Canada's New Drug-Impaired Driving Law: The Need to Consider Other Approaches

References

• Adlaf EM, Begin P, Sawka E, eds. Canadian Addiction Survey (CAS): A National Survey of Canadians’ Use of Alcohol and Other Drugs: Prevalence of Use and Related Harms: Detailed Report. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Adler EV, Burns M. Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Validation Study. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Department of Public Safety; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Angus Reid Public Opinion. Most Americans and Canadians Are Ready to Legalize Marijuana. New York, NY: Angus Reid Public Opinion; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Asbridge M, Hayden JA, Cartwright JL. Acute cannabis consumption and motor vehicle collision risk: systematic review of observational studies and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2012;344:e536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asbridge M, Poulin C, Donato A. Motor vehicle collision risk and driving under the influence of cannabis: Evidence from adolescents in Atlantic Canada. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37:1025–1034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beasley EE, Beirness DJ, Porath-Waller AJ. A Comparison of Drug- and Alcohol-Involved Motor Vehicle Driver Fatalities. Ottawa, ON, Canada: CCSA; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Bedard M, Dubois S, Weaver B. The impact of cannabis on driving. CJPH. 2007;98:6–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beirness DJ, Beasley EE. A Roadside survey of alcohol and drug use among drivers in British Columbia. Traffic Inj Prev. 2010;11:215–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beirness DJ, Beasley EE. Alcohol and Drug Use Among Drivers: British Columbia Roadside Survey 2010. Ottawa, ON, Canada: CCSA; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Beirness DJ, Beasley EE, Boase P. A comparison of drug use by fatally injured drivers and drivers at risk. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety T-2013; Brisbane, Australia: International Council on Alcohol, Drugs, and Traffic Safety (ICADTS); 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Beirness DJ, Beasley E, LeCavalier J. The accuracy and reliability of evaluations by drug recognition experts in Canada. Paper presented at: 18th Canadian Multidisciplinary Road Safety Conference; 2008; Whistler, BC, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Beirness D, Swan P, Logan B. Drugs and Driving: Detection and Deterrence. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Transport Research Centre; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Berthiaume L, Fekete J. Liberal delegates vote yes to legalizing marijuana, no to cutting off monarchy. National Post. . January 15, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Blencowe T, Pehrsson A, Lillsunde P, et al. An analytical evaluation of eight on-site oral fluid drug screening devices using laboratory confirmation results from oral fluid. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;208:173–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blows S, Ivers RQ, Connor J, et al. Marijuana use and car crash injury. Addiction. 2005;100:605–611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boorman M, Owens K. The Victorian legislative framework for the random testing [of] drivers at the roadside for the presence of illicit drugs: an evaluation of the characteristics of drivers detected from 2004 to 2006. Traffic Inj Prev. 2009;10:16–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosker WM, Karschner EL, Lee D, et al. Psychomotor function in chronic daily cannabis smokers during sustained abstinence. PloS One. 2013;8:e53127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouchard J, Brault M. Link between driving records and the presence of drugs and/or alcohol in fatally injured drivers. In: Williams P, Clayton A, eds. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety [book on CD-ROM]. Glasgow, Scotland: ICADTS; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Burns M, Moskowitz H. Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Canada, Department of Justice. Drug-Impaired Driving: Consultation Document. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Department of Justice Canada; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. Drugs and driving. 2013. . Available at: http://www.ccsa.ca/Eng/Priorities/ImpairedDrivi-ng/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed August 28, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part 1 of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, . c. 11.
   Google Scholar
• Compton RP. Field Evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department Drug Detection Program. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Compton R, Vegega M, Smither D. Drug-Impaired Driving: Understanding the Problem and Ways to Reduce It: A Report to Congress. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Criminal Code, Revised Statutes of Canada. 1985, . c. C–46.
   Google Scholar
• DuPont RL, Voas RB, Walsh JM, Shea C, Talpins SK, Neil MM. The need for drugged driving per se laws: a commentary. Traffic Inj Prev. 2012;13:31–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dussault C, Brault M, Bouchard J, Lemire AM. The contribution of alcohol and other drugs among fatally injured drivers in Québec: some preliminary results. In: Mayhew DR, Dussault C, eds. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety. Montreal, QC, Canada: ICADTS and Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec; 2002:423–430.
   Google Scholar
• Evaluation of Impaired Operation (Drugs and Alcohol) Regulations. . SOR/2008-196.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer B, Rodopoulos J, Rehm J, Ivsins A. Toking and driving: characteristics of Canadian university students who drive after cannabis use—an exploratory pilot study. Drug-Edu Prev Polic 2006;13:179–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flight J. Canadian Addiction Survey (CAS): Substance Use by Canadian Youth. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Health Canada; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Forum Research, Inc. More than two thirds support decriminalization/legalization of marijuana. 2013. . Available at: http://www.forumresearch.com/forms/News%20Archives/News%20Releases/50140_Federal_Trudeau_-_Marijuana_(24082013)_Forum_Research.pdf. Ac-cessed September 12, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Governors Highway Safety Association. Drug Impaired Driving Laws. 2013. . Available at: http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/dre_perse_laws.html. Accessed September 12, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Grotenhermen F, Leson G, Berghaus G, et al. Developing limits for driving under cannabis. Addiction. 2007;102:1910–1917.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargutt V, Krüger H-P, Walter M. Risk estimations based on data from experimental studies, epidemiological studies and meta-analysis on driving under the influence. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety T’2013. Brisbane, Australia: ICADTS; 2013:309–314.
   Google Scholar
• Harris DH, Dick RA, Casey SM, Jarosz CJ. The Visual Detection of Driving While Intoxicated: Field Test of Visual Cues and Detection Methods. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Heishman SJ, Singleton EG, Crouch DJ. Laboratory validation study of drug evaluation and classification program: ethanol, cocaine, and marijuana. J Anal Toxicol. 1996;20:468–483.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heishman SJ, Singleton EG, Crouch DJ. Laboratory validation study of drug evaluation and classification program: alprazolam, d-amphetamine, codeine, and marijuana. J Anal Toxicol. 1998;22:503–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Association of Chiefs of Police. The International Drug Evaluation & Classification Program: The 7 Drug Categories. 2013. . Available at: http://www.decp.org/experts/7categories.htm. Accessed 11 September 2013.
   Google Scholar
• International Association of Chiefs of Police and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Drug Evaluation and Classification Training, “The Drug Recognition Expert School,” Administrator's Guide. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson PG, Tunbridge RJ, Rowe DJ. Drug recognition and field impairment testing: evaluations of trials. In: Laurell H, Schlyter F, eds. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, 2000 [book on CD-ROM]. Stockholm: ICADTS; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Knoche A. Per se limits—recommendations for defining cut-off values for psychoactive substance use in traffic. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety T’2013. Brisbane, Australia: ICADTS; 2013:427–432.
   Google Scholar
• Lacey J, Brainard K, Snitow S. Drug Per Se Laws: A Review of Their Use in States. Washington DC: NHTSA; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Lyckegaard A, Hels T, Bernhoft IM. Risk of driving when positive for psychoactive substances. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety T-2013. Brisbane, Australia: ICADTS; 2013. :491–496.
   Google Scholar
• Mann RE, Stoduto G, Ialomiteanu A, Asbridge M, Smart RG, Wickens CM. Self-reported collision risk associated with cannabis use and driving after cannabis use among Ontario adults. Traffic Inj Prev. 2010;11:115–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayhew DR, Brown S, Simpson HM. Drugs Among Fatally Injured Drivers: 2000–2002. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Traffic Injury Research Foundation; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer GW, Jeffery WK. Alcohol, drugs, and impairment in fatal traffic accidents in British Columbia. Accid Anal Prev. 1995;27:335–343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) Detection & Standardized Field Sobriety Testing: Instructor Manual 2006 Edition. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Ogden EJD, Moskowitz H. Effects of alcohol and other drugs on driver performance. Traffic Inj Prev. 2004;5:185–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliver JS, Seymour A, Wylie FM, Torrance H, Anderson RA. Monitoring the Effectiveness of UK Field Impairment Tests: Road Safety Research Report No 63. London, UK: Department of Transport; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Paglia-Boak A, Adlaf EM, Mann RE. Drug Use Among Ontario Students, 1977–2011: OSDUHS Highlights. Toronto, ON, Canada: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Patton D. , Brown D, Broszeit B, Dhaliwal J. Substance Use Among Manitoba High School Students. Winnipeg, MN, Canada: Addictions Foundation of Manitoba; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Patton D, Mackay T-L, Broszeit B. Alcohol and other Drug Use by Manitoba Students. Winnipeg, MN, Canada: Addictions Foundation of Manitoba; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Porath-Waller AJ, Beirness DJ, Beasley EE. Toward a more parsimonious approach to drug recognition expert evaluations. Traffic Inj Prev. 2009;10:513–518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulin C, McDonald W. Nova Scotia Student Drug Use 2007: Highlights Report. Halifax, NS, Canada: Communications Nova Scotia; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Preusser DF, Ulmer RG, Preusser CW. Evaluation of the Impact of the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program on Enforcement and Adjudication. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 1992.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Doell, [2007] . 9 W.W.W. 51 (Sask. C.A.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Houben, [2007] . 2 W.W.W. 195 (Sask. C.A.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Hufsky, [1988] . 1 S.C.R. 621.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Ladouceur, [1990] . 1 S.C.R. 1257.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. MacDonald (2012), . N.S.J. No. 178 (Prov. Ct.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Mellenthin, [1992] . 3 S.C.R. 615.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Orbanski; R. v. Elias, [2005] . 2 S.C.R. 3.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Perillat (2012), . S.K.P.C. 135 (Sask. Prov. Ct.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Rosskoph (1995), . 11 M.V.R. (3d) 62 (Man. Prov. Ct.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Sanclimenti (2010), . O.J. No. 5917 (Ct. J.).
   Google Scholar
• . R. v. Steeves (2010), 934 A.P.R. 48 (N.B. Prov. Ct.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Therens, [1985] . 1 S.C.R. 613.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Thomsen, [1988] . 1 S.C.R. 640.
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Wakewich (2010), . O.J. No. 1128 (Ct. J.).
   Google Scholar
• R. v. Wood (2007), . 426 A.R. 335 (Q.B.).
   Google Scholar
• Ramaekers JG, Berghaus G, van Laar M, Drummer OH. Dose related risk of motor vehicle crashes after cannabis use. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2004;73:109–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinar D, Schechtman E. Drug identification performance on the basis of observable signs and symptoms. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37:843–851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson H, Singhal D, Vanlaar W, Mayhew D. The Road Safety Monitor: Drugs and Driving. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Traffic Injury Research Foundation; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Smith JA, Hayes CE, Yolton RL, Rutledge DA, Citek K. Drug recognition expert evaluations made using limited data. Forensic Sci Int. 2002;130:167–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith P. Canada Liberal party leader says legalize marijuana. Cannabis Culture. . July 29, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Solomon R, Chamberlain E, Abdoullaeva M, Tinholt B. Random breath testing: a Canadian perspective. Traffic Inj Prev. 2011;12:111–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon R, Chamberlain E, Abdoullaeva M, Tinholt B, Chiodo S. The case for comprehensive random breath testing programs in Canada: reviewing the evidence and challenges. Alta Law Rev. 2011;49:37–78.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. CANSIM Table 252-0051, Incident-Based Crime Statistics, by Detailed Violations. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Statistics Canada; 2013a.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. CANSIM Table 252-0053, Adult Criminal Courts, Number of Cases and Charges by Type of Decision Annual (Number). Ottawa, ON, Canada: Statistics Canada; 2013b.
   Google Scholar
• Stough C, Boorman M, Ogden E, Papafotiou K. An Evaluation of the Standardised Field Sobriety Tests for the Detection of Impairment Associated With Cannabis With or Without Alcohol. Payneham, SA: Commonwealth of Australia; 2006. . Monograph Series No. 17.
   Google Scholar
• Stuster J. Development of a Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) Training Management System. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Stuster J, Burns M. Validation of the Standard ized Field Sobriety Test Battery at BACs Below 0.10 Percent. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Tharp V, Burns M, Moskowitz H. Development and Field Test of Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest. Washington, DC: NHTSA; 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson P. Driver drug testing-THC detections of drivers in South Australia. Paper presented at: 2011 Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference; 2011; Perth, Western Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Tzambazis K, Stough C. The SFST and driving ability. Are they related? In: Mayhew DR, Dussault C, eds. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety. Montreal, QC, Canada: ICADTS and Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec; 2002. :397–400.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh JM, Verstraete AG, Huestis MA, Mørland J. Guidelines for research on drugged driving. Addiction. 2008;103:1258–1268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolff K, Brimblecombe R, Forfar JC, et al. Driving Under the Influence of Drugs: Report from the Expert Panel on Drug Driving. London, UK: Department for Transport; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Young MM, Saewyc E, Boak A, et al. (Student Drug Use Surveys Working Group). Cross-Canada Report on Student Alcohol and Drug Use: Technical Report. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse; 2011.
   Google Scholar