In the flurry of end-of-year activity and
the heightened media coverage of the passage of the Right-to-Work Legislation in
December 2012, the Michigan Legislature also passed Public Act 543 with the
intention to “close the loop” of driving under the influence laws so that
substances other than alcohol were also included, such as marijuana. The Law was signed on January 2, 2013 by
Governor Synder and becomes effective on March 31, 2013. Although the Legislation may have been well
intended, Public Act 543 may need reconsideration and modification to address
serious concerns brought up by both the legal and medical professions. Many attorneys are concerned that the Law’s
definition of “intoxicating substance” is so broad that the general public will
be unable to determine what drugs would cause a person to be potentially liable
for “driving under the influence” and subject to arrest. According to the Law, “intoxicating
substance” refers to any substance or preparation listed as a drug in The
Official United States Pharmacopeia, The Official Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of
the United States or The Official National Formulary. The Law also defines an intoxicating
substance as “a substance, other than food, that is used in a manner or for a
purpose for which it was not intended, and that may result in a condition of
intoxication.”
“The use of specific
publications to define a criminal offense creates a serious problem when
citizens do not have access to the publications and when the publications
change frequently. It leaves the drivers
of Michigan in between a rock and a hard spot.
Either they spend a significant amount of money each year to have access
to the publications or they roll the dice and risk being charged with a
criminal offense” says attorney Joshua M. Covert.
Doctors are also
concerned that the Law’s definition of “intoxicating” substances includes
almost all of the medications prescribed for behavioral health patients, high
blood pressure medications, antihistamines, decongestants and many other
commonly prescribed medications which physicians did not fathom would be
included under the Law. For example, people with allergies could
potentially be “under the influence” of an” intoxicating substance” if they take
a Sudafed to stop their nose from running and then decide to drive. Physician groups are disappointed that
neither the Michigan Legislature nor the Governor’s Office consulted with
medical professional groups to consider the full impact of the Law. Many Physician groups are now contacting the Michigan
Department of Community Health to create a response to the legislation because
of its perceived disastrous potential impact on the public.
Obviously, this new Law
was designed to protect the public from dangerous drivers who make poor choices
in regards to the use of intoxicating substances; however, it appears that a
better balance can be accomplished by more concise legislative drafting
to protect both Michigan drivers from being seriously injured by dangerously intoxicated persons and avoid restricting a large segment of
the population from ever driving when taking necessary physician prescribed
medications.
Please contact your
State Representative or Senator to share your concerns and / or comments
regarding Public Act 543.
