Final

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

Final Project

Roberta Simpkin

HUM440 UC: M7:A2 Critical Thinking

Argosy University

Instructor: Sandra Foderick

1

Final

When I was a little girl, there was a horrible accident involving a car and some young people who did not survive. I didn’t go down to the corner of the block like the other people to see it but I’ve always remembered it and what I heard about it; young people, traveling too fast and not obeying safety rules. The question I have chosen is: “Should people under 18 be subjected to restricted driving privileges?”

I say Yes because there have been far too many fatalities involving young drivers. I would first like to give my views on this matter and then we will consider the evidence supporting this claim with arguments from peer-related articles.

My personal opinion is yes, young people under the age of 18 should be subjected to restricted driving privileges. The reasons I feel this way are many. I’ve had personal tragedies in my own family associated with automobile accidents, all involving drivers under the age of 18. I had a cousin, age 17 who was involved in a very tragic automobile accident a few years ago. The factors in the crash involved speeding, wet roads, and a lot of other young people in the car. They could have been talking loud, listening to the radio playing too loud, and not obeying safety rules which would have been a distraction to the driver.

Another example of a young driver was the grandson of a friend of mine. He too was 17 and ran through a stop sign. An oncoming car hit his car. He did not survive. Another case was the cousin of my neighbor who tried to beat a train by crossing the railroad tracks. Another tragic case involved two cars drag racing near a local church. All three young people in one car did not survive and two of them were brothers.

A friend of mine once told me, “You cannot put an old head on a young body”. When a young person begins to drive, I feel they tend to overestimate their abilities. Driving an automobile is a privilege and also requires years of experience. A lot of young people do not take driving lessons and I am an advocate of that. They are taught by family members or friends and then think they can just go out and drive.

I would like to see all states in the U.S. make it mandatory for young people to be at least 19 years of age before obtaining a driver’s license. I really don’t see the need for high school students to drive themselves to school, leave the car parked in the hot sun all day, and then drive themselves home. I rode the school bus until I graduated from high school and then I worked and saved my money to get a car and pay for car insurance.

Not all young people are bad drivers. Some are more responsible than others. But experience takes years and years of driving ability. I don’t feel restrictions on driving privileges are discriminatory against young teenage drivers. I feel it’s for their own protection as well as other people too. It is the parent’s responsibility to monitor their

2

Final

young teens but some parents do not, so this law would be necessary to keep everyone safe.

Some teenagers have jobs, but I drove my daughter to her job or if that is not possible, there is public transportation. I know in other countries that the driving laws are different but this is the U.S. I cannot control foreign countries. I am concerned with my country. Teenagers can also drink alcohol under the age of 21 in foreign countries and we’ve seen where that can lead. Site the recent example of Natalie Holloway who was vacationing with her class in Aruba.

The following is evidence that supports the argument and I think this evidence supports my claim. In the article, “Age performance relationships among accident-repeater automobile drivers”, it states, “It has been reported that drivers under the age of twenty-five showed accident records that were several times higher than would be expected from the number of such young drivers to be found among the driving population. It suggests that there are two factors involved among these young drivers. First, coordination, vision and other driving abilities and, second, attitudinal factors such as over-confidence and carelessness”, (EBSCO PsycARTICLES database).

In “Review of alcohol, young drivers, and traffic accidents”, it states, “In the early 1970s, the drinking age was lowered in most of the U.S. and Canada. As the data on increasing traffic accidents accumulated, people began to call for the relaxation of restrictions to be reversed. Between 1976 and 1983, many states began to move their minimum drinking age upward. Most of this is devoted to a study of the effects of this reversal in two states, Michigan and Maine. These particular states were easily studied because they maintained good records on accidents and liquor sales prior to the lowering of the drinking age, during the period when more young drivers were drinking, and after the drinking age was raised. The research presented is a clear and well-controlled time-series study of the estimated shifts in crash involvement and beverage distribution”, (EBSCO PsycARTICLES database). Also, it states, “Motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death among youths aged 15-25. Moreover, human factors are important in the majority of accidents, and accident severity is directly related to alcohol. Given that ours is a society in which persons are expected as adults to be able to drink socially and to handle themselves competently while under the effects of alcohol, it is difficult to understand how young adults gain this experience”, (EBSCO PsycARTICLES database).

In AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, it stated, “Young drivers, particularly 16- and 17-year-olds have been a significant road safety and health concern for decades in Canada and the U. S. because of their high risk of collision involvement. The factors that place them at greater risk have, generally, been grouped into two categories: 1) age-related factors, such as exuberance, risk-taking behavior, peer pressure, and sensation and thrill

3

Final

seeking, and 2) experience-related factors such as psychomotor skills, perception of hazards, judgment, and decision-making. Graduated driver licensing (GDL) seeks to reduce the crash risk for young drivers by providing novices with greater opportunities to practice under supervision as well as limiting their exposure to risky conditions and circumstances while they mature and gain experience. This is achieved by imposing restrictions, such as limiting unsupervised driving at night or transporting teenage passengers, which lowers the risk of crashing. Over the past two decades, some version of GDL has been implemented in all jurisdictions in the U. S. and most jurisdictions in Canada. Research has consistently shown that these programs are effective in reducing collisions involving young drivers. At the same time, however, young drivers, who are protected by the GDL system, continue to crash at substantially higher rates than mature drivers. The current investigation, involving two related studies, attempted to determine why this is so--it addressed the reasons young drivers continue to crash, even when under GDL provisions”, (EBSCO, PsycEXTRA database).

Adolescents are more likely than older people to engage in risky driving practices, and some young people are particularly prone to risky driving. Young beginners combine risky driving practices with driving inexperience, greatly heightening crash risk. The young driver problem is acute in the United States because licensure is allowed at very young ages, and the path to full driving privileges is quick and easy. Risky driving is tied to developmental and lifestyle factors and is difficult to change. The traditional approaches of driver education and penalty-based licensing systems have not worked adequately. Graduated licensing systems now are being considered by many states and have been adopted by some. These systems do not address risk factors directly but are structured to provide beginners the opportunity to gain initial on-road experience outside of situations that have more driving difficulty and therefore more risk and/or that encourage risk taking. Graduates are older and on their way to maturing out of risky driving tendencies, and they will have accumulated important driving experience under protected conditions. The initial graduated systems adopted in the United States vary substantially in their features. It will be important to evaluate the effect of these systems in reducing young driver crashes and to determine which set of provisions is optimal in terms of both acceptability and effectiveness, (Argosy EBSCO database).

Objectives. We describe intervention effects on parent limits on novice teenage driving.

Methods. We recruited parents and their 16-year-old children with learner's permits and randomized them from August 2000 to March 2003. Intervention families received persuasive newsletters related to high-risk teenage driving and a parent-teenager driving agreement; comparison families received standard information on driver safety. We conducted interviews when the adolescents obtained a learner's permit, upon licensure, and at 3, 6, and 12 months post licensure.

4

Final

Results. Intervention parents and teenagers reported stricter limits on teen driving compared with the comparison group at 12 months, with direct effects through 3 months and indirect effects through 12 months post licensure.

Conclusions. A simple behavioral intervention was efficacious in increasing parental restriction of high-risk teen driving conditions among newly licensed drivers, (American Public Health, 2005, 1995, 447-452, EBSCO Psychology and Behavioral Sciences database).

The field of knowledge most closely associated with the study of argument is logic. Those terms that signify the parts of an argument are the premises and the conclusion. The premise here is “People under 18 should be subjected to restricted driving privileges.” The conclusion is “There would be less driving fatalities involving people under the age of 18 if the law in the U.S. stated the legal age to drive was 19”, (Argosy, 2010).

5

Final

References

Argosy University. (2010). AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. (2006). 607 14th Street

NW, Suite 201, Washington, District of Columbia, US, 20005-2000, 2006. 181

pp., URL: http://www.AAAfoundation.org, Retrieved June 20, 2010, from

http://myeclassonline.com

Argosy University. (2010). Forbes, T. W., Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol 2(5),

Sep, 1938. pp. 143-148, Journal Article, EBSCO database, PsycARTICLES, “Age

performance relationships among accident-repeater automobile drivers”,

Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://myeclassonline.com

Argosy University. (2010). Sivan, A. B., EBSCO database, Rehabilitation Psychology,

Vol 29(2), Sum, 1984, pp. 123-125, (Review-Book), “Review of alcohol, young

drivers, and traffic accidents”, Retrieved June 20, 2010, from

http://myeclassonline.com

Hartos, J., Leaf, W., Preusser, D., Simons-Morton, B., Persistence of Effects of the

Checkpoints Program on Parental Restrictions of Teen Driving Privileges,

American Journal of Public Health, (2005, March, Vol. 95 Issue 3, p447-452, 6p,

1 Chart, 3 Graphs), Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://myeclassonline.com,

from the Argosy University EBSCO Psychology and Behavioral Sciences

Collection database

6

Final

Ruggiero, Vincent, Beyond Feelings: Guide to Critical Thinking (2008). (8th ed),

McGraw Hill Publishing Company

Webster’s Dictionary, (4th ed.), Random House, Ballantine Books, New York

Williams, A., Graduated licensing and other approaches to controlling young driver risk

taking: Risk-Taking Behavior and Traffic Safety Symposium Proceedings,

October 19 – 22, 1997, Argosy University EBSCO PsycEXTRA database

7