Letter from MADD Oregon Public Policy Liaison and Victim Advocate

Bruce and Anne Pratt on right

Dear MADD Oregon:

I would like to share some good news! The Oregon legislative session, while it had its share of budgetary problems, did experience a good session for DUII bills. When I began this session I believed it would be a tough and challenging one, we were told by legislators not to request any bill that had a "fiscal"; it would very likely die in committee.

We are lucky in Oregon to have a coalition of partners who work together on these bills, they include: Crime Victims United, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Oregon District Attorneys Association, Oregon Anti-crime Alliance, Governors Advisory Committee on DUII, Oregon Chiefs of Police, Oregon Sheriffs Association, Parents of Murdered Children, plus many individual liaisons who came to testify or offered other assistance. There are also other good DUII bills that passed through other organizations, such as the Governor’s Task Force on Underage Drinking, and others by individual request.

Over the years, I have requested many DUII bills through CVU (Crime Victims United), the organization I lobby under and am vice President. This session I requested House Bills 2870 & 2796 for the first time and 2427 the past two sessions before partnering with the GAC in 09; all three passed. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Eugene Affiliate Office, Lois Harvick E.D., has supported and provided written testimony on many of these bills, for which I am most grateful. I also appreciate the wealth of information and statistics MADD makes readily available to us. I am proud to be part of MADD, CVU, POMC and the Governors Advisory Committee on DUII.

I believe with the cooperation, support and assistance of our coalition members, we all are able to accomplish what we could never do individually. Much credit also goes to Representative Jeff Barker who sponsored most of these bills. Together, I believe we have made a very significant difference in the war against intoxicated driving for the State of Oregon.

Thank you,

Sincerely,
Anne Pratt
MADD Public Policy Liaison & Victim Advocate



DUII BILLS 2009:

HB 2870 (CVU/Barker) Lifetime Revocation requires permanent revocation of driving privileges for persons convicted of certain crimes (murder, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide). Passed House 58-0. Passed Senate 27-0. Signed 6-17.
HB 2796 (CVU/Barker) Expungement - Prohibits setting aside conviction of criminally negligent homicide. Passed House 59-0. Passed Senate 30-0. Signed 6/25/09

HB 2427 (CVU/Barker/GAC) Provides that a person commits the offense of refusal to take test for intoxicants if person refuses to submit to urine test when requested to do so under implied consent law. Punishes by fine of at least $500 and not more than $1,000. Passed House 59-1. Passed Senate floor 27-0. House concurred 46-0, Signed 6/26/09

HB 2331 (ODAA) /Barker) Restricts eligibility of defendants to enter into driving while under the influence of intoxicants diversion agreements to once in 15 years, instead of every 10 years. Passed House 55-4. Passed Senate 26-0. Signed 6/24/09

HB 3051 (ODAA/Barker) Tripathi – Urine fix: Makes valid chemical analysis of persons urine admissible at trial as evidence of whether person was driving while under influence of intoxicants. Specifies that chemical analysis is valid if performed by accredited or licensed toxicology laboratory. Passed House 46-14. Passed Senate 26-0. Signed 6/17/09.
HB 2426 (GAC/Barker) Imposes minimum fine of $2,000 for person convicted of driving while under influence of intoxicants if person had 0.15 percent or more by weight of alcohol in blood of person at time of offense. Passed House 58-2. Passed Senate 27-0. Concurred with House. 46-0, Signed 6/26/09

HB 2238 (GAC/Barker) Provides that person who refuses breath or blood test is not eligible for hardship permit for at least 90 days and, depending on certain factors, for up to three years. Provides that person who fails test may qualify for hardship permit in 30 days, depending on persons driving record. Passed House 54-5. Passed Senate 27-1. Signed 6/26/09

HB 3508 (2428) (Barker/CVU) Assault III bill- Increases penalty for assault in third degree if defendant commits assault by means of motor vehicle and was driving while under influence of intoxicants. Moves from a 6 to an 8 on the sentencing grid and becomes a “B” felony.. Passed in HB 3508.
HB 3508 (3271) (OAA/CVU/ODAA) Harassment BILL – Aggravated Driving while Suspended-amendment: SECTION 5. (1) A person commits the crime of aggravated driving while suspended or revoked if the person operates a motor vehicle that causes serious physical injury to, or the death of, another person while knowingly violating ORS 811.175 or 811.182, if the suspension or revocation resulted from, or if the hardship or probationary permit violated is based upon a suspension or revocation that resulted from, a conviction for a criminal offense involving the use of a motor vehicle. Class “C” felony; 7 on the Sentencing grid. Creates the new crime of Aggravated Driving While Suspended. Re-Passed House 6-25. Passed Senate 6-25

Start Conversation Today About Underage Drinking

Parents want to keep their children safe. To ward off diseases, parents have their infants immunized. To give them skills in order to protect themselves as they become more independent, the subject of “stranger danger” is discussed. Parents set curfews and emphasize safe driving habits when teens obtain a driver’s license. Conversations also take place about the dangers of illicit drug use.

However, underage drinking may be the most difficult issue for parents to discuss. Teen drinking is often thought of as a rite of passage, glamorized and romanticized by the media. Battling these outside influences, however, can lead to feelings of hypocrisy if the parents drank before the age of 21. As a result, they may decide not to have a conversation with their teen and deny the problem exists because they feel discouraged and powerless especially when they hear, “But everyone’s doing it!”. The boundaries parents set to keep their adolescents safe provides their teens with a sense of security and develops a level of trust when it comes to important, life-saving issues like avoiding underage drinking.

There is no simple, guaranteed solution to ensure teenagers will wait until their 21st birthday to make a decision about drinking. Addressing this issue depends on the adolescent and the situation. It is important for parents to understand why their teen may be considering starting drinking or already doing so. For example, teens report drinking because they are bored, pressured, trying to escape from challenges, or believe is a way to celebrate or blow off steam.

In order to tailor the conversation to their adolescent before parents initiate the discussion, set boundaries or dole out consequences, it is important to ask themselves what their teen would hate to give up when rules weren’t followed. The realities and consequences of underage drinking must have a personal connection to things and people they care about. Is it losing their place on an athletic team or in the drama club; spending time with friends; driving the family car; forfeiting a scholarship; being injured and/or hurting someone else and having to live with that burden; spending time in jail, losing driving privileges or one’s driving license? Just as important as the consequences of underage drinking is to acknowledge adolescents when they observe the rules.

Deciding whether they are going to drink alcohol is not a one time choice for teenagers. It is something they may be faced with every week, on multiple occasions so continue to have conversations with them. According to adolescents, alcohol is almost always available and there are ample opportunities to make mistakes. Their decision is ongoing.

Talking about alcohol-related problems in the life of a family member, friend or acquaintance may help make the issue more real. Every family has someone they know and maybe love who has dealt with difficulties caused by alcohol. Whether the problem is alcoholism and its dramatic consequences or the devastating impact of impaired driving, talk openly about the impact of alcohol on their lives. This might provide some motivation for teens to wait until the age of 21 to make their decision about drinking.

However difficult it may be, have a conversation with your adolescents instead of lecturing them. It is important to be aware of tone of voice, facial expressions and body language. While eye-rolling and sighing may be initial responses, it’s important to create a comfortable environment in which teens feel validated in expressing their thoughts and opinions.

Underage drinking is a serious societal problem. Parents can help shape the behavior and attitude of their adolescents in regards to alcohol. You can help to protect teens from the dangers of underage drinking. The best way to influence them not to drink before age 21 is to have a strong, trusting relationship with them. Research shows that children, ages 10 and 11, whose parents fostered communication, were highly involved and set clear expectations were more likely to see underage drinking as harmful and were less likely to initiate early alcohol use. When these pre-teens turned 17 and 18, they were also less likely to use alcohol. You can make a difference. Start the conversation today.
For more information, please visit http://www.madd.org/ or http://www.why21.org/

MADD Awards Deputy Aaron Hoberg at Cinco de Mayo Saturation Patrol Briefing

Successful efforts to deter and arrest drunk drivers on Cinco de Mayo, by Sergeant Fred Swank of the Lane County Sheriffs Department align directly with MADD's Campaign To Eliminate Drunk Driving. The Lane County Sheriffs Department teamed with Oregon State Police troopers to patrol county roads and state highways for intoxicated drivers for the anticipated festivities on Cinco de Mayo. The Eugene Police Department was also out with high visibility.

Efforts to get drunk drivers off the road occur throughout the year despite limited funding for the Lane County Jail and continued decreases in the counties traffic team. Without the teeth of the jail and the continued layoff of deputies, roads in Lane County will continue to be at risk for drunk driving crashes and fatalities. Deputy Mike Lamb told MADD executive director, Lois Harvick during the nights ride along that he will continue to make traffic safety a priority regardless of the cuts. He says he will continue to do his part.

This same attitude is apparent throughout the team, yet keeping morale high is a challenge. This was an important factor why MADD participated in the Cinco de Mayo patrols as a ride-along passenger. MADD considers law enforcement an invaluable partner in the fight against drunk driving and supports and appreciates the tough jobs that they do.

According to Sergeant Swank, Deputy Aaron Hoberg holds the highest arrest level for DUII arrests while serving on the traffic team with the department. MADD honored Deputy Hoberg with an award of appreciation just prior to deploying en mass officers. Congratulations and keep up the good work Deputy Hoberg and the rest of your team!

President Obama nominates MADD CEO Chuck Hurley to head NHTSA

White House Announces Its Intent to Nominate MADD CEO to Head NHTSA; Debbie Weir Will Serve as Acting CEO.

Wednesday, the Obama Administration announced its intention to nominate MADD CEO Chuck Hurley as the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The MADD National Board of Directors will name Chief Operating Officer Debbie Weir as acting CEO upon Chuck’s appointment.

Upon his confirmation by the U.S. Senate, as NHTSA Administrator, Chuck will be responsible for leading all highway safety programs in the U.S., promulgating highway safety standards and helping to administer fuel economy regulations.

Chuck joined MADD as CEO in March 2005. He previously served as the Vice President of the Transportation Safety Group for the National Safety Council and as the Executive Director of the Council’s Air Bag and Seat Belt Safety Campaign.

A longtime volunteer for MADD, Chuck has been involved in the organization since the very beginning. He attended MADD’s first national press conference in Washington, D.C. in 1980, and strongly supported and assisted in MADD’s efforts to pass the National 21 Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984. From 1993 to 1998, Chuck served on MADD’s National Board of Directors.
“As CEO, Chuck brought focus to MADD,” said Paul Folkemer, chairman of MADD’s Board of Directors. “Under Chuck’s leadership, MADD developed and launched its boldest initiative ever: the Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving. The Campaign has brought renewed focus, passion and vigor to the organization."

Bringing 14 years of nonprofit management experience from the healthcare industry, Debbie joined MADD in 2002 as the Vice President of Victim Services. Under her leadership, MADD increased the number of victims served for three consecutive years by 20 percent. In December 2005, Debbie was promoted to Chief Operating Officer for MADD, responsible for building capacity at the field level and providing strategic leadership in the areas of communication, field relations, public policy, programs, and victim advocacy. In 2007, MADD served more than 50,000 victims of drunk driving crashes.

“The Board has complete confidence in Debbie’s ability to lead the organization during this transition,” said Folkemer. “With her experience as Chief Operating Officer, commitment to victim/survivors and extensive knowledge of MADD’s field, Debbie will lead MADD to success as we pursue our mission to eliminate drunk driving, serve more victims and prevent underage drinking.”

The White House nomination may go to the U.S. Senate in early May with a Senate confirmation hearing to follow thereafter.

Photo above of Chuck Hurley on steps of Oregon State Capitol

Lessons in dealing with grief will last child a lifetime

Editor’s note: This is the second of a two-part series on helping children cope with death. Age 7 through adolescence is addressed here.

Grieving is part of living. Much of how a child grieves is determined by the influence of parents and primary caregivers. An environment that fosters open, honest communication offers bereaved children security during their waves of yearning, sadness, anger and guilt. They will undoubtedly experience the pain associated with grief and mourning, yet will be able to express their feelings and resolve any difficult issues. They will learn to cope with grief and the skills they master will remain with them throughout adulthood. Lessons in grief and healing are precious gifts you can give your children.

Children age 7 to 8 frequently become fearful of death because they realize for the first time that it is real. They are not only concerned about death as a concept, but also about the instruments of death and what happens after a person dies. They may ask questions about why the person died or seek information about who or what caused the death. However, many of the factors of early childhood still apply and children may not be ready for all the details. It is important for caregivers to provide age-appropriate responses. At this age, it is important for children to express their sadness, anger, fear and guilt.

A more adult concept of life and death develops roughly between the ages of 9 and 11. At this age, children are aware of their own feelings and need support and comfort. They may also empathize with others, understand what the loss means to them and be a source of support. Opportunities to be helpful to others during the crisis may actually help children deal with their own feelings.

Adolescents are on the threshold of independence. They are tightly bonded with peers and begin to disengage from family. Although adolescents may understand how to behave appropriately with others, their social and emotional immaturity often leads them to act otherwise, which can affect their relationships at home and at school.
The adolescent’s school performance will likely reflect the stress and trauma that accompanies sudden and violent death. While academic expectations should not be relaxed, bereaved children may need extra tutoring, a less demanding schedule or some other assistance from the school. School officials should always be notified of a death within the family, regardless of the child’s age.

Adolescents between the ages of 14 and 16 have achieved a stronger identity. They are not as self-centered, although they may still think about their own death when faced with the death of another. When met with the loss of an important relationship, adolescents’ self-centered values may cause great fear, guilt, anxiety and anger. They may feel that no one has felt the deep and powerful feelings they now feel. No one has ever loved as they do, or grieved as they grieve. Adolescents have the ability to empathize with others, so their pain is doubled. They may express their rage by a general increase in aggressive behavior. Adolescents should be told that while feelings simply exist, how one responds to these feelings could be appropriate or inappropriate. Helping teens find acceptable ways to express anger is of utmost importance.

Because adolescents form more intimate relationships with peers than with parents, it is advisable that networks or groups be made available for adolescents who have experienced the death of a loved one. While reluctant to participate in family therapy or support groups, an adolescent may respond well to a pastor, school counselor or another adolescent who “understands.” Parents and caregivers of a grieving adolescent should not be discouraged if their teen reaches out to someone other than family. It is normal behavior for this stage of development. Some kind of family intervention may be necessary, however, if the adolescent’s response is destructive to the family.

If you have questions or would like additional support in helping your child cope with death, call a local hospice, grief center, local MADD office, your child’s guidance counselor at school or a mental health professional. Many pediatricians and hospital social work departments can refer you to appropriate programs or professionals. Funeral directors and faith-based community leaders are also good resources.

By Lois Harvick for the Register Guard

Appeared in print March 22, 2009

MADD SAYS DON’T PRESS YOUR LUCK -Sober Designated Drivers Save Lives

While celebrating the luck of the Irish on St. Patrick’s day with parades and pub parties, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) reminds the public to designate a non-drinking driver before celebrations begin. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 78 people were killed in drunk driving crashes on St. Patrick’s Day 2007.

“Don’t press your luck by not planning ahead,” said Laura Dean-Mooney, MADD national president. “Designating a sober driver should always be a part of the celebration planning process. A designated driver is your most important lucky charm.”

MADD recommends that everyone designate a sober driver before celebrations begin. To prevent drunk driving in the first place, planning ahead includes ensuring guests are safe. MADD’s online Safe Party Guide is available at www.madd.org/safeparty. Here are common misconceptions of drunk driving.

Myth: Coffee can sober up someone who has had too much to drink.Fact: Only time sobers. It takes about one hour to process each drink through the body.

Myth: Hard liquor is more intoxicating than beer or wine.Fact: A 12-ounce can of beer, a five-ounce glass of wine, a 12-ounce wine cooler contain the same amount of alcohol and the same intoxication potential as 1 1/2 oz. of liquor.

Myth: Someone who has had too much to drink will look intoxicated.Fact: Someone’s physical appearance can be misleading.

Caregivers' reactions key in helping children grieve

Editor’s note: This is the first of a two-part series on helping children cope with death. Age birth to 6 is addressed

Successful grieving after the untimely death of a loved one is an extremely difficult task. We would like to tell our children that the world is fair and just, but it is not so. Adults and children alike must realize that painful things happen. It is impossible to live without hurt because no one is immune from danger.


Many things influence children’s views on death. Age, religious beliefs, cultural or ethnic values and their relationship to the deceased are important factors that affect their understanding. The reactions of the surviving parent or caregivers are of primary importance in determining how children will cope with death. Understanding how children conceptualize death within the context of their prospective age ranges may help parents and caregivers in coping with this process.



Infants can sense when something is amiss following the death of their primary caregiver. Although a death in the family may affect an infant, the absence of the mother causes a clear biological reaction. However, this can be remedied very quickly if another caregiver assumes primary responsibility for the infant’s care. Passing infants from caregiver to caregiver, however, may cause anxiety due to the fluctuation and inconsistency of care and is not recommended.



Older infants are beginning to see themselves as separate from their parents or caregivers, and this separation can be frightening. They can only experience the presence or absence of another and may grieve for a lost relationship through anger, crying, searching, lack of appetite and quiet resignation. Two-year-olds can feel grief and anxiety in their surroundings and will require frequent, large doses of tender loving care: holding, cuddling and stroking. Explanations of death are meaningless. What one does is far more important than what one says to a child this young.
At 4 to 6 years old, children also have a great need for physical nurturing and the security of knowing who will care for them. They are learning to express themselves verbally, but are most effective in expressing themselves through play. Although significant events such as birthdays, holidays and the first day of school are major milestones to young children, they tend to have a limited concept of time and space.



“Magical thinking” is an important characteristic of 4- to 6-year-old development. Children at this age are capable of a variety of fantasies based on something they have seen or heard, even though it was misunderstood. Viewed through their limited conception of time and death, bereaved children may expect the deceased to be alive again soon. It’s best to explain death in physical, concrete terms; for example, “His heart stopped beating and no one can make it start again. We won’t be seeing him move or talk any more.”
For children raised in traditions that believe in an afterlife, concepts such as heaven may be difficult for them to grasp. They will see a discrepancy between burial of the body and the description of “going home” or “going to heaven.” While the young child probably cannot grasp this idea, you might address the distinction, as “the part that we loved, the part that smiled, laughed and loved us, is the part that has gone to heaven.”



In the event that the deceased is cremated, don’t used the word “burned” in explaining this process. According to Carleton Kendrick, a family therapist in private practice, children may be told that “cremation means (the body was) put in a room that was very, very hot until (it) turned to soft, powdery ashes … Be very careful to make sure that (they) understand that their (loved one) was not hurt by this process.”



Invite children to be present at the funeral, memorial service or scattering of ashes. Although they should be encouraged to attend, children should never be forced. Likewise, they should not be required to view, kiss or touch the deceased, although it is perfectly all right if they wish to do so. It is important for children to say goodbye in their own way.

By Lois Harvick
For The Register-Guard
Appeared in print: Sunday, Feb 22, 2009, page E2