Teenage Road Deaths

Last month, hundreds of teenagers dressed in black and pink fill St Francis of Assisi Church in Mill Park, 23 km north-east from Melbourne's central business district to say goodbye to Anthony Iannetta, 18, one of five young men killed when a speeding car driven by Steven Johnstone, 19, hit a tree at 140 km/h in the early hours of Sunday morning.

Of the major risk factors associated with teenage road deaths, many were present, the driver was speeding, had a blood alcohol level of .19, it was early morning, there was passenger overcrowding, and of course driver inexperience.

The horrific car smash, predictably reignited debate about penalties for hoon drivers and the Opposition and State Government began trading blows in the media over who has the toughest anti-hoon policy.

It was Nelson Mandela, who said that there can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its young people. Data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare released in September 2009 showed motor vehicle accidents are by far and away the leading cause of death in adolescent males (32%) and female (26%) behind suicide, so addressing the issue sensibly should go way beyond party politics.

As it stands now, as a result of the deaths of these five young men, hoon drivers face having their cars crushed, whoever wins this year's Victorian election, which is curious given there have been no peer reviewed studies showing the car crushing is an effective deterrent to young people. It transpires that Victoria will be in a position to run the world’s first proper scientific study of whether this works.

So what does the research show? Evaluation studies [i] in the United States concluded that vehicle impoundment/immobilization are associated with declines in crashes and moving violations that are both statistically and practically significant .

The experiences from New Zealand and elsewhere suggest that vehicle impoundment and confiscation are effective in reducing the road safety risks posed by sub-groups of drivers who have proved otherwise difficult to influence.

Currently Victoria has impoundment for extreme speeding currently 45km/h + over the limit. With increasing severity in consequences if there is re-offending. (48 hours first time, up to 3 months second time, and potential forfeiture third time).

Psychologists who study the behaviour of road users focus amongst other things on speeding. Victoria's arrive alive road safety strategy document states speeding is involved in 25-30% of road deaths and injuries. Speeding is one of the key ways in which adolescent risk taking is expressed, and increases crash risk dramatically. Every additional 5km/h over the speed limit doubles the risk of crashing.

Doing 20km/h over a 60km/h speed limit increases the risk of a casualty crash by 31 times - the same as driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.2 (4 times the legal limit)!

The problem is that the current penalty for travelling 20km/h over the limit is 3 demerit points and a fine. The State is much tougher and stronger on drink driving - the risk of a casualty crash at 0.2 BAC (4 times the legal limit of 0.05) increases by 30 times too, but the penalty for this is long periods of licence cancellation and P platers needing to start their P licence all over again and when they return to driving they have to put a device in their car (an ignition interlock) which stops them from driving if they have been drinking.

Many Australians who care about the health and welfare of the next generation need to ask themselves why was it so easy for Steven Johnstone’s car to be driven over the legal speed limit? Most of us drive a car with a speedometer that goes up to 240 Km/h – a design feature that could only encourage the very speeding behaviour that contributed to the deaths of five young men early on that Sunday morning.

Vehicles are also becoming increasingly powerful and are readily available to young people who are tempted to use vehicles beyond legal speed limits. The problem is that there are no physical barriers to speeding in the way vehicles are currently designed. External limits on behaviour are much more effective than education alone. Speed limiting technology is still in embryo and it is gratifying to know that Australian trials are underway. In the meantime if the Premier wants to take evidence based action to prevent the carnage on the road, then effective and appropriate consequences for such dangerous high risk speeding behaviour is needed and with respect Mr Brumby, 3 demerit points and a fine just doesn’t cut it.