.
Feedback

Proposed Bill May Increase CT Teen Driving Accidents and Fatalities

Is it Ever Prudent To Put Parent Convenience Over Statistically Increasing Teen Driving Accidents?

Let us assume for a moment, that you are hailing a cab in New York City. A taxi cab pulls over. You notice that the driver appears to be a teenage boy.

You ask this young man how long he has had his license. He excitedly tells you that he just got it yesterday. Would you then get into this cab with him? Most people probably would answer no. The reason being that they would not want to entrust their life in the hands of a driver who has just received his license. This quite naturally, makes perfect sense.


In Connecticut, we have a graduated driver license statute that states that a newly licensed teen driver cannot drive with any passengers in his or her vehicle for six months unless that passenger is a parent, driving school instructor or someone at least 20 years of age (with conditions).

The reason behind this requirement is that statistically, new drivers are shown to become involved in more accidents. As most of us know, teen driving accidents are the number one cause of death for this demographic. The law makes perfect sense and since its inception in 2008 the incidences of teen fatalities in Connecticut have been greatly reduced. This is a proud accomplishment for the many people who have worked hard at getting this set of laws enacted.

So why, might one ask, has Senator Kevin Witkos of the 8th District, proposed bill number 104 which is entitled, “An Act Allowing Newly Licensed Motor Vehicle Operators to Transport Immediately Family Members to and from School”? The reason behind the proposed bill is to eliminate the restriction placed on newly licensed drivers to allow such drivers to transport immediate family members to and from school.

Study after study during the past decade has documented beyond any doubt that crash rates of newly licensed teen drivers increase significantly when they have one or more passengers other than a supervising adult in the motor vehicle with them. The current law was based upon the recommendations of Gov. Rell's 2007 - 2008 Safe Teen Driving Task Force which relied upon the findings of national experts and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The task force's recommendation to lengthen passenger restrictions by prohibiting siblings as passengers for the first six months of licensure was adopted and made into law in 2008.

There can be no denying that many parents are very busy and would like to rely upon the convenience of having their newly licensed teen driver act as their other child's driver. The fact remains that putting convenience ahead of safety should never be a consideration. We elect our officials to act in the best interests of the citizens of the state of Connecticut. One of our greatest societal concerns is the health and safety of our children.
Statistics have proven that the law, as it currently stands, is saving lives and helping to prevent accidents. Sen. Witkos' proposed bill appears to be the result of receiving calls from parents that would like to change our current teen driving laws to accommodate their schedules without giving the proper consideration to the great safety risk that this proposed bill, if passed, would create.

In closing, I would like you to consider the following: the year before the new teen driving laws were passed, a Wolcott crash killed two siblings on their way home from school. Sen. Witkos' bill endangers siblings riding together with an inexperienced driver and poses the threat that parents could lose two or more children at once in a car crash. The thought of having multiple children killed in the same car accident is so overwhelming that few lawmakers and parents, if any, can comprehend the inexplicable loss and accurately gauge that effect. It should be understood that this proposed bill creates an illusion of temporary satisfaction in addressing parental and constituent convenience, while inviting unimaginable heartache.

It is never the right time to seek to amend legislation that is saving our teenagers’ lives. It is never the right time to attempt to repeal a law that is protecting our teenage drivers. If the teenage taxicab driver referenced in the opening of this article came to your house to pick up your child, would you let your child get in the vehicle with him? I would hope the answer is no. Then what sense does it make to put a newly licensed teen driver at the wheel with one or more younger siblings in the car, that statistically would increase the likelihood that the new teen driver would get into an accident?

This bill should never have been proposed and should not become law.

If you feel the same way, then you should contact Senator Witkos http://ctsenaterepublicans.com/contact-witkos/ and/or the Co-Chairs of the Transportation Committee, Senator Maynard http://www.senatedems.ct.gov/Cap/php-bin/form.mail/Maynard-mailform.php and Representative Guerrera http://www.housedems.ct.gov/guerrera/contact.asp. and/or your State Representative or State Senator and advise them of this fact.

 

Richard P. Hastings is a Connecticut personal injury lawyer at Hastings, Cohan & Walsh, LLP, with offices throughout the state. He is a member of the CT DMV Commissioner's Advisory Committee on Teen Safe Driving. He has been named a New England Super Lawyer and is the author of the books: "The Crash Course on Child Injury Claims"; "The Crash Course on Personal Injury Claims in Connecticut" and "The Crash Course on Motorcycle Accidents." He has also co-authored the best selling book "Wolf in Sheep's Clothing- What Your Insurance Company Doesn't Want You to Know and Won't Tell You Until It's Too Late!" He can be reached at 1(888)CTLAW-00 or by visitingwww.hcwlaw.com.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from East Haven Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Stephen Austin May 20, 2013 at 11:14 am
I'm sorry I don't have any equipment.
Lori Marcucci May 20, 2013 at 09:29 am
I have a 16 year old son that might be able to help. He needs to earn some money. Do you have theRead More equipment? You can contact me with the info Thank you
Not Guido May 19, 2013 at 10:11 am
I agree Jack is a good man. He however needs to better explain his financial problems. ForeclosureRead More doesn't go forward due to a mistake. Stand up and tell the truth. If you fell behind and got back on track tell us.
Sam Giglio May 18, 2013 at 04:41 pm
Jack is a good and decent man, He would be an asset to this Town if Elected to serve as our Mayor.Read More With that said we look forward to a new beginning in East Haven, One that can set the path to a new vision for the Residents who live here now and the ones yet to come. Yes its easy to say I like Jack
Richard Poulton May 18, 2013 at 03:53 pm
Gene, Jack is your party's pick, so what else are you to say. As to Jack, if he is anything likeRead More his father he IS a good man. But being just a good man doesn't cut it in todays small world politics. Jack has issues he needs to explain and I am sure when he time comes he will. But as to this article, I wouldn't expect anything else from the SHADOW. Wouldn't want him backing me for anything.
Richard Poulton May 19, 2013 at 08:24 am
I asked the question and you gave me the answer I was looking for, and I thank you for that. As toRead More the rest of your dribble, doesn't deserve a response for EVERYONR knows all about the true Gene aka ******** Ruocco.
Gene Ruocco May 18, 2013 at 04:24 pm
Richard, the Mayor kicked the CEO of the company that had the contract out of his office less than aRead More month after he won the election. The contract was with the town not the BOE. And if you think the only thing to check is if the panels are dirty, then it isn't worth answering you. A large investment of tax dollars was made and it is paying off with lower electric bills. The systems delivering these savings need to be checked, that is why people who were smart enough to sign a maintenance agreement did just that. Ask the BOE how the chiller replacement is going at the High School; due to lack of maintenance they lost two chillers that should have lasted at least 10 to 15 more years. Penny wise and dollar foolish is what this is all about, not the election year, but what else could we expect from you Richard. You have become the cheer leader of the administration.
Richard Poulton May 18, 2013 at 03:58 pm
Boy, you just know it's an election year. Gene, one question, when was this contract stopped?Read More Just now or some time ago, but seeing its getting "close' to November you just thought you would bring this up. Besides, shouldn't your question be aimed at the B of E, not the Mayor. And what is to be maintained anyway beside washing the panals now and then? You just keep us all informed now Gene.