The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER FOUR: WHO DRINKS AND DRIVES?

The prevalence and incidence of drinking and driving

4.1 A key objective of the research was to provide information about the extent to which drinking and driving is occurring. In order to allow us to measure any changes in this over time, the same measures of driving after drinking alcohol were used as in the 2001 research. Firstly, respondents were asked about occasions on which they had driven 'within a few hours of having something alcoholic to drink'. Later they were asked about occasions when they had driven when they suspected that they 'might have been over the limit'. Both these questions were asked in relation to ever having done so and having done so in the past twelve months.

4.2 This chapter looks at the prevalence (i.e. the proportion of drivers undertaking a particular behaviour) and incidence (i.e. the number of times a behaviour occurs per 100 drivers) of each of these measures. Where appropriate, it comments on the behaviours of the different sub-groups of drivers. It also describes some results from the qualitative research, in particular considering the practice of drinking and driving from the viewpoint of different ages and as it relates to drivers in urban and rural areas.

Driving within a few hours of drinking alcohol

4.3 The questions related to whether respondents had ever, or in the past 12 months, driven after having something alcoholic to drink and emphasised that it was legal to do so after consuming small amounts of alcohol. The majority of respondents in this category may have driven after consuming an amount of alcohol below the legal limit, though some may have been over the limit.

Prevalence of ever driving after drinking alcohol

4.4 Figure 4.1 shows self-reported life-time prevalence of driving within a few hours of having something alcoholic to drink in 2007 compared with 2001, in total, and by gender and age. The overall prevalence fell from 55% in 2001 to 43% in 2007. This was evident in both men and women and across all age groups, though the pattern between groups remained the same over time.

Figure 4.1 Prevalence of ever driving after drinking alcohol in 2007 compared to 2001 by gender and age

Base: All in each sub-group in 2001 and 2007 (see brackets)

4.5 As in 2001, in 2007 a higher percentage of males (49%) admitted to ever driving after a drink compared with women (37%). The gap between men and women is reducing as the prevalence has fallen more among males than among females. The lowest prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol was once again found in the youngest age group (33% of 17 to 29 year olds), followed by the oldest age group (40% of those aged 60 and older). 45% of those aged 30 to 44 admitted to ever having driven within a few hours of drinking alcohol, as did 49% of those aged 45 to 59.

4.6 Looking at age and gender in combination (see Figure 4.2) it is evident that, as in 2001, the difference between males and females exists within every age group. Additionally, the prevalence in every sub-group has fallen. However, with the exception of those in the oldest age group, the drop has not been as large within the female groups compared with the male groups. While this may lend weight to the idea, suggested by the recent increase observed in convictions of females for drink-driving, that females are becoming more likely to drive after drinking, it is important to remember that the female life-time prevalence was starting from a lower level than males (in 2001, 44% of females admitted to ever driving within a few hours of drinking compared with 64% of males) and is, therefore, not likely to fall as far.

Figure 4.2 Prevalence of ever driving after drinking alcohol by gender within age group in 2007

Base: All in each sub-group in 2007 (see brackets)

4.7 It is unclear why life-time prevalence should have dropped across all groups. Clearly, if anti- drink-driving messages were successful, it would be expected that life-time prevalence within younger groups would have dropped as they may have never driven after drinking due the success of these messages, but it is unclear why this should have an effect on all groups. It is possible that there is some effect of people being less willing to admit to this behaviour, despite the question emphasising that it is legal to consume small amounts of alcohol before driving, or that respondents may have imposed their own time frame on the question and be answering in relation to their more recent, rather than 'historical', behaviour.

4.8 Figure 4.3 shows the prevalence of ever driving within a few hours of drinking alcohol by social grade and whether respondents lived in an urban or rural location.

Figure 4.3 Prevalence of ever driving after drinking alcohol by social grade and area

Base: All in each sub-group in 2007 (see brackets)

4.9 Prevalence of ever driving after drinking increased with social grade, with ABs showing the highest prevalence (58%), followed by C1s (44%), C2s (40%) and DEs (29%). There was no real difference in prevalence of those living in urban compared with rural areas, a finding which reflects that of the previous survey.

Prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months

4.10 Figure 4.4 shows self-reported prevalence of driving within a few hours of drinking alcohol in the past twelve months in 2007, compared with 2001 by gender and age. The percentage prevalence overall fell from 37% in 2001 to 25% in 2007. As was the case with life-time prevalence, this decrease was evident in both men and women and across all age groups. However, in both 2001 and 2007 men had a higher prevalence of driving within a few hours of drinking alcohol, and those in the two middle age groups showed a higher prevalence than those in the youngest or oldest group.

Figure 4.4 Prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months in 2007 compared to 2001 by gender and age

Base: All in each sub-group in 2001 and 2007 (see brackets)

4.11 As in 2001, the 2007 research showed a higher percentage of males (28%) admitting to driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months compared with women (21%). As with ever driving after drinking, the gap between the genders narrowed as prevalence among males reduced proportionately more than among females. The lowest prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past twelve months was once again found in the oldest age group (20% of those aged 60 and older), followed by the youngest age group (21% of those aged 17 to 29). 29% of those aged 30 to 44 admitted to having driven within a few hours of drinking alcohol in the past twelve months, as did 26% of those aged 45 to 59. The gap between the age group with the highest prevalence - 30 to 44 year olds - and the lowest - those aged 60+ - appears to have narrowed since 2001.

4.12 Figure 4.5 shows prevalence of driving after a drink in the past year by age and gender in combination. The difference between females and males exists within every age group. Additionally, the prevalence in every sub-group has fallen. However, as with the prevalence of ever driving within a few hours of having a drink, with the exception of those in the oldest age group, the drop has not been as large within the female groups compared with the male groups. Indeed in the youngest age group, there now appears to be very little difference in the prevalence of this behaviour between males and females. For this group, however, it is important to note that small base sizes make it difficult to be confident that the results are robust.

4.13 As discussed above, although this may appear to support the theory that females are becoming more likely to drive after drinking, it is important to remember that the female prevalence was starting from a much lower level than males (in 2001, 25% of females admitted to driving within a few hours of drinking in the last twelve months compared with 37% of males) and is, therefore, not likely to fall as far.

Figure 4.5 Prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months by gender within age group

Base: All in each sub-group in 2007 (see brackets)

4.14 Figure 4.6 shows the prevalence of driving within a few hours of drinking alcohol in the past 12 months by social grade and whether respondents lived in an urban or rural location.

Figure 4.6 Prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months by social grade and area

Base: All in each sub-group in 2007 (see brackets)

4.15 Similar to the findings related to life-time prevalence, the prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months, increased with social grade, with ABs showing the highest prevalence (40%), followed by C1s (25%), C2s (21%) and DEs (12%). Again, there was very little difference in prevalence of those living in urban compared with rural areas.

4.16 Another method of looking at demographics in relation to this behaviour is to look at how the profile of those who drive after drinking is composed. This gives an overview of who is actually drinking then driving and thus which groups pose the greatest risk in absolute terms. While, to an extent, this reflects the incidence of different groups in the population at large, this type of absolute figure could be helpful in determining the focus of communications, allowing targeting of those who constitute the largest part of the overall drinking and driving group. This profile is show in Figure 4.7.

Figure 4.7 Demographic profile of those who have driven after drinking alcohol the past twelve months

Base: All who have driven after having an alcoholic drink in the past 12 months (254)

4.17 The above chart shows the demographic characteristics of the group of respondents who had driven after an alcoholic drink in the past 12 months. As the chart shows, the group of those who drive after drinking alcohol was composed primarily of drivers from urban areas, with 62% of this group living in urban as opposed to rural locations. 57% of those who had driven after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months were male. Those aged 30 to 44 made up 37% of those who had driven after drinking in the past 12 months, followed by those aged 45 to 59 (28%), those aged 60 and over (24%) and those aged 17 to 29 (10%). The social group most represented was ABs (36%), followed by C1s (33%), C2s (20%) and DEs (10%).

4.18 Compared to the profile of the population of drivers (see Figure 3.1), it is apparent that males were over-represented in the population of those who have driven after drinking in the past 12 months while females were under-represented (57% of males had driven after drinking compared to 51% in the population of drivers overall, while for females, 43% had driven after drinking compared to 49% overall). The different incidence of those in different age groups who drive after drinking is largely comparable to the incidence of these groups within the population of drivers, though the oldest group is slightly under-represented (24% of those who drive after drinking were aged 60 and over, compared with 29% of the population of drivers) and those aged 30 to 44 were slightly over-represented (37% compared with 32%). Social group ABs were considerably over-represented among those who drive after drinking (36% compared with 22% in the driving population as a whole), while DEs were under-represented (10% compared to 21%). The population of those who have driven after drinking in urban and rural areas exactly matched the incidence of these groups in the driving population.

The frequency and incidence of driving after a drink

4.19 In addition to measuring the proportion of the population who have driven after drinking alcohol, it is also of interest to assess how often this behaviour occurs. This was asked in 2 different ways, once again keeping the questions the same as those asked in 2001 to allow comparison. In terms of ever having driven after drinking alcohol, respondents were asked to rate how frequently they believed they had done so on a scale ranging from very often to never. Those who said they had ever driven after drinking alcohol were then asked how many times they had done so in the last year, giving a single numerical value. This can be used to calculate the incidence rate, which shows the number of incidents of driving after drinking alcohol per hundred drivers.

4.20 For those respondents who have ever driven after having something alcoholic to drink, Figure 4.8 shows the frequency doing so by age and gender. It is important to note the small base size for those respondents in the youngest age group which may have exaggerated the differences between them and other groups. Generally, most respondents said that they had only driven within a few hours of drinking alcohol once or twice, or only did so occasionally. Males did so with slightly greater frequency than females and frequency of doing so increased with age. There were no differences in frequency by social grade or by whether respondents lived in rural or urban areas.

Figure 4.8 Frequency of ever driving after drinking alcohol by age and gender

Base: All who have ever driven after drinking alcohol in each sub-group (see brackets)

4.21 Looking at the number of times those who said that they had ever driven after drinking had done so in the past twelve months, the mean number of incidents was 3.6. Looking only at those drivers who had driven after drinking alcohol in the past twelve months (57% of those who had ever driven after drinking) the mean number of incidents rises to 6.3 per driver. The small base sizes for most demographic groups when looking at people who had driven after drinking in the past twelve months make it difficult to comment with confidence on the differences between groups. The differences were not large, ranging from a minimum of 5.0 to a maximum of 8.7 incidents of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months.

4.22 Another way to look at incidence is to calculate the number of incidents occurring per hundred drivers by dividing the total number of incidents in each group by the total number of drivers in that group and multiplying by 100. Doing this provides an overall incidence rate of 154 incidents in the past 12 months per 100 drivers. This is a considerable drop from the incidence rate of 229 incidents per 100 drivers that was found in 2001.

4.23 Figure 4.9 shows the incidence rate by age and gender in comparison to 2001. Males not only have a higher prevalence of driving after a drink than females, they are also responsible for 192 incidents of driving after drinking alcohol per hundred drivers compared to the 114 incidents per hundred drivers among females. Incidence also increases with age, showing that despite the fact that the prevalence among the oldest age group is low compared with those aged 30 to 59, they are actually responsible for a larger number of incidents per 100 drivers. As with prevalence, there was reduced incidence in almost every group compared with 2001, though this was proportionately less in females and the youngest age groups. Notably, incidence had increased among the oldest age group since 2001.

Figure 4.9 Incidence of driving after drinking alcohol per hundred drivers in past 12 months by age and gender in 2007 compared with 2001

Base: All in each sub-group (see brackets)

4.24 Figure 4.10 shows the incidence rate by social grade and area of residence. The single highest incidence rate of any sub-group, 255 per 100 drivers, is found in those in the AB social grade, who also report the highest prevalence of this behaviour. Drivers in urban areas have a higher prevalence rate and are responsible for more incidents per 100 drivers (163) compared with those in rural areas (139).

Figure 4.10 Incidence of driving after drinking alcohol per hundred drivers in past 12 months by social grade and area

Base: All in each sub-group in 2007 (see brackets)

Driving when over the limit

4.25 It is not possible within a survey to collect objective information about whether a respondent was actually driving when over the drink-drive limit (referred to as 'drink-driving', as described in Chapter 1). The following findings relate to respondents' self-reported behaviour in terms of having, ever or in the last 12 months, driven when they suspected they might have been over the limit. The likelihood is, therefore, that there will be some representation within these respondents of drivers who were, in fact, under the legal limit, but of course there will also be some under-representation of drivers who either have driven when unknowingly over the limit or who are deliberately under-reporting their behaviour.

Prevalence of ever drink-driving

4.26 Figure 4.11 shows self-reported life-time prevalence of drink-driving in 2007 compared with 2001 by gender and age.

Figure 4.11 Prevalence of ever drink-driving in 2007 compared to 2001 by gender and age

Base: All in each sub-group in 2001 and 2007 (see brackets)

4.27 The overall prevalence of ever drink driving fell from 22% in 2001 to 18% in 2007. The pattern among the different age groups was the same as in 2001, with those in the oldest and youngest groups showing the lowest prevalence at 14%, followed by those aged 30 to 44 (15%) and those aged 45 to 59 (29%). The decrease in prevalence was evident in all age groups, but particularly in those aged 30 to 44, perhaps due to the success of anti- drink-driving messages among those who have grown up with them. The difference was least pronounced among those aged 17 to 29 though this is likely to reflect the low starting point of prevalence of drink driving in this age group.

4.28 Additionally, although prevalence of ever drink driving dropped from 32% to 23% among males, it remained constant at 11% in females. Again, this is likely to reflect the low prevalence among females in 2001, making it harder to reduce further. Despite this reduction over time, it is important to note that prevalence among males, at 23%, was more than double that among females (11%).

4.29 Looking at age and gender in combination (see Figure 4.12) it is evident that the highest prevalence of ever drink-driving is among males aged 45-59. As in 2001, the difference between females and males exists within every age group. However, while prevalence of drink-driving has dropped since 2001 within every age group among males, for females there has been no real movement.

Figure 4.12 Prevalence of ever drink-driving by gender within age group in 2007

Base: All in each sub-group in 2007 (see brackets)

4.30 There was no difference in the prevalence of ever drink-driving by whether a respondent lived in a rural (17%) or urban (18%) location and, although prevalence broadly decreased with social grade, this was not consistent across all social grades (AB, 22%; C1, 17%; C2, 20%; DE 12%).

Prevalence of drink-driving in the past 12 months

4.31 Figure 4.13 shows self-reported prevalence of drink-driving in the past twelve months in 2007 compared with 2001, by gender and age. The percentage prevalence overall remained at 5%, and this lack of change was reflected throughout all sub-groups. Again, the very low levels of prevalence in 2001 made a noticeable decrease less likely.

4.32 In 2007, men were twice as likely to have been drink-driving in the last 12 months compared with women (7% compared with 3%). A new picture emerges when age is examined. Despite the fact that 17 to 29 year-olds have the lowest life-time prevalence of drink-driving and comparatively low prevalence of driving within a few hours of drinking alcohol, both ever and within the past 12 months, drink-driving within the last 12 months is most prevalent in this age group (9% compared with 6% of those aged 30-44; 5% of those aged 45 to 59; and 2% of those aged 60 and over).

Figure 4.13 Prevalence of drink-driving in the past twelve months in 2007 compared to 2001 by gender and age

Base: All in each sub-group in 2001 and 2007 (see brackets)

4.33 There were no real differences by social grade or area of residence (urban/rural). Due to the low numbers who admitted to drink-driving (N=53), we have not examined differences by gender within age.

4.34 While the study only picked up a small number of current drink-drivers, it is still useful to look at the profile of these drivers to provide some suggestion whether some groups make up a higher proportion of drink-drivers than others, taking into account the size of the different groups. Due to the small number identified, this is presented as proportions of drink-drivers and these should be interpreted as indicative. Over 7 in 10 of the drink-drivers were male. 30-44 year olds were the largest age group (4 in 10) and those aged 60+ the smallest (one in 10). A little over a quarter was aged 45-59 and one in 5 was 17-29 years old. One in 8 was in DE social grade; between one-quarter and one third were in each of the remaining social grades. Two-thirds of current drink-drivers lived in urban areas and a third in rural areas.

The frequency of drink-driving

4.35 When we look at the frequency of ever drink-driving, it is apparent that this is a relatively uncommon behaviour. 73% of those who admitted to ever drink-driving said they had done so once or twice, 25% said they had done so occasionally and 2% that they had done so fairly often.

4.36 Again, due to the relatively small number of people who admitted to drink-driving ever, it is not possible to be confident about differences between gender and between age groups.

4.37 When looking at incidence of drink-driving in the past 12 months, it would appear that, despite the fact that prevalence has remained consistent between 2001 and 2007, incidence has fallen. In 2001, those who admitted to drink-driving had done so on average 4 times in the preceding 12 months. In 2007, this had fallen to an average of twice. Additionally in 2001, the incidence rate was 19 incidents per 100 drivers. In 2007, this had fallen to 11 incidents per 100 drivers.

Other significant groups

4.38 In addition to exploring any differences between those in the different demographic groups of age, gender, social grade and area of residence, differences among other sections of the population were also investigated.

4.39 When we look at whether respondents have ever driven within a few hours of having an alcoholic drink, there is a number of other groups where differences were seen. As Figure 4.14 shows, those with points on their licence were more likely to say they had ever driven within a few hours of having an alcoholic drink than those with a clean licence (61% compared with 50%). Additionally, around half of those who have never been breathalysed (47%) stated that they had ever driven within a few hours of having an alcoholic drink, compared with 61% of those who had been breathalysed.

4.40 There are two things this suggests. There may be some link between driving after drinking and undertaking other risky behaviours such as speeding, although further research would be needed to confirm this. The second is that, although those who have been breathalysed report a higher prevalence of ever driving after drinking, a sizeable minority of those who have not been breathalysed also report ever driving after drinking ever.

Figure 4.14 Prevalence of ever driving after drinking alcohol by state of driving licence and whether ever breathalysed

Base: All who have consumed alcohol in the past year in each sub-group (see brackets)

4.41 Additionally, those who had not consumed any alcohol in the last 7 days more often said that they had never driven within a few hours of drinking alcohol, than those who had consumed 15 or more units in the last week (66% compared with 36%). This demonstrates the links between drinking behaviour and driving after drinking behaviour.

4.42 This was also seen when looking at driving after drinking alcohol in the last 12 months. Almost two-thirds (60%) of those who had not drunk alcohol in the last 7 days said that they had not driven after drinking alcohol in the last 12 months. In comparison 34% of those who had 15 or more units of alcohol in the last week said that they had not driven after drinking alcohol in the last 12 months.

4.43 Similarly, those who had not consumed alcohol in the last 7 days were much more likely to say that they had never driven whilst over the limit than those who had consumed 15 or more units in the last 7 days (65% compared with 42%).

Changes in prevalence and incidence

4.44 The reductions in prevalence and incidence may be due to a number of reasons. Firstly, it could be due to differences in the samples between the 2 surveys. While the method was kept constant as far as possible, fewer younger people and a higher proportion of older people were interviewed. Possible reasons for this difference are discussed in Chapter 3 (paragraph 3.4).

4.45 A number of issues suggest the change in age profile is not the reason for the change in prevalence and incidence. Prevalence rates have dropped within all age groups since 2001. They are lower for both younger and older people than for those in between. This means that substituting those younger for older respondents would not necessarily increase the prevalence rate overall. The incidence rate among older people is higher than for any other age group and for younger people is lower. Interviewing larger numbers of older people, if all else remained equal, would lead to an increased incidence rate per 100 drivers, yet the rate has reduced.

4.46 Another reason the prevalence and incidence may have fallen is that the level of under-reporting could have increased. The same techniques were used, including question wording and self-completion elements (i.e. CASI) as the previous survey, which should, all things being equal, have produced similar levels of under-reporting. It is possible though that drinking and driving has become less socially acceptable since the last survey, leading to people being more reluctant than previously to admit to driving after drinking. Attitude statements were not included in the previous survey so that there is no baseline against which to test this theory. Based on evidence from the qualitative research, under-reporting is most likely to be of borderline over-the-limit drink-driving rather than of drink-driving which is clearly over the limit. It is difficult to assess to what extent drinking and driving at all has been under-reported.

4.47 Finally, it is probable that prevalence and incidence have decreased. This is considered likely based on investigation of opinions which demonstrates high levels of consensus on most attitudes and indicates drink-driving is considered to be highly anti-social.

Qualitative views

4.48 In this section, information and perceptions about who drinks and drives, as identified in the qualitative research, are highlighted to give more depth and context to the survey findings. In particular, the area of residence of respondents and their demographic differences are considered.

Area of residence

4.49 One of the questions the study sets out to answer is whether the prevalence of drinking and driving differs in rural and urban areas. Survey findings, in common with previous research in this series and elsewhere, suggested there was no discernable difference in the claimed prevalence according to the circumstance of where drivers lived, whether in urban or rural areas.

4.50 Findings from the survey also suggested that the incidence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months was a little higher in urban areas than in rural areas. Despite this, in the qualitative research, drinking and driving behaviour was believed to be more common in rural areas rather than in cities. This was due to the circumstances of living in rural areas, such as transport availability and quieter roads, or to attitudes towards drink-driving in such areas, rather than due to the characteristics of people in those areas. These differences are discussed in the chapters that follow.

Demographic differences

4.51 Putting aside the circumstance of where people lived, in general in the qualitative research there was not thought to be a specific kind of driver that would characteristically drink and drive. This broadly represents the findings in the survey in relation to claimed drink-driving.

4.52 Two focus groups were conducted with females as there is a particular interest in understanding whether drinking and driving might be increasing among this group. Females in the groups were aged 25-34 living in an urban area and 35-49 living in a rural area. Both groups were broadly against drink-driving in principle, although they were recruited on the basis that they had driven a few hours after drinking in the past 12 months.

4.53 The participants believed that people from all age brackets were potential drink-drivers. There was a perception that older drivers were often the most likely to risk drinking over the legal limit and driving on a regular basis, and that drink-driving was not an issue specific to young drivers. Clearly it was recognised that it does occur among young people, though sometimes they themselves excused it or down-played its effects.

"You concentrate a lot better if you're drunk because you know you are so you take more care." (Male, 17-20, C1/C2, Urban)

4.54 There was a sense among some older drivers that young people did not have the social conscience held by other, more responsible drivers:

"I think there's a certain attitude especially with younger people that they can drink what they want and they can just get back into a car." (Male, 35-49, B/C1, Urban).

4.55 However it was also recognised that many young people are so enamoured with driving and the possession of their cars that they would not risk drink-driving. It was also felt that the police were likely to target young drivers, leading to many choosing not to drink at all before driving.

4.56 In the survey, 17-29 year olds (along with those aged 60+) reported the lowest prevalence of driving after drinking in the past 12 months (although this was similar to the average among all respondents) and the lowest incidence of any age group. They had the highest reported prevalence of drink-driving in the past 12 months, although the fact that there are fewer drivers of this age meant the proportion of current drink-drivers in the 17-29 age group was smaller than that of those in middle years.

Increasing responsibilities and middle years

4.57 In the qualitative research, the 25-34 age group considered themselves to be the least likely to deliberately drink and drive. There was a number of reasons for this, including growing up with anti- drink-driving messages (the groups could recall the televised drink-drive campaigns from their childhood and beyond), their maturity, awareness of personal health both in relation to consuming alcohol and knowing the potential physical dangers of drink-driving. In particular, increasing responsibilities, including employment and family commitments, affected their perceptions of drink-driving behaviour.

"…you've just got engaged and had a child and just hit thirty and thinking I'm getting old but also your friends are getting married or having kids or whatever so there's not so many opportunities to go out or people don't want to go out." (Male, 25-34, B/C1, Urban).

4.58 In contrast, the age group between 35 and 49 appeared to be regular offenders in the 'slightly over the limit' category, rather than in what was considered to be the 'real, seriously over the limit' drink-drive category. In the groups and depth interviews, being slightly over the limit was often identified as being situational; driving locally around social activities such as golf, visiting friends and attending meals. In the main, it was felt that people drive when they are slightly over the limit for convenience.

"I know I've been slightly over when I've had 3 pints and I know I'm over and if I'm breath-tested I'm getting done but I've taken the car and I've taken the car because it's been a convenience thing because I've needed it first thing in the morning." (Male, 35-49, B/C1, Glasgow).

"I know a lot more people who, like myself, maybe you're late for the golf, you take the car down, you go out and have a game, you know you've been out there for 4 hours, you come in and think 'Oh God, I'll have a glass of wine', and then maybe have another. Are you going to take the car? Oh aye I'll just take the car it's only for 2 minutes." ( OTL female, B, 35-49, Rural)

4.59 In the survey, 30 to 44 year-olds reported the highest prevalence of driving after drinking any alcohol in the past 12 months, though this level was not much above the average for all respondents. They also recorded an incidence rate for driving after drinking in the past 12 months a little below the average for all respondents. The prevalence of drink-driving in the past 12 months among this age group was about average for all groups and, like all ages, was relatively small.

4.60 Also in the survey, 45 to 59 year olds reported average prevalence and incidence of driving after alcohol in the past 12 months, the highest prevalence of ever drink-driving (especially among men) and average prevalence of drink-driving in the past 12 months.

Older drivers

4.61 After some consideration, this age group was identified in the groups and depth interviews as the individuals most likely to drink and drive. The reason for this was thought to be that they had habitually done so for the majority of their driving career. Drinking alcohol and driving was not an issue for this age group when younger, and so the attitude for some is "so why change now?" Drink-drivers in this category tend to be habitual, and unlikely to modify their behaviour. For many in the focus groups, there was a sense that their parents' generation tended to be more likely to fit into this category and have a less responsible attitude towards drinking and driving:

"There's a generation gap I think. Everyone in this room is the generation that knows that drinking and driving is wrong, but it's not our parents, it's the ones above that, the ones who are 60 odds who still do it and you have to kind of take keys away to stop them." (Female, 25-34, B/C1, Urban).

"I see it pretty much as a generational thing actually. My social group and age are much less of a problem than perhaps our parents' group who are much more prepared to wing it." (Male, 25-34, B/C1, Urban)

"When I've been to the golf club and picked up my mum and dad because they've been drinking, the amount of older people that drink and drive seems to be a lot more than any young people that drink and drive that I know." (Female, 35-49, C1/C2, Rural).

4.62 The depth interviews included individuals who had admitted to drinking and driving over the limit. The following exemplifies the attitude of one older individual who habitually drinks and drives:

"I know what I'm doing is probably wrong but once you get into the situation, it kids you on a bit and you think well, it's not really that bad and I feel fine to drive and I've been doing it for years… I've never been steaming drunk." ( OTL male, 50+, C1 Urban).

4.63 Drivers aged 60+ in the survey recorded a lower than average prevalence of driving after drinking in the past 12 months, but their incidence of doing this over the past year was higher than any other age group. Prevalence of ever drink-driving among this group was below, but close to, the average for all ages, and in the past 12 months was lower than any other group (although it was low among all age groups).

Key points
A key objective of the research was to at the extent of drinking and driving and to see if there have been any changes since the last study. The research looked at:

• Prevalence (proportion of drivers) and incidence (number of times per 100 drivers)
• Lifetime prevalence (if they have ever done it) and prevalence in the last 12 months.
• Driving after drinking and drink-driving (driving over the limit). (This was measured by asking people when they suspected they might be over the limit).

Overall there has been a reduction in the levels of driving after drinking alcohol since the 2001 research:

• Prevalence of driving after drinking alcohol decreased since 2001.
• • There was a decrease in ever having driven after drinking (from 55% in 2001 to 43% in 2007)
  • There was a decrease in having done so in the past twelve months (from 37% in 2001 to 25% in 2007).
  • Incidence of driving after drinking alcohol in the past 12 months also decreased from 229 to 154 incidents per 100 drivers.
• Prevalence of ever drink-driving also decreased.
• • There was a decrease in ever drink-driving (from 22% in 2001 to 18% in 2007).
  • Although prevalence of drink driving in the past 12 months remained constant at 5%, incidence decreased from 19 to 11 incidents per 100 drivers.

The research also looked at who drinks and drives, and differences between sub-groups of drivers (e.g. men/women, drivers in rural and urban areas, different social grades):

• Greater proportions of men, people aged 30 to 59 and those in higher social grades had driven after drinking, both ever and in the past 12 months.
• • Men had driven more often after a drink than women in the past 12 months.
  • Incidence of driving after drinking increased by age, despite the lower prevalence in older age groups. Meaning that older people drove after drinking more often, although a smaller proportion of them actually did so at all.
  • Those in social grade AB had the highest incidence of driving after drinking of any demographic group (255 incidents per 100 drivers) and those in social grade DE the lowest (86 in 100).
• Men had the highest life-time prevalence of drink-driving. Prevalence had fallen in men and across all age groups, though it remained constant in women (likely to reflect the low levels of prevalence in this group at the baseline measurement). The largest recorded drop in prevalence of ever drink-driving was among 30-44 year olds, reducing to similar levels as younger (17-29) and older (60+) drivers. 45-59 year olds had a higher prevalence than any other age group in both 2001 and 2007.

* Shows the proportion of the group of drivers who drive after drinking any alcohol that are male, female, 17-29 etc
** Shows the incidence rate per 100 drivers of driving after drinking any alcohol among males, among females, among 17-29 year olds etc.

« Previous | Contents | Next »