Hands-Free Cell Phone Use in Cars While Driving Should Be Implemented in All 50 States, Essay Example

By the end of 2008, The Wireless Association estimated that about 270 millions of people (according to other sources – 260 millions) had cell phones. It estimated nearly 90 percent of the American citizens. There were only 4.3 millions of cell phones in USA in 1993. Hundredfold change led to significant changes in human behavioral patterns. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration provides current approximate data about cell phones and claims that about 11% of the Americans use cell phones while driving at least once a day. This means that many people have an opportunity to drive irresponsibly on the everyday basis.

Nowadays, most people cannot imagine their lives without cellular phones. Cell phones seem to be an indivisible part of modern society. They offer convenience and mobility that were never seen before. However, cell phones require certain things in exchange for their benefits: attentiveness, common sense and good driving skills while using them. For example, 6 percent of crash deaths in 2003 were reported to be caused by inattentive driving (III, 2008). It does not mean that all of them were caused by cell phone use while driving. Cellular phones are not major causes of distraction. Eating, talking, listening to radio programs, putting on make up, keeping an eye on children distract drivers a lot more than the telephone talks. What are the most distracting things for drivers?

Major Threats to Driving Are Distraction and Texting

Arguably, two major things that influence driver’s attention most are text messages and loss of concentration; former includes general distraction, visual distraction, so-called situational blindness, etc.

Supporters of the cell phone use limitation when driving claim that distractions caused by cell phone use are of greater threat than other distractions. Cell phones demand concentration on the conversation topic. Usually, they withdraw visual attention of the driver from the road when he or she dials or recollects the telephone number. There are also some aspects of cell phone use while driving which are not as threatening as they are said to be, and it is a theme of further investigation.

The most dangerous drivers are minors who are so addicted to cell phone use that they cannot stop using it while driving. Their primary problem is immature attitude to driving and safety. To perform several tasks while driving one requires certain skills, habits, and experience. Professional or experienced drivers are capable of doing several things simultaneously because their skills allow them to react quickly and correctly when some minor road problems occur. Even their talking to passengers is sometimes justifiable as they do control situation in the back of their mind. The situation differs a lot when it comes to minors driving. Due to the lack of basic automatic reactions use of cell phones can be really dangerous for young and inexperienced drivers. Use of cell phones by young drivers must be strictly regulated in order to eliminate inexperienced distracted drivers on the roads. And then the problem changes to professional use of cell phones only. Bans imposed on minor driving and cell phone use will change current crashes rate. So the problems of cell phone use will be seen from the objective point of view, not taking into consideration minors problems.

Drivers do distract when they dial phone numbers, search for their cell phones, and receive incoming calls. In such situations drivers’ sight is distracted from the road and road tasks. Such distraction is an indivisible part of the driving tasks because they are similar to the other ones: searching for handkerchiefs, looking around, etc. Drivers can also immerse in their conversations so much that their ability to concentrate on the driving process can suffer a lot. It may lead to certain risk of safety of pedestrians, their passengers, and of the driver himself. Both hand-held and hands-free cell phones cause distraction. And when it comes to deciding which one to use the answer is obvious – hands-free cell phones offer more convenience though causing the same distractions.

But the worst thing to do with cell phone when driving is texting. Writing messages require visual distraction and long-term distraction of attention from the road. It comes as no surprise that a lot of car crashes caused by drivers writing messages result in major injuries. Texting is jeopardous and it should be regulated.

What can we do about texting while driving? In fact, it is a great mistake to text while you are driving a car. Drivers must use their common sense in order to avoid rather silly mistakes. At least they must be informed about consequences of inattentive and irresponsible driving. Measures such as instructing and persuasion can reduce dramatically the rate of accidents caused by texting drivers. It is so obvious that it does not make sense for adult drivers. But this must be done really persuasively for minors to grasp the degree of risk and realize the necessity of changing their habits to safer ones.

Cell phones are comparatively new in comparison to cars and, consequently, cellular telephone speaking habits are much younger. But these habits are formed very quickly and have already reformed our behavior. In order to avoid excessive addictiveness to cell phone use while driving new drivers must be instructed how to avoid dangerous situations on the roads when they buy their cars. Also, information about hands-free cell phones must be given in order to provide the decrease of texting while driving. With hands-free cell phones minors stand no chance of writing messages.

Employers’ Point of View on Cell Phone Use When Driving

Though employers suffer from court suits connected with cell phones rather rarely, they are still anxious about possibility of being responsible for accidents caused by their employees. Such cases include driving and conducting work-related conversations via cell phones. And modern business requires frequent and operative work conversations that can be easily provided by cell phones. Vicarious responsibility implies that employers may be held legally liable for the acts of negligence of their employees committed when being employed. Employers may also be considered to be negligent if they fail to establish a policy for the safe use of cell phones. Such conditions lead to establishment of harsh restrictions of cellular phones use by many employers (III, 2008). They set rules for cell phones use in order to avoid abuse and dangerous situations on the road. Employer’s regulation is one more alternative to prohibiting cell phones.

In 2003, attorney Jordan Michael proposed a theory of ‘cell phone manufacturer liability for auto accidents if they fail to warn users of the dangers of driving and talking on the phone at the same time’ (III, 2008). It means that even manufacturers are responsible for drivers’ behavior when they use cell phones, either hands-free or hand-held. For example, most motor vehicle manufacturers now design their cars applying Bluetooth technology in order to provide hands-free devices for communication.

The theory also insists that making employers and employees equally responsible for the use of cell phones on the road will change the roles and thus change attitude to responsible driving. Such measures will enforce employees to drive more responsibly and keep in mind that business calls can be done in stopped car. Use of hands-free cell phones can also reduce number of accidents, because in that case business people can receive calls and then ask to call back later or quickly set the time of meeting.

Legislation Issues

A lot of countries have numerous laws considering cell phones. Namely these countries are Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Botswana, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Singapore, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, the United Kingdom and Zimbabwe. Most of them prohibit the use of hand-held phones while driving (III, 2008). Though cell phones are rather new in the lives of their citizens, they do care about cell phone use. And United States are among those first countries that deem the cell phone impact on lifestyles, safety, and social issues important enough to have laws regulating it.

Nowadays, more than 250 bills prohibiting or restricting cell phone use while driving are pending in 42 state legislatures. Though cell phone use impact on road safety is still rather controversial issue, all these regulations are going to come into operation. No crucial decisions like total prohibition are expected, but generally needed restrictions will certainly take place.

In order to estimate the scale of the on-going prohibition, let’s address ourselves to statistics of distracted-driver legislation. National Council of State Legislatures gives the next distribution: in Alaska and Michigan screen device use by drivers while driving is currently prohibited; in Arkansas, California, Louisiana and Maine minors are currently banned from using cell phones while driving, and in Colorado, Kentucky, and Massachusetts the same laws are about to come into operation; in Arkansas, Alaska, Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Virginia, Washington, the District of Columbia, West Virginia and Wisconsin laws prohibiting texting while driving are either pending or currently in operation; Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Vermont are waiting for the laws restricting or banning use wireless devices (O’Donnel, 2009, III, 2008). Several states prohibit school drivers from using cell phones while driving. Other states increase penalties in order to draw attention to inattentive driving. This information is far from being complete, as far additional laws are being passed in attempt to make living in the country safer.

Another source provides us with somewhat different information. Insurance Information Institute claims that about 18 states have passed laws banning or restricting young drivers from using cell phones. The law in California is the harshest in comparison to laws passed in other states. It prohibits the use of any mobile device (a cell phone, a broadband personal communication device, specialized mobile radio device, handheld device or laptop computer) by drivers under age 18 (III, 2008).

Most states restrict wireless cell phones use and allow hand-free ones only. Unarguably, it is a justified measure, due to the fact that hand-free cell phones are much safer to use while driving. It can be a real solution for the sates that do not want to impose a severe ban on all kind of cell phones.

Drivers’ Point of View

According to a research conducted in 2004, vast majority of drivers use cell phones while driving, and even larger proportion think that doing so is unsafe (PEMCO Insurance, 2004). Most drivers do believe that distraction caused by cell phone use is extremely hazardous, but, nevertheless, constantly use cell phones. Cell phone use while driving is estimated as dangerous or very dangerous by drivers. Strange as it may seem, these results are verisimilar. Drivers do find some compromises between conflicting tasks. What accounts for such a strange fact?

The main reason is probably the matter of habits. As specified above, driving habits are older than the habits of using cell phones, and drivers cannot reject one in favor of the other. Driving habits are usually interwoven with everyday lifestyle. Clash of safety and convenience issues results in cell phones use while driving, though it is largely admitted to be dangerous and unwelcome activity.

Current opinions and actions considering receiving calls while driving vary: 80 percent answer or dial only necessary calls; 73 percent tell callers they are driving; 45 percent pull over to answer or make a call; 39 percent use a hands-free device (PEMCO Insurance, 2004). Taking into consideration that this study is nearly five years, some numbers may vary.

Many drivers claim that they sacrifice their common sense for convenience – they choose to talk while driving a car. When hand-held devices are involved, the best choice is to hang up in order to call later or to pull over. Imagine all those numerous cell phone users pulling over. Such rational decisions are sometimes inapplicable when it comes to 90 percent of the nation. Consequently, some other technique must be thought of. One of the alternative ways is to use hands-free cell phones.

The official prohibition of cell phone use can result into undesirable negative outcomes, as in the modern world of fierce competition things tend to change in a matter of minutes and a lot of businessmen depend on their cell phones. Therefore, the decision made by legislatures must be a compromise between safety regulations and social necessity. They must give the drivers an opportunity to communicate via cell phones but at the same time, extend their safety to a possible degree. This is achievable by introducing hands-free cell phones instead of hand-held gadgets.

To summarize it is reasonable to note that all people who are now involved in driving have their own opinions regarding the issue. It is arguable that all people who participated in the poll told the truth and really behaved themselves in such a lawful and correct way. Nevertheless, the survey in question showed that most drivers are responsible enough to think twice before answering an incoming call. They showed behavioral patterns that fully corresponded to safety regulations. Why then there should be any limitations? If drivers’ report is reliable enough, it will be enough to oblige them to use hands-free cell phones and, thus, resolve the problem of cell phones interfering with driving.

Insurance Companies Point of View

The aforementioned poll was conducted in order to provide a decent base for safety guidelines of the insurance company. It was specially designed to gather information about Washington drivers and their measures of precaution. It was intended to warn drivers about distraction dangers and to review the whole situation concerning driver’s responsibility. Different drivers were required to estimate the degree of danger of different road situations, including cell phone use. On a basis of this poll a safety policy was made up. In general, representatives of PEMCO Insurance Company saw hands-free cell phones as a decent alternative to hand-held ones.

In 2007, the survey of unsafe driver behavior was conducted by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. The survey found that out of interviewed 1,200 drivers 73 percent communicate via cell phones. Cell phone use while driving was highest among young drivers (III, 2008). This survey reflects young drivers situation. Limitation of minor’s cell phone use while driving can influence overall driver’s cell phone use and introduction of hands-free cell phones.

Insurance companies are the most interested parties as their main target is to provide their customers with proper and easily comprehensible regulations. So researches launched by insurances companies are of great importance as they show how things are changing in the world of road safety. And the results of such studies usually represent social attitudes to things like cell phone use while driving. These attitudes are quite responsible so laws must be tolerant to cell phone use.

Safety Organizations Point of View

The safety organizations have not yet achieved a consensus in the question of cell phone use while driving. ‘Unlike with seat belt and drunk-driving legislation, there’s no consensus as to what an effective cell phone law entails and also no evidence that these … approaches have any impact,’ says Barbara Harsha of the Governors Highway Safety Association (III, 2008 ). Her words reflect different positions of different organizations – some of them are influenced by personal circumstances and think that all cell phones must be prohibited; some of them approach this problem with great accuracy and caution.

In July 2007 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Center for Statistics and Analysis released the results of their National Occupant Protection Use Survey that was aimed at tracing the hand-held cell phone use through the course of time. It showed that in 2006 five percent of drivers used hand-held cell phones – compare with 6 percent in 2005; it was the first decline since 2000 when the survey was launched. The decline also took place in several driver categories, including ‘female drivers (down from 8 to 6 percent), drivers in the Midwest (down from 8 to 4 percent), drivers age 25 to 69 (down from 6 to 4 percent) and drivers of passenger cars (down from 6 to 4 percent) to name but a few’ (III, 2008). This study showed that introduction of hands-free cell phones and prohibition of hand-held ones while driving will be a reasonable and popular decision as many people tend to alter their habits.

Furthermore, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conducted a study that was published in April 2006 and was targeted at the main sources of car-crashes. The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study, as it was entitled, found that almost 80 percent of crashes and 65 percent of near-crashes involved some form of driver inattention within three seconds of the event – not 20 or 30 seconds, as it had been previously thought.

Though drowsiness and cell phone use were among major causes of accidents, cell phone use is far less dangerous than other distractions when it comes to crash and narrow crash situations. ‘For example, while reaching for a moving object such as a falling cup increased the risk of a crash or near-crash by nine times, talking or listening on a hand-held cell phone only increased the risk by 1.3 times’ The result is obvious – hands-free cell phones can be decent alternative for hand-held ones as are of not that great threat as they are usually reported to be.

Researchers’ Point of View

Usually, studies dedicated to cell phone use concentrate on several aspects of the problem, namely quantity of drivers who use cell phones, seriousness of injuries in car crashes caused by cell phone use while driving, or differences between hand-free and hand-held devices.

Public Policy Institute of California released a study in 2008. It was dedicated to the new law and was called ‘What to Expect from California’s New Hands-Free Law’. It overlooked all advantages and disadvantages of the new law. Using as a base the data collected from states where analogous laws were in operation (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Washington, D.C.), researchers came to the conclusion that prohibition would reduce traffic deaths by about 300 a year in adverse conditions, such as on wet or icy roads (III, 2008). They also concluded that small penalties and no ban on texting while driving would debilitate the law and lessen its effects. After publication of this research some more laws were introduced. For example, law that prohibits texting while driving was enacted in September, 2008.

Another survey was dedicated to texting. As said above, teenagers are the most active social group that uses messages for communication. And this fact was researched in August 2006 in ‘Teens Today’ survey conducted by the Liberty Mutual Research Institute. Rather expectedly, the survey showed that teenagers considered texting to be their biggest distraction. 37 percent of the surveyed teens claimed that text messaging was extremely or very distracting, 20 percent claimed it was their emotional state that was the most distracting, and 19 percent claimed that they were distracted by having passengers, especially friends (III, 2008).

Conclusion

Use of cell phones is still an arguable question. While some researches show that use of cell phones is distracting in itself, others think that replacement of hands-free cell phones instead of hand-held might be helpful. Though researches still argue, hands-free cell phones are a great solution to the road cell phone problem.

It is useless to hide the facts. Nowadays, a lot of researchers claim that hands-free and hand-held cell phones are equally dangerous. They compare their ability to load the brain, the reaction time and time spent on dialing, and even eye movements within conversations. No matter what they compare, most researches agree about dangers. But they fail to care about convenience and human habits. Drastic measures in the scale of the state are impermissible, as for me. This conclusion came as a result of all investigations and thoughts of this paper, as summarized below.

Use of cell phones in United States is a commonplace. People are used to speaking every time they need to – students, businessmen, housekeepers and even school pupils are in the habit of being available every time they need to. The reason for this quick spreading of the cell phones is the necessity to communicate. In the age of technology communication with anybody you need anytime you need seems absolutely casual. Modern query for connectivity and mobility leads to cell phones gaining more and more popularity.

Consequently, problems with cell phones being used while driving could have been predicted but could not have been avoided. Cell phone communication requires concentration and distraction from the driving process, but gives necessary information.

Some researches show that people with high income tend to use cell phones more frequently than people with low income. The reason is not only the price of the gadget itself, but also different reason of cell phone use. Opulent people, such as businessmen or lawyers, need information constantly and instantly; their ability to respond quickly to the changing circumstances is crucial for their work performance. They do need cell phones.

Another point about cell phone use is that now too much people have cell phones and are addicted to its use. Though hand-held phones change to hands-free ones certainly will require certain money investments, it is incomparable to losses caused by total prohibition of cell phone use while driving.

The hand-held cell phones are a decent alternative to hand-held ones. Reaction time, level of distraction and some other parameters vary slightly from one kind of phones to another. When the question is asked ‘Which phones involve less visual distraction?’ the answer is: certainly hands-free ones. When the question is ‘Which phones cause more general distraction?’ the answer is also hands-free cell phones. When it comes to mind loading, it is similar for both kinds of cell phones. So a question of introduction hands-free cell phones is just a mater of time.

Implementing hands-free cell phones is a great step. It will not interfere with current laws but at the same time, it will introduce more safety and accuracy on the roads.

Works Cited

Altmann ,Erik M., Cleeremans, A., Gray, Wayne D., Schunn, Christian D. (2001) Proceedings of the 2001 Fourth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling, July 26-28. Virginia, USA: George Mason University, Fairfax,

Cellphones and Driving (2008). Insurance Information Institute Retrieved April 12, 2009 from http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/cellphones/

Drivers consider cell phone use unsafe (2004). PEMCO Incurance Retrieved April 12, 2009 from http://www.pemco.com/about_us/nr_drivers_consider_cell.aspx

O’Donnel, J. (2009) States target distracted drivers. USA Today Retrieved April 12, 2009 from http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-03-29-distracted-drivers-texting-law-proposals_N.htm