Driver Safety for Parents

Why Do We Have Traffic Violator Schools (TVS) ?

2013-09-11T07:33:00.000-07:00

I recently read a post touting the idea that TVS's are getting cheaper and easier to comply with, in order to eliminate a traffic citation and/or keep points off of your record, and to be honest, it really made my blood boil. Why do we even have these atrocities?
I have yet to see a study that shows them to be effective, in any manner, other than to benefit the driver that was charged, at the expense of others in the society of drivers. Oh, I have heard the tiresome argument that "...bad things happen to good drivers...this helps them out!" and similar, but the basic truth is that they are nothing more a money-making machine, designed by law-makers, created by entrepeneurs who saw the pot o'gold, and web-based businesses who can sit at home in their pajamas and watch their bank account grow, without ever having to know a damn thing about driving or traffic safety.

(California Vehicle Code Section 42007 requires TVS drivers to pay a fee equal to the total bail set for the eligible offense on the uniform countywide bail schedule. This fee does not include the cost of TVS enrollment.)
One of the largest states with such legislation and creation is California, and four studies, done over a period of 2 decades there, have shown that they are counter-productive. They have shown an INCREASE in traffic incident propensity by so-called "graduates" of such schools. Here's a few quotes from a 2007 study (pdf file):

"The number of drivers attending TVS courses has been increasing. For example, in year 2005, approximately 1,233,327 drivers completed a TVS course as compared to 939,719 drivers completing a TVS course in 1996, an increase of 31%. TVS dismissals represent about 25% of the total number of traffic violation abstracts reported to the department by the courts." (emphasis in these quotes is mine)

"The traffic safety value of the TVS citation dismissal policy has been questioned in several prior California DMV studies. For example, a 1979 study found no evidence that TVS programs had any impact on subsequent crash and citation rates. A 1987 study reported that TVS dismissals result in an increase in crashes compared to the effects of conventional adjudication (traffic conviction). A 1991 study presented evidence that the TVS group had a significantly higher (by 10.2%) crash rate than did a comparison group of convicted drivers after statistically adjusting for the more favorable preexisting characteristics of the TVS group. Three other department studies (1993, 1999, & 2003) found that TVS dismissals in combination with other risk factors increase traffic crash propensity beyond that of drivers who meet the state’s prima facie definition of a negligent operator."

"These prior studies are consistent with the hypothesis that the TVS citation dismissal policy may result in increased crashes as the result of a loss in deterrence due to drivers’ avoiding both the department’s license control interventions, as well as an increase in insurance premiums. In addition, the masking of violation dismissals through the TVS option results in a distortion of the accuracy of the department’s records in predicting future crash risk."

and finally: "Results -The results of the current study were consistent with prior departmental evaluations reporting a negative traffic safety impact associated with the TVS citation dismissal policy."

One-and-a-quarter MILLION attendees, in one year, in one state, and all the studies were consistent with the negative value of their effectiveness, and their affect overall driver safety? Some states seem to have a grasp that they are somewhat counter-productive, but at the same time they are big money, so they tweak the laws (Ohio comes to mind) to make such TVS's either court-mandated (as opposed to voluntary), or voluntary, (to dismiss citation and points) but only once in a lifetime, or every "X" years.

For those of you familiar with the legal concept of "Negligent Entrustment", TVS's throw a monkey-wrench into your own safety as a driver. Not only are these violations and points "masked" or hidden from insurance and general public inquiries, they are also hidden from employers seeking to hire a driver, and seeing if (s)he is a trustworthy driver.

So I go back to my original question: Why do We Have TVS's?

Scaring Teens and Others Into Changing Their Behavior

2013-07-07T13:44:00.000-07:00

Recently, an attorney friend asked me what I thought about programs like "Every 15 Seconds" and others that are designed to scare teens into "behaving", especially with alcohol and texting. Every single authoritative study or report I have seen results in a definite no. Why? Why don't they work?

First off, let me tell you that for the first few years, when I began teaching, I showed these films with utter confidence that they would "teach" my students about the dangers of drinking and driving. But then, I noticed a funny thing happening; new students came to class, and their FIRST question was, "Are we gonna see that bloody, gory crashes video?". When I told them no, they were terribly disappointed and whined that they wanted to see the brains, blood, and disfigured victims. WAIT!!! They WANTED to see it...not the alcohol part, but the blood and guts part? It was then that I realized that, fear and scare wasn't working, but the prurient interest in the CONTENTS of the film was. In other words, THE SCARE VALUE OBLITERATED THE EDUCATIONAL VALUE.

Some of you may remember the film, "Reefer Madness" from the early 1930's and re-released in the 1970's, about the evils and dangers of Marijuana.......I wonder how that worked out?

Many law enforcement groups, school PTA's and organizations like MADD, SADD and others, like to point out the decrease in alcohol-related traffic deaths and injuries, and claiming victory for their scare tactics, but they neglect to inform people what "alcohol-related" means, and they NEVER show videos of kids laughing AFTERWARDS about the film(s). They have adopted a fully POLITICAL style of messaging to their recipients, mainly spinning the best stats, ignoring or denigrating the ones which don't agree with their agenda.

Make no mistake about this blog post; I am FULLY against drinking/texting/cellphone use while driving. But history shows that fear doesn't last long, and without a strong education or empirical knowledge to MAINTAIN a "fear" or respect for an entity, skill, or behavior......it won't last.

Some links:
http://www.npr.org/2012/07/30/157476789/cheer-up-its-just-your-child-behind-the-wheel

http://drivingmba.com/2012/08/do-scare-tactics-work-in-driver-training/

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/ChildrenAndParenting.html

Sharing The Road 1, Bicycles

2013-04-15T09:16:00.001-07:00

Sharebike from Glenard Munson

Road Markings - 1, Yellow Lines

2013-03-26T09:14:00.004-07:00

Road Markings 1 from Glenard Munson

2013-03-12T13:25:00.003-07:00

Bill Hurst has a good blog on Texting while driving
Texting and driving

2013-03-12T13:23:00.002-07:00

Bill Hurst has a good blog concerning Indiana's "Guest Staute"
Passengers suing drivers

2013-03-12T13:08:00.003-07:00

David Slepkow has a good blog concerning letting a friend drive drunk
Letting a Friend Drive Drunk

2013-03-12T12:56:00.003-07:00

Steven Sweat has a good blog on the Human and Econoimic cost of auto collisions
Human & Economic Costs to Auto Collisions

2013-03-12T12:52:00.000-07:00

Matt Dolman has a good blog on the Correlation of Hit-and-run collisions and DUI's
DUI and Hit-and-run

2013-03-12T12:46:00.001-07:00

Matt Dolman has a good blog on texting and driving:
Not Worth It

Whose Fault? Backing out of a parking space

2012-10-05T16:16:00.000-07:00

This is too good for me to try to edit, so I am re-posting it, with permission from the author, in its' entirety:

Determining Fault When Backing out of A Parking Lot

Oct 05, 2012No Commentsby admin

Interview with Farid Yaghoubtil senior partner at Downtown L.A. Law Group

This is a common question asked by many parties. To settle the dispute we have interviewed our resident attorney Farid Yaghoubtil on the subject. Below he shares his insights on this topic.

Who is at fault when backing out of a parking lot or driveway?

Generally the person backing out is responsible to make sure it is safe. California recognizes that the driver in the “flow of traffic” has the right of way. Thus, when you are backing out of your driveway or parking lot you are considered to be coming into that flow and not given the right of way.

Does this mean you are automatically at fault?

Yes, you would be deemed the “at fault” party. But don’t give up on your case. There are times when the other driver is at fault. Examples include running a red light. There are plenty of examples where the driver ran a red light and thus would be deemed at fault for the injury.

What do you recommend if this has happened to someone?

I always recommend that you make sure a police report is filed before doing anything else. You are not allowed to make a police report after the accident. So make sure you do it immediately. If you are seriously injured, it is possible that the police will come to the hospital to take a statement. After a police report is filed, make sure you seek medical treatment of your injuries. It is never advisable to self diagnose.

Should they contact their insurance company?

NO. Absolutely not! Do not make a statement to your insurance company until you have consulted with a personal injury attorney. The reason is that you want to limit the scope of the questioning. Insurance company statements can hold you at fault when you are not responsible for the injuries. Always make sure you speak with an attorney before making a statement to your insurance company.

What happens if it’s my word against the other driver?

This happens all the time. A common example includes when a driver runs a red light and admits to doing so at the scene of the accident. However, when he makes a statement to his insurance company, the story is a bit different.

Isn’t that considered lying or illegal?

You are not under oath when making a statement to your insurance company so it is not perjury, but it unlawful to make false statements regarding an accident. Also, California Evidence Code permits admissibility of the statements made at the scene of the accident under a number of exceptions including the “excited utterance exception” to hearsay.

To Learn more about auto accident liability and personal injury claims visit Mr. Farid Yaghoubtils Google Plus Page

Is there anything else you would like to say?

Auto accidents are common. If you have been injured make sure you get treatment for your injuries. If you have been hurt, speak to an attorney. I know many people feel hesitant speaking with an attorney, but that is not the case with our law firm. There are no fees AT ALL for the consultation and we can give you the best advice.

Are Driving Schools Worth It? Part Two

2012-06-02T07:54:00.000-07:00

Are Driving Schools Worth It?

PART TWO

The following table shows some of the results from around the world, of surveys and studies, on the purported value of Driver Education. As you can see, irrespective of country or type, Driver Education classes seem to be meaningless, except as a knowledge source.

SPC mentioned = Safe Performance Curriculum, a specially devised course.

Reference	Design	Results	Methodological Strengths/Limitations
Dreyer and Janke 1979 California	2,057 students randomly assigned to two training conditions	Those receiving range practice had fewer recorded crashes, but tests scores were no different	Randomized control trial Intermediate measures No follow-up survey for exposure & behavioral measures
Ray et al. 1980 Stock et al. 1983 DeKalb County, Georgia	Intensive, minimal, and no driver education groups About 6,000 students randomly assigned to each group	Intensive training (SPC) drivers had better skills and fewer crashes during first 6 months, but not beyond	Comprehensive randomized controlled trial Long follow-up – 6 years Formative evaluations and intermediate outcomes measures
Wynne-Jones and Hurst 1984 New Zealand	788 students, 561 received course, 227 family/friend taught Random assignment	No reduction in collisions for driver education group	Adequate design Small control group No formative evaluation or intermediate outcomes
Gregersen 1994 Sweden	850 students received driver education course compared to controls Random assignment	Driver education group significantly worse first year, significantly better second year	Longer follow-up – 2 years Reasonable sample size
Masten and Chapman 2003; 2004 California	1,300 students randomly assigned to one of four instructional settings	Home-based methods better for 1 knowledge and attitude test, classroom better for DMV knowledge test	Sample size adequate Well planned and controlled Psychometric measures only
Forsyth et al. 1995 United Kingdom	Survey of 15,000 new drivers	Longer time learning to drive associated with fewer crashes for males More driving education was associated with more crashes	Several follow-ups over time Self-selection bias Self-reported data only
Howarth et al. 2000 Australia	Self-report crash effects for in-car training effects	Substantial differences, but not significant	Sample size too small
McKenna et al. 2000 Pennsylvania	Survey and crash records Random sampling for survey	Driver education not associated with lower crashes or convictions	Multi-variate statistical analysis used to control for confounding variables SES missing from control variables
Lonero et al. 2005 Manitoba	Survey and crash records Random sampling for survey	Driver education not associated with lower crashes or convictions	Multi-variate statistical analysis used to control for confounding variables
Wiggins 2005 British Columbia	Cohort record study Case control study with survey and records	New graduated license holders who took driver education had 26% more crashes	Multi-variate statistical analysis used to control for confounding variables
Zhao et al. 2005 Ontario	Self-report survey of high school students	Driver education associated with fewer crashes for learner license holders	Multi-variate statistical analysis used to control for confounding variables
Pezoldt et al. (2007) Texas	Focus groups, surveys, and driver records	Parent-taught teens less safe.	Comprehensive approach with intermediate measures
Robertson and Zador 1978 27 U.S. States	Modeling study of driver education and fatal crash rates	No relation between proportion taking driver education and fatality rates	Not program specific
Robertson 1980 Connecticut	School boards with and without driver education	For school boards without driver education, total licensing and crashes of 16- and 17-year-olds decreased by 10-15%	Not enough data analysis presented
Potvin et al. 1988 Québec	Mandatory driver education introduced in Québec for all (formerly just 16-17 year olds)	Increased number of young driver crashes due to increased number of licensed females aged 16-17	Large sample size Different timeframes for treatment and control groups
Levy 1990 USA 47 States	Large-scale modeling study of effects of mandatory driver education	Small but significant beneficial effect on fatal crashes	Not program specific
Carstensen 2002 Denmark	Mandatory driver education, new curriculum	Reduced crashes	Large sample size No control of confounding variables

It is especially interesting to note the 2 yellow highlighted areas....in one, a 26% INCREASE in crashes if they took driver education classes, in another, a 10-15% REDUCTION in crashes if there was NO driver education classes.

I leave the reader to draw his or her own conclusion.

Are Driving Schools Worth It? Part One

2012-06-02T06:08:00.001-07:00

Are Driving Schools Worth It?

PART ONE

World-wide, we have this idea, called “face validity”, that it is obvious that more education for young, novice drivers, is a good thing. The problem is…..it isn’t! Study after study after study, from Sweden and Denmark, to England, Canada and the United States, have shown otherwise.

First, let’s examine what Driver Education / Training is, in its’ general context. By design, classroom training (the Driver Education portion) should give a student a better grasp of the laws governing roadway use, signs and markings used by their respective country, and a general idea of both the vehicle and how it handles. All of this is done in roughly 30 hours or so. Then, comes the “practical” side, the in-car training.

I can only speak of this, with authority, in terms of United States training; it tends to be much longer, and more detailed in other countries. Most states still use the “30-and-6” rule, where 30 hours of classroom and 6 hours of in-car are required/recommended. To see what your state uses for Graduated Driver Licensing rules, go to http://www.iihs.org/laws/graduatedlicensestatelaws.aspx?StateAbbr=AL and select your state from the drop-down menu. Some states also require a Driver Education course, either from a public school or a commercial driving school.

The major problem in ANY driver education course, whether it is public or commercially given, is the lack of motivation and inspiration to actually teach SAFE driving. Instead, the SKILL of driving is focused on, by both the student and the teacher, because the end-result desired is to pass the road test to become licensed. A SKILLFUL driver is NOT necessarily, a SAFE driver. It has been my sad experience, in teaching in 3 states and conducting seminars in many others, that the majority of driving schools fall under this category, whether meaning to or not.

Many of the instructors I have met have been either poorly trained, or hardly trained at all, and they tend to teach “Here’s How I Drive” lessons, without giving thought to WHY a certain technique should be used, WHEN braking is more harmful than good, HOW to safely negotiate curves and tight turns, etc. They simply check off on the lesson plan that the student was satisfactory at a certain task.

Similarly, classrooms have devolved into relying on reading a handbook, viewing a few videos/DVD’s, and then testing on what was read or seen. Instructor interaction (called “participative Lecture”) is almost non-existent, except for the occasional commentary of “here’s how I handle that situation”. Classrooms that I have visited tend to have, to save costs, textbooks that are 10 or more years old, and no solid agenda for a parent to view on exactly what their teen is going to learn, how it will be determined if learning occurred, or even what the testing will entail. A parent would, rightfully, be angered if a school teacher for, say, English or Math, treated the student’s education the same way. Speaking of which, even in the public school system, many of the “Driver Education” teachers are NOT licensed to be one, as ordained by their K-12 Teaching Certificate.

So, just what is being accomplished here? Is it all bad? Of course not. The classroom AND behind the wheel training are valuable for learning WHAT the rules are. But they do little, if anything, to teach WHY the rules are there, and WHY a driver should utilize safer driving practices. To make matters worse, almost everyone seems to think that they are a better driver than others, and such training is a waste of time. And yet, close to 40,000 people, 2-4,000 of which are teens, die every year on US roads.

The next section will show results from around the globe, many of which are taken from the LSEDE (Large-Scale Evaluation of Driver Education, 2010 Update) which can be downloaded in a pdf format from: https://sites.google.com/site/parentinstructor/my-forms (scroll down to LSEDElit). This link also has many other informational documents for those interested in driver safety, especially as it relates to teens.

2012-06-01T03:30:00.001-07:00

Distracted Driving Redux

Much has been written about distracted driving, and considering a Massachusetts case now wending its way thru the courts (http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/31/justice/massachusetts-texting-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t3), I thought I would present a series of pix from my Distracted Driving Seminar. The original program these are taken from is an interactive media program I use, so the links you see aren't clickable.

This is one of the best videos I have seen on the subject:

For more information on this, please visit:

http://www.distraction.gov/

What's It Take to Be a Driving Instructor?

2012-05-27T22:34:00.000-07:00

{This is an excerpt from my Training Manual for new instructors, with Parents added in}

Necessary Traits for Becoming a Driving Instructor

A Primer for Parents

What Am I Supposed To Do? I'm a Parent, Not an Instructor!

Obviously, a driving instructor must have an in-depth knowledge of traffic laws and safe driving practices. An instructor must also possess an understanding of why these laws exist, and why certain driving practices are safer, or more dangerous, than others, so that he or she can better explain them to the student. It is not enough to simply tell a student to "aim higher" or "use caution". These are vague terms to a novice driver, and will, most likely, be misunderstood or forgotten by the student unless an explanation of "why" is given for each term used in the training.

An instructor also needs to be able to analyze problems, such as what to do in any given traffic situation, so that both the instructor and the student can safely maneuver through or around any dangers. In addition, every individual, whether in a classroom or in one-on-one training in a vehicle, has different rates of understanding, and the instructor must be able to analyze, and then solve, any problems relating to getting the students to understand the instruction being given. Get feedback from them!

Communications skills are a prime requisite for anyone involved in any kind of instruction. Communicating does not always equal "talking". It also involves listening, demonstrating, explaining a concept seen in a video or text, and encouragement of the student's own sense of self-confidence in his or her driving skills. When we hire a person to be an instructor, one of the first things we look at is his or her "personality" and conversation skills. Every instructor uses the same basic "text", the Vehicle Code. The difference in instructors is how they communicate that text to the student in an understandable and memorable manner.

Going hand-in-hand with communication skills is the ability to be patient, understanding, and compassionate about the students skills, or lack of skills. Some students are truly terrified of driving, while others are boastful of their driving abilities, whether real or imagined. Any given classroom will have a varied mix of these types of individuals, and the instructor must be able to accommodate the learning curve of all of them. In addition, not all students will be willing teenagers; you may find yourself driving with a rehabilitating stroke victim who may have poor speech patterns, or with immigrants with trouble understanding you. The wise instructor also takes the time to explain and encourage parents regarding their children's lessons.

In most cases, you will be driving in a vehicle plainly marked with your school name, address, and phone number. A professional instructor will always strive to present a professional manner while driving. If a student witnesses an instructor violating traffic laws, or "shrugging them off" while driving, the instructor's credibility is tarnished, and his or her "professionalism" is in question. The attitude of an instructor must be professional at all times, in class, in the car, and in all driving situations.

Needless to say, if an instructor does not have a working knowledge of the vehicle, as well as other vehicles the student may meet up with while driving, it will be impossible for the instructor to impart the required knowledge of safety and defensive driving techniques. Knowing that a front-wheel drive vehicle handles differently than a rear-wheel drive car is important to students driving in tight curves or bad weather conditions. The difference between Anti-Lock brakes and regular brakes, during hard braking maneuvers, can be the critical difference between life and death, and must be explained by the instructor.

None of the "traits" mentioned so far has any meaning if the instructor lacks a true desire to teach. If instruction becomes a "job" and the instructor has no drive to instill knowledge and safety to a novice driver, then no real instruction is being done. Driving instructors who have a desire to teach are the ones that students respect and ask for in subsequent lessons; they know that they are actually learning something! The desire to teach also makes the instructor find various ways of communicating to the students, rather than "going by the book".

Instructors must always be looking for new and inspirational methods of communicating. Such methods include "participative lecturing", teaching-by-coaching, role-playing and problem solving games, to name a few. Mundane teaching or reading bores many students, and a bored student is a student who is not learning.

How would you feel about a doctor, or a lawyer, who practices in cut-off shorts, scraggly beards, unkempt hair, and dirty hands? Probably not very comfortable! What makes you think that your students, and their parents, don't look at you and your vehicle the same way? When you take a teenage student for a lesson, the parents are, quite literally, putting their child's life in your hands. They want the comfort of knowing that a professional instructor is at their side, and your appearance, as well as the vehicle they will be in, is the first impression that they have of you. Remember, you never get a second chance to make a first impression.

As mentioned earlier, listening is a vital part of communicating. A good instructor listens to not only the words a student may be using, but how they are being used, and the inflection. Quite often the student in your car has poor communication skills themselves, so it is up to you, as a professional, to listen intently and make sure that understanding, comprehension, and learning is taking place.

The novice driver is also a nervous driver. It is the job of the professional instructor to calm the nerves, build self-confidence, and impart knowledge to the novice driver. This can only be done if the instructor maintains a pleasant and comfortable demeanor. The instructor knows that we all make mistakes now and then, and so he or she must also have the ability to laugh at himself or herself, and not take life too seriously.

Finally, the professional instructor not only cares about his or her students, but also finds ways of showing it. A student more readily understands the inherent dangers of driving when that student feels that the instructor actually is concerned, and explains the dangers in a way that shows he or she actually cares.

Be Consistent

One of the most difficult tasks facing you, the parent, is to QUIT being a parent! Your teen needs two things right now: someone to INSTRUCT them on safe driving habits, and an AUTHORITY figure to make the teaching credible. If you try to be a PARENT, your teen (who is, after all, in his or her "rebellious" years) will likely let many of your statements go in one ear and out the other. Remember, they SEE you drive every day, they KNOW (or at least THINK they do!) what your "parenting" skills are like, and they will, very likely, only drive "correctly" when you are around.

The wise parent is able to set aside their "Mommy / Daddy" personality and adopt a "Teacher" one, which requires a constant conversation during the drive. This conversation will entail descriptions of WHY a certain driving action is done, WHEN it should be done, WHERE it should (or should not) be done, and HOW it should be done, both correctly AND legally.

You must “prepare yourself “prior to taking your teen driving. Accept the fact that mistakes are going to happen, and think about how you will handle them; reaching over and calmly taking control of the steering wheel, instead of "grabbing" it, using the parking brake on the console (if your car has it there) as your own secondary brake, informing your teen at least a block ahead of a desired turn, or other maneuver, using a "baby monitor" mirror (available from most department stores for around $5.00) as a secondary mirror so that YOU can see traffic to the rear and sides.

One of the things I look for in an instructor is the ability to remain calm during potentially dangerous situations. I take them out and become a horrible student, one that they must constantly correct and advise. If they rattle easy, I don't hire them. YOU can do the same: take another adult along with you on a drive (WITHOUT your teen!), and let them make mistakes, such as over-turning on a right turn, failure to stop for a stop sign, etc. YOU make the corrective action for them, and think about how you would advise them on a change in their driving skill during the maneuver.

Good Luck....and smile. Remember, in all my years of driver training, the only ones who truly scared me were those who ALREADY HAD a license!

Understanding Intersections

2012-05-27T21:55:00.000-07:00

Understanding Intersections

Despite popular belief, intersection crashes and fatalities are only around 20% of all traffic incidents. The latest figures from the National Highway Traffic Safety, FARS (Fatality Analysis Reporting System) 2009, are shown below:

Notice that, of 30,797 fatal crashes, 6,670 (21%) were intersection or intersection-related. The vast majority were at NON-JUNCTION locations, 22,286 (72%). All things considered, intersections are one of the SAFER places to be; one hypothesis for this is due to the fact that most drivers become MORE aware of the danger and pay closer attention to their driving.

Now, of those crashes that DID occur, here’s a breakdown of the traffic flow:

Again, note that the vast majority (75%) occurred on two-lane roads (one lane in each direction). Multi-lane traffic flow, of 4 or more lanes, accounted for only 15%.

Finally, as to the crashes that DID occur in intersections, this pie chart shows the style of crash:

Note that angle collisions (such as occurs when traffic conflicts at right angles, such as when making a right-turn-on-red, or driving thru a red light) account for almost ½ of all fatal collisions, 47%. Side-swipe collisions (such as would happen if changing lanes) are only 2% of those fatalities.

THIS is precisely why I want new drivers, of any age, to understand the law about lane changing. In some states, lane changing WITHIN an intersection is illegal, in others it is illegal within 100 feet of an intersection, and in some, like Florida, it is legal sometimes, and sometimes not. (Florida's traffic laws can be found here: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0316/titl0316.htm&StatuteYear=2009&Title=-%3E2009-%3EChapter%20316

To deny them a reasonable expectation of what might happen, legally, just because it is not a popular belief, is, in my opinion, unprofessional at best, and negligence at worse. When we talk about teaching safe driving habits, we should, no, MUST, give them an explanation of WHY this or that practice is safe, and what they can expect from adhering/disobeying such practices.

Pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way...REALLY?

2012-05-27T21:09:00.002-07:00

Pedestrian Safety

“Pedestrians always have the right-of-way”, is one of the most vicious myths ever propagated by the general public. It is, quite simply, not true. An even harsher version of that statement, “In Florida, the pedestrian always has the right-of-way” is often (mis)quoted.

The problem with the above statement(s) is that it empowers pedestrians to simply cross where they want, ignoring signs and signals and even traffic…almost daring you to hit them.

This link is from the FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. It cover the “rights and responsibilities” of pedestrians, as outlined in the Florida Statutes (something not needed if they always had right-of-way!).

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_pedLaws.shtm

One of the reasons I take each of my students on a beach run (Beach Blvd), is to explain to them what to watch for in pedestrians; errors in walking across, using/not using the provided green flags, flashing lights at some crosswalks, anticipation of what a pedestrian might do based on location, body stance, and visual search.

Pedestrians do not have the right-of-way, except in certain cases where they are WITHIN a crosswalk. This is why we often read in the paper where a pedestrian was injured/killed and the driver WAS NOT CITED. How can this be if the pedestrian always has the right of way?

Parental Driver Training

2012-05-27T18:57:00.000-07:00

Parental Driver Training

{the word "guide" as used in this blog refers to my upcoming guide to "Parent-Lead Driver Education for Teens"}

Parental Driver Training

Your child has reached an important milestone; a LEARNER’S PERMIT. It is our hope that acquiring mature driving skills and judgment will be a rewarding experience for you and your teenager. With your involvement, it can also be a safe experience. This 40-hour parent/teen driving handbook provides suggestions for in-car lessons to help you guide your child in making this step to adulthood more successful for both of you.

How do you teach a 16-year-old not to be a 16-year-old behind the wheel of an automobile? Unfortunately, there is no magic formula to prepare your teenager for the responsibilities of driving. Driver education at its best is a team effort involving schools, communities, students, and families.

Cars do not crash; people crash them. In 2005, 136 Young Drivers (Ages 15-20) were killed and an additional 193 others killed as a result of a crash involving a driver (Ages 15-20) in Georgia. Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death of 15 to 20-year olds (based on 2003 figures, which are the latest mortality data currently available from the National Center for Health Statistics). In 2008, 3,500 15- to 20-year old drivers were killed and an additional 350,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes nationally.

The ability to move a car skillfully is not the same thing as the ability to drive safely. Steering the vehicle is a relatively simple skill that most people can master in a short period of time. Driving is a complex task requiring mastery of various performance skills. It requires processing and accurately evaluating risk in the driving environment, developing appropriate responses to minimize risk, and gaining experience to predict what action others may take.

Research shows that in order for young drivers to remain collision-free, parents must model safe driving behaviors and invest in meaningful guided practice over a long period of time to turn these skills into good driving habits!

If neither parent has a valid driver’s license, a friend or relative can conduct the guided practice sessions. Because parents and guardians play such a significant role in the development of safe driving habits, parents should remain involved in the learning process as observers in the car during the guided practice sessions. Knowing your child is a skilled, safety-conscious driver will give you peace of mind in the years to come.

In addition to sharpening your driving skills, it is our hope the guided practice sessions presented in this guide will provide your child with a solid foundation to develop safe, collision-free driving habits that will last a lifetime. At the end of this technical assistance guide is a 40-hour log to help you keep track of your driving time together.

The Parents’ Role in the Young Driver’s Licensing Process

• Provide their child with at least 50 hours of supervised driving experience with 10 hours at night.

• Control the child’s driving privileges if he or she is not demonstrating responsible behavior.

• Continue to monitor their child’s driving after receipt of their provisional license, reinforce safety

belt use, and limit passengers, cell phone use and other driving distractions.

• Present a positive role model by demonstrating safe driving behaviors.

Parent Tips for In-Car Guided Practice Sessions

Parental reinforcement of basic driving skills and good decision-making will lead to safe driving habits that will last a lifetime.

• Enjoy your time together. Have fun! This is a great “bonding” opportunity. Focus on the driving

task and leave family issues at home.

• When you drive, set a good example to model. Always wear your safety belt. Try to correct any

unsafe driving habits that you may have acquired; such as rolling through stop signs, accelerating through yellow lights, exceeding the speed limit. etc.

• If possible, initial instruction should begin in a car with an automatic transmission so that your

child can focus on mastering basic vehicle control maneuvers.

• Select driving environments that complement the lesson objectives and the novice driver’s ability.

Start in parking lots and progress to quiet neighborhoods. Stay in a safe, low-risk environment as long as needed and, in the beginning, practice driving routes familiar to your child.

• Check to make sure your child has their Learner’s Permit and insurance information with him or

her when operating a vehicle.

• Explain the objectives of each lesson and review what was learned in the last lesson.

• Feedback should be precise and immediate. If a mistake is made, repeat the maneuver taking the

driver step by step through the process, and then allow practice without assistance.

• Be patient, calm, and alert at all times. Make positive remarks frequently.

• Have short, well-planned practice sessions. Thirty minutes is the optimum learning period for

beginning drivers. The first 30 minutes of each one-hour session should be used to introduce and practice the new skills. Assess the child’s understanding of the lesson objectives during the second half of the session. Set high standards and evaluate each driving session together.

• In a parking lot, practice steering the car with your left hand from the passenger seat.

• If you have a car with a parking brake between the seats, practice stopping the car by depressing the release button and raising the parking brake.

• To prepare yourself to regain speed control in the event you child panics, practice shifting the

transmission from drive to neutral from the passenger seat.

• Adjust the mirror on the passenger sun visor so you can use it as a rearview mirror. If the right

outside mirror is properly adjusted to eliminate blind spot and glare, you can also use that mirror to monitor traffic to the rear from the passenger seat. (see page 7)

• Keep instructions simple and concise. First direct where to go, and then state the action to take

(e.g., “At the next intersection, turn right.”)

• Check mirrors and the space to the sides and ahead of the vehicle before giving directions.

• Emphasize driving with a large anticipation zone by looking at least 15-20 seconds ahead. Play the

“what if game”; what if a car suddenly changes lanes, stops, turns, etc.

• Encourage commentary driving! This is the most valuable tool you have for checking how your

child is processing driving skills and evaluating the environment. Ask your child to “read the

traffic picture aloud” describing anything that may affect your path of travel. For example, when your child changes speed, your child may say: “red light, mirror, ease foot off accelerator and brake.” Actually, you should hear “mirror and ease off accelerator” a lot!

• Reinforce the fact that a green light means one must scan the intersection before proceeding.

• Encourage your child not to panic when approached by an emergency vehicle and to focus on

looking for a safe area to pull over.

• Discuss the rules for passing a stopped school bus with flashing lights.

• Encourage new drivers to change their route to avoid making a difficult left turn.

• There is a lot to learn in each lesson, so your child may need extra time to attain adequate skill

proficiency. Mastery at each level is important before moving on to the next lesson.

• If possible, integrate night driving into each area of instruction.