In an exclusive report in last Sunday’s Toronto Sun newspaper, an Emergency Room (ER) doctor revealed his angst at being forced to respect patient confidentiality while tending to a visibly drunk driver. The driver had been taken to the hospital in an ambulance after slamming into the back of another vehicle injuring two people and causing extensive damage in the process.
The doctor had been made aware that the police had neither interviewed the driver nor administered a breathalyzer test prior to the hospital visit, and it was soon apparent that the driver had sustained no serious injury. Having refused blood tests and other screening, the driver then left, well aware, the doctor believes, that being at the hospital when the police arrived would prove to be disadvantageous.
The doctor’s concern was that the driver, emboldened by having committed a crime and gotten away with it would risk driving drunk again and that there could be even more dire consequences in the future. In that same issue of the newspaper, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Canada said that many drunk drivers were managing to escape justice by going to the ER after a crash. The group said the only way to prevent this was for the federal government to make blood tests mandatory for all drivers involved in collisions which resulted in serious injury or death. And while Toronto police doubted the veracity of MADD’s ER-getaway claim, they offered to throw support behind any initiative that would make the roads safer.
Driving drunk is a serious and deadly problem the world over, but more so in Guyana where having a designated driver is almost a standard joke. This is despite the passage of the Evidence and Motor Vehicles and Road Traffic Amendment Act in 2008, which cleared the way for the use of breathalyzers among other equipment in an effort to curb road carnage. It has so far proven to be a most ineffectual law.
Anyone who has ever been near any of this country’s famous (and infamous) watering holes will tell you that the majority of drinkers, simply jump into their vehicles and drive off after imbibing. This might sound incredible to persons who would not dream of breaking the law in this manner, but by no means would they have had just one or two drinks. No. They would never leave until they are either ‘silly drunk’, ‘pick-a-fight-for-no-reason drunk’ or ‘falling-down drunk.’ So it is a miracle that the road fatality figure involving driving under the influence (DUI) is not much higher than it is.
And while the Road Traffic Amendment law exists, the means of enforcing it remains hazy. It had been recently discovered that the police’s breathalysers had malfunctioned, but had not been replaced for a considerable period of time. Moves had been made to remedy this, but perhaps it’s a case of too little too late as driving drunk seems to have become a national pastime.
Though assertions have since been made to the contrary, the two people who were injured on Republic night (February 23) this year when Finance Minister Dr Ashni Singh rammed his SUV into a car in Campbellville had initially alleged that he was driving under the influence. The impact of the collision had sent the car careening into a trench. The car was damaged and its two occupants injured, but Minister Singh got out of his vehicle and was spirited away “to seek medical attention,” the nation was later told.
No breathalyzer test was administered and no one will ever know if the minister’s injuries warranted a blood test and what its results would have showed.
The police investigation into the matter was handled in accordance with a so-called long standing tradition regarding cases which involve high-ranking government officials. And in May this year, following advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions and a decision by the two injured persons against pursuing he matter, the police revealed that no charges would be laid against Minister Singh.
Two years ago, a magistrate had been accused of driving under the influence by a man he had injured on the East Coast Demerara roadway. The man had been sitting on his bridge in his parked car when the incident occurred. The matter was later settled, but the magistrate had reportedly refused to submit to a breathalyzer test.
It is no secret that policemen, including officers and high-ranking government officials drink and drive. They have been/are seen in their favourite bars, and just like the ordinary Joe Blow some of them do get behind the wheel and drive after imbibing.
If legislators can’t be bothered to uphold the laws they pass and the police to either espouse or enforce them, then the man in the street will see this as a licence to do likewise. There are instances when by example is the only way to lead, and this is one.