IPFS
"Human Subjects" needed for DNA extraction (especially all motorcycle riders)
Written by Ernest Hancock Subject: Law Enforcers or Peace OfficersOff-Duty Police
Officer Human Subjects Overview Pacific Institute
Off-Duty Police Officers are hired by PIRE as
consultants to provide assistance with the National Roadside Survey. The survey
sites are marked with two signs that say “Voluntary Survey.” Off-duty police
officers assist with directing the safe flow of randomly selected vehicles into
the survey site. They do not speak with subjects. A Survey Manager signals the
police officer when an interviewer is available to conduct the next survey. The
off-duty police officer then selects the next vehicle that can be safely waved
into the survey site. To ensure unbiased selection of the first vehicle at each
interview site, the third vehicle passing the site after initiation of the
survey will be selected by the officer for the first
interview.
The random selection process is vitally important.
Without it, our data cannot be generalized to the whole population. A non-random
sample makes our data worthless. There are, however, two exceptions to the
random selection requirement: 1) We will NOT sample commercial vehicles at all;
and 2) We will oversample motorcycles by selecting ALL motorcycle riders to
participate.
The National Roadside Survey is research sponsored by
two federal agencies (NIAAA and NHTSA), thus the Pacific Institute is bound by
law to follow the Office of Human Research Protections, Ethical Principle, and
Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects. Consultants must complete a
Human Subjects training module either on-line or review the training module
binder and sign the training certificates before assisting with the
surveys.
The most relevant features of the Human Subjects
Protection Guideline on this project are as follows:
Subjects must understand that their
participation is completely voluntary and anonymous and they may leave the site
at any time. Upon contact with the subjects, the interviewer stresses three
factors to the selected driver, namely they have committed no offense, are free
to leave at any time, and that the stop was to request participation in an
anonymous and voluntary survey. Any conversation with subjects by the police
officer can be seen as coercive, thus the importance of not speaking to the
subject. Police officers may say, “Please follow the directions of the Survey
Manager,” when directing vehicles into the research site.
Subjects cannot be placed at risk of any
type of harm as a result of participating in the survey, including arrest. However, as researchers, we cannot ethically let an obviously impaired driver
drive away from the survey site. The interviewers will not know the subject’s
BAC (the PBT reading is stored in the PBT for download later), but they are
trained to identify the signs of intoxication. They have passive sensor devices
that they activate twice for every participant to help make an assessment of
impairment. An interviewer will signal a Survey Manager if they suspect a driver
is impaired. The Survey Manager will make his/her own assessment and decide if
the survey should continue and if the Impaired Driver Protocol should be
implemented. This protocol calls for the Survey Manager to request a breath test
with a PBT that displays the BAC and then offer these choices: 1) Let a sober,
licensed passenger drive after breath testing with a PBT that displays the BAC;
2) Call for two friends to come to the site; one to drive the subject’s vehicle;
3) Offer to pay for a taxi or tow ride home, and making arrangements for the
safe parking of subject’s vehicle if needed; 4) Offer to have a member of the
survey team drive the vehicle and subjects home; 5) Pay for a hotel if the
subject lives far from the survey site.
If the driver refuses all options, the
subject is told that we cannot in good conscience let him/her drive and that we
will have to let the police officers know that in our judgment, he/she is not
fit to drive away. From vast past experience, this is usually sufficient to get
the driver to cooperate and take one of the options. If the driver continues to
refuse, it is only then when it is a matter of public safety that the police
officers will be asked to assist. The officer will be asked to (1) repeat the
safe ride options, and if that fails, (2) the officer will call an off-duty
officer and warn that an apparently impaired driver has left our site and report
the pertinent vehicle information. Prior to calling the on-duty police, the
off-duty officer will inform the driver that he/she will ‘call it in’ if the
driver leaves the site. Police are then alerted to the potential hazard and if
the driver gives probable cause to an on-duty officer, then that driver will be
pulled over and subject to a police intervention. Because the driver would have
to give probable cause for a stop, there is no excess risk of arrest as a direct
result of our calling. The risk of being pulled over and possibly arrested is a
function of the driver’s behavior after leaving the site.