Teenage Drivers - Research Proposal Example

TEEN DRIVERS Introduction The automobile truly burst onto the national scenario of the United s in 1909 when Henry Ford introduced the famous Ford Model T automobile at a price of $ 825. Rapid innovation followed all through the 21st century, causing the Model T to record huge sales. By 1918, in response to a reduced price of $ 360, more than 50% of all cars in the country were Model Ts. The Model T as well as other automobiles began to have a pronounced effect on the American people and their way of life (Elliot), as has been well elucidated by E.B. White: “Everything in life is somewhere else, and you get there in the car” (The Quote Garden). The automobile provided Americans a heightened sense of personal freedom without consequences. It was soon transformed from being just an invention that facilitated reliable and speedy transportation, to a symbol of social status (Elliot). The 1920s in the U.S were dominated by the youth of the nation. It was a period of celebration as a result of emerging from the First World War, during which the country was badly damaged, causing a whole generation to thankfully experience peace. The period also spawned an outburst of self expression among the American people; one of the most distinct manifestations of such self expression was the automobile. Irrespective of whether good or bad, each person in the nation was influenced by a century that was greatly swayed by the power of the automobile (Elliot). Teens, that comprised a significant part of the American population, were also greatly influenced by the automobile, which ignited in them an overwhelming desire to give vent to self expression by driving. Background Modern culture in most parts of the world, especially in Western Europe and the United States ranks motor vehicles as the most important manner of transportation. By association, the liberty to drive is looked upon as a firm right of the individual that is as important as the rights to life, liberty and achieving happiness (Haverstock). Teens {persons aged between 16 and 19} form a large portion of drivers that drive motor vehicles on roads all over the U.S. In recent years there teen drivers have come increasingly under the national spotlight due to compelling statistics presented government authorities. For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration {NHTSA} has identified motor vehicle crashes as the foremost cause of teen deaths in the country (Saferoads.org). There is a sage quotation by Ernest Greenwood: “Accidents, particularly street and highway accidents do not happen – they are caused” (The Quote Garden). The number of fatal motor vehicle crashes caused by teen drivers in the U.S is more than double the number caused by drivers over 21 years of age, more than 4 times the number caused by drivers aged between 25 and 69, and more than double the number caused by drivers over 85 years of age (Saferoads.org). Proposition The alarming statistics presented by the NHTSA and other government agencies about teen drivers in the country has spawned a heated debate about whether teen drivers should be allowed to drive on American roads. Those in favor have put forward several arguments while those against the proposition have come out with their own reasons. It is my contention that teen drivers should not be allowed to drive on the roads of our country. Proof Those who are against teens driving on American roads have put forward 9 arguments. In what is easily the most powerful argument, attention is drawn to the horrific statistics of death and injury from accidents caused by teens in the U.S. In 2001, the approximate economic cost of teen crashes was $ 42.3 billion (Saferoads.org). Per mile driven, teen drivers are 4 times more likely than older people to cause vehicle crashes. In 2004, road accidents caused by teens resulted in 4,767 teen deaths; the motor vehicle death rate for male teens was 19.4 per 100,000 as compared to 11.1 per 100,000 for females. In 2005, 12% of all motor vehicle crash deaths were caused by teens; 36% of teen deaths resulted from motor vehicle crashes; 400,000 injuries requiring emergency treatment were caused to teens as a result of accidents caused by them; teens accounted for 30% or $ 19 billion of total costs on account of physical damages caused by motor vehicles among males, and 28% or $ 7 billion of total costs on account of physical damages caused by motor vehicles among females (Cdc.gov). NHTSA revealed that in 2006, there were 6.2 million road crashes of which nearly 8,000 were caused by teenagers; this number included 3,406 teenage deaths (Saferoads.org). The second argument against teen drivers involves the National Safety Council (NSC), which, like insurance companies and many parents look upon the teen driving problem as a national crisis in the U.S. The NSC claims medical researchers have discovered that the region of the human brain that controls the individual’s capability to judge the results of his or her actions has not get reached maturity in a teenager; this brain region reaches full development stage only when the individual reaches the age of 25. The second discovery is that the teen brain produces that makes the teen unable to properly control mood and excitement, thus causing thrill-seeking behavior that is so regularly seen in teens. The presence of the two behavioral factors make teens not fit to drive (Jackson). This argument vindicates Judith Martin’s cryptic quote: “The invention of the teenager was a mistake” (The Quote Garden). The third argument is that teens are inexperienced. Contrary to what the rules state, most States in the U.S. have not been strict while carrying out licensing requirements (Haverstock). This attitude is spawned by the common tendency in North American countries to have a collective blind spot when it comes to the vital value of training teen drivers (Smith: 8). As a result, teens with hardly any driving experience are given the go-ahead to drive where and when they wish. For example, in 1995 the rules in only 30 States required a learner’s permit as a must to obtaining a license; of these, 19 States did not insist that the drivers have the permit for the minimum period {14 to 90 days}. Their inexperience causes teen drivers to take more risks than mature drivers do by incorrectly judging or undermining possible driving dangers while estimating their own ability at an unnaturally high level (Haverstock). The fourth argument disproves the notion that drivers’ education programs in high schools are effective. These programs have lost their effectiveness due to lack of funding. They do nothing but follow brief formalities such as providing basic information courses on traffic rules and vehicle handling. Nothing in the program relates to or teaches about driver attitudes and decision-making skills. Critics claim proof of the ineffectiveness of the drivers’ education programs is the fact that there has never been a study that proved this school-based program has reduced the number teen crashes (Haverstock). The fifth argument refers to the habit of teens to always be impatient, expecting the best results to be reached in the shortest possible time. This matter is made worse by the teen’s typical overconfident behavior (Jackson). They do not understand, in the words of Eleanor Everet, that “safety is not a gadget, but a state of mind” (The Quote Garden). Professional drivers like truckers, race drivers and ambulance drivers undergo long and strict training schedules that also provide information about change-producing forces in vehicles, closing speeds, distance dimensions and reaction times that make them able to properly control most situations. This is strengthened by many hours of practice. Teenagers do not have the patience to undergo all this, instead expecting to become highly skilled drivers without the need for basic training, education and practice (Jackson). The sixth argument is that teens are pushed into driving by their parents. Teen parents have been charged on three counts. First, they do not consider their teen’s needs when choosing places to live, many times choosing houses that are far from teen educational institutions and recreation facilities thereby forcing teens to undertake long daily drives. Secondly, parents want their teens to get their own driving license as soon as possible in order to rid themselves of troublesome chauffer duties that interfere with their daily work schedules or social engagements (Haverstock). Thirdly, parents show little or no concern about their teen’s driving habits. The NSC considers parental involvement so vital that it publishes a brochure called “Teen Driver: A Family Guide to Teen Driver Safety” that guides parents in ways to handle their teens’ driving experience, examine their risky behavior and develop an effective two-way dialogue with them to understand their point of view and their problems (Jackson). It is also worthy to note that teens whose parents have committed traffic violations are 19% more likely to commit their own violations as compared to teens whose parents did not commit any violations (Smith: 19). The seventh argument is that teens seem, to change roles completely when they find themselves behind the steering wheel. They drive calmly with admirable adult-like confidence when their parents are in the car, but change abruptly to dangerous driving when alone or when they carry friends as passengers. The presence of teen passengers brings out the highest risk taking behavior in the teen driver due to challenging actions carried out by the passengers such as daring the driver to attempt dangerous feats, or increasing the volume of the vehicle’s CD player (Haverstock). In the year 2002, 61% of teen passenger deaths in the U.S took place in fatal vehicle crashes involving teen drivers (Saferoads.org). The eighth argument is that teens hate to wear seat belts in motor vehicles (Cdc.gov). They do not realize that the seat belt is undoubtedly the single greatest factor in surviving a car crash (Smith: 74). A 2005 survey found that male teens {12.5%} did not wear seat belts as compared to female teens {7.8%} (Cdc.gov). This behavior is seen in teen drivers as well as teen passengers sitting in front or behind (Haverstock). Teens are less aware of how significant it is for their backseat passengers to also wear safety belts (Smith: 75). It is a well-known fact that the act of not wearing seat belts has resulted in countless accidents of both drivers and passengers. Records show that teen drivers carry the most number of passengers {usually of their own age group}, most of whom do not wear seat belts (Haverstock). In 2005, 10% of high school teens stated that they rarely or never wore seat belts; 13.4% of African-American teens and 10.6% of Hispanic teens used seat belts as compared to only 9.4% in case of white teens (Cdc.gov). The last argument contains the peculiar habits displayed by teen drivers which contribute to making them bad drivers. In most cases, teen behavior tends to be inexplicable (Smith: 42). Firstly, they don’t like to regularly glance at side view and rear view mirrors of the vehicle while driving. The correct method is to glace at the mirrors every 30 seconds. Secondly, they like to frequently look at passengers while driving instead of concentrating on the road. Thirdly, they like to use mobile phones while driving. If the call is not urgent, it can wait until the drive is over; if the call is urgent, it is a much safer to use the phone after pulling over to the side of the road (Jackson). Fourthly, teens think it is only natural to drive while searching for different radio stations (Smith: 18), or applying make-up or groping a favored front seat passenger (Smith: 76). Fifthly, teens like to speed (Cdc.gov). They do not realize that increased speed is equal to lower time for reaction plus greater distance required to stop (Smith: 205). In 2005, 38% of teen drivers were speeding when they caused crashes that resulted in death. Sixthly, teens like to allow shorter headways {the distance between the front part of one vehicle and the rear of the one preceding it}. Seventhly, they like to drive dangerously during late hours and over the weekend (Cdc.gov). Over 40% of fatal teen vehicle crashes take place at night, especially during weekends (Smith: 177). In 2003, 41% of teen deaths in fatal vehicle crashes in the U.S took place between 9 pm and 6 am (Saferoads.org). In 2005, 50% of teen deaths took place as a result of crashes between 3 pm and midnight, and 54% took place over the weekend {Friday, Saturday, Sunday} (Cdc.gov). Lastly, miscellaneous other disturbing teen driving habits include an inclination to drive despite being very tired {one of the major causes of teen vehicle crashes is fatigue (Smith: 182)}, a tendency to neglect vehicle maintenance {it is common for teens to presume that regular vehicle maintenance is either not required or to be done by someone else (Smith: 57)}, and, as highlighted by a ‘USA Weekend’ study, a tendency to speed and run off the road, an inclination to crash into poles and trees more regularly than drivers of any other age group, and, except drivers more than 82 years old, a habit of receiving most traffic violations (Haverstock). Refutation Those who are in favor of teens driving freely on American roads have put forward 5 arguments. In what is probably their strongest argument, they argue that unlike other countries of the world, West European countries and the U.S. have strict driver licensing systems that contain severe training regimes that must be fully and properly passed by teens before they get a driving license. Like Germany, the U.S. insists on issuing driving licenses to teens more than 18 years of age. The U.S. has gone one step further by also requiring written consent from the teen’s parents before issuing not only a driver’s license, but also a learner’s permit to teens (Smith: 10). The second argument is that teens are well informed by drivers’ education programs available in high schools all over the U.S., whereby participating teens are trained in traffic rules and the complex methods of handling motor vehicles (Haverstock). This initial education is later strengthened by driving instructors, who are experienced, caring persons who take great pains to teach teens all they should know about careful driving (Smith: 9), even going to the extent of using opposite-sex pairings while teaching teens to drive as they have provided better results as compared to same-sex pairing (Smith: 41). In addition, teens have access to driver education programs like the Graduated Driver Licensing {GDL} program that looks at driving as a sort of apprenticeship (Smith: 13). GDL guides teens through 3 stages {Learners phase, Intermediate phase and Unrestricted Driving phase}, starting initially under lower-risk conditions and then graduating to higher-risk situations. GDL has enjoyed great success in countries like Canada and New Zealand which report a 33% reduction in teen vehicle crashes as a result of it. Many states in the U.S {like California and Delaware} that have the GDL program in place also report a nearly one-third reduction in teen driver crash rates as a result of the program (Saferoads.org). The third argument is that, as compared to adults, teens rarely drive when drunk. Considering that most motor vehicle accidents are caused by drunk drivers, this good trend showed by teens indicates they have an admirable responsibility in their attitude, and therefore deserve to be allowed to drive. The fourth argument concerns the education level of teens. Teens are not illiterate morons but study in high schools and colleges where they are gaining a high level of knowledge as they are trained to be our country’s future. They are perfectly aware of the risks involved in rash driving and are responsible enough to decide for themselves if they are competent enough to drive. The last argument is that teen drivers have no proper alternatives to driving their own motor vehicles. By denying them the right to drive, their parents are being put into inconvenience in the form of taking time off busy working schedules to drive teens between school/college and home, or between home and recreation centers. Denial of the right to drive means teenagers who live far away from their educational institutions or recreation centers have to undergo the inconvenience of long walks to reach public transports, long waits for such transports to arrive, and many times having to face rowdy persons traveling on these public transport vehicles. Conclusion The statistics of accidents caused by teens and the large number of arguments against teen driving are more forceful as compared to the few, weak arguments that favor teen drivers, thus pointing to the necessity of keeping teen drivers off American roads. Teens wrongly assume that the use of a vehicle is an irreplaceable part of their passage to adulthood (Smith: 240). They are simply not yet ready to face the responsibilities connected with safe driving. They are too reckless, and in the words of Marlin E. Pew: “Recklessness is a species of crime, and should be so regarded on our streets and highways” (The Quote Garden). Teen years are mostly a period of higher education and building for a future. It is advisable that teens concentrate on this and do not risk lives – their own as well as others – by driving on American roads. References used: Elliot, Sam. “The Roaring 1920’s: The Effects of the Automobile on American Life.” About, Inc. 2006. 3 Mar. 2008. “Graduated Driver Licensing.” Saferoads.org. 2008. 3 Mar. 2008. Haverstock, Mark. “Teen Drivers: Accidents Waiting to Happen.” Parenting Teens Magazine. 1999. 3 Mar. 2008. Jackson, Les. “Teen Driving Dangers.” American International Automobile Dealers. 2006. 3 Mar. 2008. “Quotations: Teenage Drivers.” The Quote Garden. 2007. 3 Mar. 2008. Smith, Timothy C. “Crashproof Your Kids: Make Your Teen a Safer, Smarter Driver.” New York: Fireside. May 2006. “Teen Drivers: Fact Sheet.” Cdc.gov. 2007. 3 Mar. 2008. Read More