I can understand being addicted to alcohol but what I cannot understand is why people cannot stop driving while they are drunk. Do they not realize they are dunk? Do they think they can get away with it? Do they not care?
Wow – I read the title and clicked to add the story of Jim Dent as I just read it this weekend. His saga might be yet another data point that support the notion that addictions are real diseases. Reading how Jim Dent celebrated his release from College Station with another arrest goes beyond the imaginable.
Perhaps there ought to be a vaccine that make the further ingestion of alcohol impossible to those poor people who are unable to self-control their actions and decisions.
Because penalties are not nearly as strict here as they are in other countries.
It also doesn’t help that, outside of an embarrassingly small number of cities, public transit either really sucks or is virtually non-existent.
Having worked with alcoholics for over 30 years- I have come to a decision that it is a disease of volition. In answer to your question, each case is different. I have seen many that do not drink and drive and only drink at home and take public transportation but continue to drink. I do feel that they are at least not involving the potential to harm others, only themselves. These are the people we do not read about. Some do get it.
I totally understand why people continue to drink – I have no doubt that alcoholism is an intense addiction for many people. And it’s true that the penalties are not very harsh, but on the other hand I cannot imagine that any time in jail is worth not calling a cab (especially for people like Jim Dent, who certainly have the means to pay for a cab) or staying home or taking some other precautions. 30 days in jail (for example) might not sound terrible in the abstract but really I can’t imagine anyone I know not being horrified at that prospect.
Mathilda it depends on the jail. Many of my patients really don’t mind it. I think that after the first time it does not seem so bad to them. I personally would be horrified. It maybe where the jail is.
I think, informed by a bunch of non-personal to me observations, there’s a sense of walking an edge, of being in control when not in control, of a death/life wish in which you play a form of dice through risky behavior. And the driving, which a repeat offender knows is dangerous, is this form of gambling coupled with potential self-punishment, coupled with the sense that God will or will not punish me, the undeserving, the sinner who has hurt these others who doesn’t deserve redemption. Even the act of putting others at risk invites that judgement. That is one root of AA: the realization by Bill W that there’s a higher power and his (and Dr. Bob’s) idea that consciously giving one’s self to that higher power can overcome the constant fear and depression of impending judgement inherent in the failures and avoidances of addiction.
I think because the risk of getting caught is low. I’ll bet folks who drink and drive rarely get caught.
People’s judgment is impaired when they drink. That said, if they are sober when they go out and know then plan to drink to excess, they should have a DD or make other plans. I am still heartsick over the death recently of one of many people sadly lost to a drunk driving accident, Thomas Stanley, guilty only of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. http://www.ajc.com/news/news/cops-man-was-dui-in-crash-that-killed-millionaire-/nkxC6/
There are resources to interrupt the addictive urge (naltrexone) or to make a person ill when taking this if they drink (antabuse) but a person has to take them, and therein lies part of the problem.
My BIL is a repeat offender. Family members have reported him and pleaded with the authorities to never again allow him to drive, but after each jail stint (fortunately those are getting longer) someone gives him a “work driving permit” (they say they cannot deny someone this privilege - I say BS on that) and of course he abuses it and of course it is always someone else’s fault.
In our state, license plates for those with DUI’s start with a “W” and I think this allows the police to pull them over at any time for any reason. We call them whiskey plates.
I totally cringe when I think about some of the poor driving choices we made back in the day (without seat belts-yikes)
The laws themselves are not always effective, either. There was a particularly horrific accident last summer in which the driver had numerous prior DUIs, blew through a stop sign and five lanes of traffic, broadsiding into two recent HS grads (who were sober and not on the phone). One died; the other has a TBI and numerous other injuries. However, Kentucky law treats a new charge as a first-time offense if the driver has not been convicted within the past five years.
My brother was pulled over for a DUI a couple of years ago. Refused to take the breathalyzer and therefore could only be charged with a civil offense, not a criminal one. Did have his license suspended, but he chose that route strategically, so that he would not have a criminal conviction that he’d have to disclose in job hunting, etc. He has lost his wife, kids, business, house, etc. and has still not hit bottom.