Autonomous Cars and Alcohol Consumption

Drunk driving laws, their rigorous enforcement, and a changing culture that is increasingly intolerant of driving under the influence have not only made people safer on the road, but they have arguably made many people healthier by giving them a reason to drink less and to monitor their alcohol consumption when they do drink. If the promise of self-driving cars pays off, people will have one less reason to limit their drinking. After all, the car is driving itself so I might as well get plastered! Hell, bring along a few roadies, too! As self-driving cars become viable and then common, it will be interesting to measure this and other unintended adverse health outcomes.

George Jetson, Sot

I was listening to a recent episode of The Diane Rehm Show on the rise of  driver-assistance systems (e.g. adaptive cruise control) and the inevitability of autonomous vehicles. One purported advantage of computer-assisted driving is that it would eliminate driver inattentiveness as a cause of accidents. Taken to its logical conclusion, cars would eventually drive riders wherever they'd like to go without the occupant intervening. This means that people could one day in the not-so-distant future safely text and drive and, perhaps, even drink and drive. This struck me as a place that might bring some unintended consequences. Here is my hypothesis: the widespread use of autonomous vehicles will result in an increase in adverse alcohol-related health outcomes. Think about it this way: inasmuch as anti-drunk driving campaigns have successfully attenuated people's drinking overall, the decriminalization of this behavior will mean that people will drink more frequently and in larger quantities. Just an educated guess.

I and We in Libational Context

I'm getting pumped up for the the new Ken Burns' documentary, Prohibition. Prohibition was an attempt at "social engineering" or, more accurately, intentional cultural manipulation. While a grassroots movement, it resulted in a top-down result. It didn't work. The problems of alcohol, however, did not disappear with the Cullen-Harrison Act. Two years later, Bill Wilson offered the world an individualistic response that resonated much more with the the increasing individualism that industrialization had ushered in, Alcoholics Anonymous. What I am proposing is that the 18th Amendment failed in part because it was a communal solution in an individualist society. It's one thing to say, "We have a problem, and it is demon liquor," a far different thing to say, "I am Bill W., and I am an alcoholic." More on this kind of dichotomy here.