when people should be treated like they've done something wrong. "
skeptic wrote on Nov 1, 2009 12:24 PM:
so , many more will be arrested every day due to a lack of sleep. the reason they won't be demonised like the drinkers is that we are all guilty. only a minority drive drunk but many of us are guilty of driving sleepy including dr.s, nurses, police officers, judges and jurors. so we go light on ourselves, though we pose an even greater danger on the road than the drunks.
i hope this video accomplishes it's purpose. to make us all aware of how little alcohol it takes to impair our driving ability. i also hope that vocal's comment is absorbed and changes the behavior of the higher number of us who drive sleep impaired. "
vocal-de-local wrote on Nov 1, 2009 2:26 PM:
If someone asked me, right now, to stand on one foot for a minute or so, I might not be able to hold that position. And not everyone has strong fine motor skills, fatigued or not. There are conditions which can interfere with a person's ability to perform well on these tests, too. For example, I am to the point in my life where I need reading glasses. Things look a little fuzzy up close. If I took my finger and brought it inward toward my nose, my focus would most definitely get out of whack.
Police need to use some criteria for determining impairment. But they also need to do it with respect. Although I have never been pulled over (knock on wood) I know people who have basically been pulled over and accused of drinking before the breathalyzer test was used. Police need to be somewhat sensitive about treating people as though they are guilty from the moment they are pulled over :~) "
hawkeye wrote on Nov 1, 2009 4:41 PM:
bauhausfan wrote on Nov 2, 2009 6:28 AM:
What really should be obvious is that even having one drink and getting in your car can be dangerous, depending on the situation. Your car can be a deadly weapon. How hard is it for people to get that? "
Bubblywine wrote on Nov 2, 2009 6:31 AM:
Second, I suspect many posters here are on to something with the "fatigued" driver issue. But we do not make it a crime to drive when impaired by fatigue. In my youth, I nearly fell asleep whle driving many many times...it terrifies me now, looking back, at how poor my judgement was, and how lucky I was. Is there a way to seperate under the influence of a foreign substance, and under the influence of lack of sleep, and can we/should we criminalize/stigmatize the latter just as much as we have the former? Why or why not? "
tsgets wrote on Nov 2, 2009 9:50 AM:
Great article. What a great way to disclose the police process of investigating intoxicated drivers and bring those steps to public attention.
Now, this business about intoxicated drivers versus fatigued drivers....you have to start at the beginning of the contact and evaluate the process to the end. Police must have probable cause to detain you in a traffic stop. Wether it's a mechanical infraction such as a non-op tail lamp or a moving violation such as unsafe speed, they still need probable cause. Wether you violate one of those infractions because you are intoxicated or beacuse you are tired it is still a legal stop. If you are soooooo tired that you can't operate a vehicle safely, you shouldn't be behind the wheel period. You should explain to the officer you are driving tired and if he/she asks, participate in the tests. Clearly if you are tired and haven't been drinking, the breath test will indicate such. On the other side, if you argue and cause a stink and decide not to participate in any of the tests, it's your own fault for getting arrrested because the opportunity to prove your innocence was given to you. Just a little advice from the law office.
Register, again, good job. And for those investigating DUI, good job to you too. I'm sure you have the skills to determine who is drunk and who is tired end of story. Those who have lost loved ones due to DUI, such as I, appreciate your hard work. "
renrut wrote on Nov 2, 2009 10:49 AM:
When I was in pharmacy school we took a field trip to the cop headquarters and smoked pot. The results were very different from those on the street. I am Joe Turner "
vocal-de-local wrote on Nov 2, 2009 11:36 AM:
Bauhausfan wrote on Nov 2, 2009 11:38 AM:
They both drove while impaired.
What about if you were seriously injured or paralyzed by someone who feel asleep at the wheel?
I have to say lack of judgement while driving a motor vehicle is deadly in many cases because it is easily turned into a deadly weapon.
When you take many medications it says right on the package do not operate a motor vehicle while taking it. Just as an example. "
Bauhausfan wrote on Nov 2, 2009 11:43 AM:
If you are a cop and you see someone exhibiting classic signs of drunk driving and it turns that they are just way too tired to be driving at all what is the difference?
They were weaving and drifting in the lane, not stopping completely, driving unusually slow etc.
I am really confused why anyone can see any difference between the two. In both cases the person shouldn't be driving. "
deathgrip wrote on Nov 2, 2009 12:28 PM:
skeptic wrote on Nov 2, 2009 1:27 PM:
60 percent of adult drivers say they've driven while feeling drowsy in the past year.
37 percent have actually fallen asleep at the wheel.
Among those who have fallen asleep at the wheel, 13 percent say they've done so at least once a month.
4 percent say they've had an accident or near accident because they were drowsy or fell asleep.
And many drivers don't know when they're falling asleep. Clinical studies show people deny having fallen asleep, even when physiological signs prove differently. The NSF contends that drowsy driving is as dangerous as drunk driving, and that there is little awareness of the problem.http://www.insure.com/car-insurance/sleepy.html
another source said 17 % of students report falling asleep at the wheel and 2.2 % got in wrecks.
one may be charged with manslaughter if a fatality happens but there's not even a law against driving while asleep in states other than n.j.
yet. "
skeptic wrote on Nov 2, 2009 2:35 PM:
The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that approximately 100,000 police-reported crashes annually (about 1.5 percent of all crashes) involve drowsiness or fatigue as a principal causal factor. According to National Sleep Foundation’s 2002 Sleep in America survey, about one-half of America’s adult drivers—or approximately 100 million people—are on the roads feeling sleepy while they are driving. Nearly two in 10 drivers surveyed say they have fallen asleep at the wheel in the past year.A study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that one-third of all truck accidents resulting in the death of the driver probably were caused by sleep deprivation. Other national studies have estimated that at least 20 percent of all drivers have fallen asleep while driving.
sleepy driving has increased since these studies were done.
it would appear that we rarely charge those who are responisible for a growing number of fatalities because we all are guilty at times of driving sleepy "
vocal-de-local wrote on Nov 2, 2009 4:13 PM:
When you consider DUI, it's an acronym for Driving Under the Influence which begs the question, of what?
Is it possible to drive under the influence of fatigue, or prescription drugs, or illegal drugs, or medical conditions which impair driving skills, or age related cognitive decline, or stupidity in the case of testosterone or youth driven reckless driving?
If a person fails the DUI cognitive tests even though they are not intoxicated with alcohol, should they be allowed to get back in their vehicle and drive?
Probably not. But does it justify being arrested or should the keys just be taken away?
Additionally, not everyone is aware of their fatigue. And then we must deal with "levels" of fatigue. We are able to physically measure alcohol levels. How do you go about measuring fatigue? If there was a way, trust me, I would support it, especially for commercial drivers who have been driving long distances for long periods of time. "
Bubblywine wrote on Nov 2, 2009 7:49 PM:
skeptic wrote on Nov 2, 2009 8:38 PM:
the bloggers have spoken by their silence. they think that "if that's what it takes ' to save a theoretical life, then 3 schools should be closed to keep the inefficient checkpoints open. "
realitybites wrote on Nov 5, 2009 4:43 PM:
Napan since 1965 wrote on Nov 19, 2009 11:32 AM:
"...the Register articles earlier outlined a $400k grant and a new $120k for checkpoints which is enough to save the schools" AND "...they think that ‘if that's what it takes' to save a theoretical life, then 3 schools should be closed to keep the inefficient checkpoints open."
FYI “skeptic,” grant money can be used ONLY for the purpose for which it was granted! For that reason, your statement about how this money could "save the schools" is invalid. "