My First Drink

Well, it happened.  I took my first drink in almost five months.  I could have easily drank in the months between my DUI and the trial since I wasn't under the obligations that come with a conviction, but I didn't.  I could have drank during the month after my trial and before I was fully registered with either VASAP or ADAPT, but I didn't.  I didn't do this because I was worried that I had a problem with alcohol.  I never thought for a minute that what happened to me back on that fateful night in November was because I had a problem with alcohol even though everything since that night has made me double and triple-check myself.  I didn't really stop drinking because I was afraid of it, either.  I just didn't care to drink.
There were several nights that my husband and I were out and alcohol was available.  Thanksgiving was one of them.  My mother asked me if I wanted to get a few special bottles for the occasion, as we sometimes did, but her supply was more than enough and my uncle was sure to bring something.  I had a wine glass in front of me, but I forgot wine was available and by the time I'd downed my turkey dinner, I lost any appetite I might have had for it.  My brother and his wife took us out one night and brought one of my favorite wines and my husband and I brought a bottle, too, but I smelled them and both wines clashed with the food we were going to order, so I didn't partake then, either.  We had a nice dinner with the entire family before Christmas and they ordered a bottle, but, again, I felt it would ruin the taste of my meal (red doesn't really go with fish).  My husband has ordered a beer now and then at dinner, but I just didn't miss the bloating feeling that I get from that, so I declined then, too. 

It wasn't until last Friday night that I really felt like having something.  It was an exceptionally warm day- about 80 degrees- and sitting outside I was craving one of those sweet, mixed drinks that we had on our honeymoon.  I didn't have the right ingredients, so I waited until dinner.  I wound up settling on a nice glass of pinot grigio from Spain.  It had a wonderful taste- light and somewhat fruity, but still a little dry- and I enjoyed it....differently.  It was just like years ago when I first started tasting wines and taking notes.  I've been keeping a wine journal for about seven years.  I've tried so many wines over the years, though, that many of them started to blur together.  I don't think I have an exceptional pallete, so that's not really a surprise.  I liked the way it tasted with my appropriately-paired food.  It was a very nice complement to my meal and the summer-like day.  I wasn't reaching for it a lot because I'd really begun to like water with my meals, especially when I'm at a gourmet restaurant, so that I can taste everything and water doesn't make me bloat like wine does.  Some wines overpower food, but this one did not.  The glass lasted from the appetizer through my meal and it was very pleasant.  I couldn't feel any alcoholic effects, either, because of the food, which was even better.   But when the meal ended, my husband ordered a cappucino and I got another glass of that fabulous wine for dessert.

The second glass was not as good.  I realized I had reached my limit as far as the taste went.  It probably would have been better to switch to something more appropriate as an after-dinner drink either alcoholic or non-alcoholic, but I had just enjoyed that glass and didn't want anything else. I think I finished a little more than half of the second glass and- bam- I started feeling my toes go a little numb and my temperature rising a bit.  I didn't really like that because I had some sunburn from earlier in the day and was already a little warm.  So, I abandoned the glass and sipped my husband's coffee.  The coffee was much better- I should have gotten my own.

When we got home that night, I sat outside for a little while.  It had been such a long time since I drank, that I wasn't surprised at how little it took to make me feel the alcohol in my system.  I didn't like this at all.  I could only sit there and wait for it to go away.  I felt a little dizzy and very tired and wished that they made some really good non-alcoholic wine so that I could enjoy the taste without the effects.  And my stomach was so bloated it was uncomfortable. 

I feel really good about this and I'm relieved that this first glass didn't make me start drinking heavily or care anymore about alcohol than I did before.  I especially liked that I hadn't enjoyed the alcoholic effects.  I wasn't worried before all this stuff happened, but I've been surrounded by so much talk about alcholism that it does start to make you a little paranoid.  I guess in a way, it should, and I can look at that as a positive outcome of all I'm going through.  However, the purpose of VASAP or ADAPT is not to help you realize if you have a problem- that seems to be an afterthought to them.  Their real concern is that you don't drink and drive while on probation or ever again.

Over the course of a year, I'll be subjected to random urine and possibly to random breathalyzer tests.  Why?  This is not because the court thinks I have a problem with alcohol.  The sole purpose of this is to prevent me from drinking/doing drugs and driving.  Okay, I get that, but isn't it a bit invasive that I can't drink on my own time when I'm not driving?  I know they can't really check that, but then they shouldn't test at all until they come up with something better.  I don't see how it's right that they can tell you what you can do in your own time at home or with a designated driver.  This is a familiar argument regarding jobs that test for drugs and alcohol.  I understand that a truck driver, for example, shouldn't be drinking during the week when he's driving.  However, if he's home, off the clock, and decides to have some beer on a Friday night, how is it the employer's business about what he does on his own time when not at work?  The employer does not own you 100% of the time, so they shouldn't be able to invade your private life.  VASAP and ADAPT do not own me 100% of the time, so, how can these tests really be appropriate? 

I looked up urine and breathalyzer testing for alcohol.  Breathalyzers can detect alcohol up to 12-24 hours from the time you took your last drink (but this has so many variables, it's hard to give a real answer). A urine test can generally detect alcohol in your system up to 80 hours after your last drink, especially if you're a regular drinker.  The advice given on the web is to drink only on weekends if you're going to be tested during the week.  But it's a little hairy.  If you drink on a Friday, you might test positive on Monday.  So, how is that fair?  You drank on your own time and you were not going to work the next day.  I don't know when my urine tests will be.  According to some ADAPT class members, they will ask for a urine test during class.  My classes are on Thursdays, so if I wanted to drink on a weekend, I should be fine.  But I don't know this for sure.  Now, it's not worth it to me to drink on a weekend if this is a problem.  I'll gladly give up drinking for the year, I don't care that much about it.  But I do care about the principle that my private life is my private life.  It's not like I've been ordered to drug/alcohol treatment and I have to prove I'm clean and sober 100% of the time.  I was ordered to classes that are to deter me from drinking and driving and that's it. 

So, how can they limit testing to make sure I'm not drinking and driving?  The only measure I know is the ignition interlock system.  But it creates more problems than I want to deal with:  It's expensive, it requires all cars registered at the same address to have a unit installed, and I question the safety of having to take a breathalzyer while driving.  So, I guess for now there's nothing else available to prove I'm not drinking and driving other than to do random testing that might infringe upon my private life, but that doesn't mean it's right.  And these tests don't seem to really work to keep people from repeating the offense- as proven by the fact that I'm the only one in ADAPT on their first offense.  So, what good is this doing?  Why go through all this trouble if something doesn't work?  Is it just better to have something instead of nothing?  Does this just make the courts and government feel better that at least they have some means of checking up on offenders even if it gives leeway to invading my private life?  How does this help anyone?

ADAPT Classes #2 and #3

Last night we had two classes in one because our counselor will not be in town the following week.  Honestly, I'm not sure why they limit these things to once per week except to stretch this as much as possible into one of the most frustrating things you have to do to get your license back. If I could, I'd take one per day just to get this over with. 

I arrived at 5:40pm.  We were expected there at 5:45pm.  There were two others waiting for Ann, our counselor- one had been there for over half an hour.  Ann had just shown up a few minutes before and had gone in her office, locking the outside door, so we waited in the hallway.  I don't know what that was all about, but eventually she unlocked the door and let us in.  One at a time, we took our turns going in to make our payments.  When it was my turn, I was ready.  As I'd mentioned before, Ann's focus was short-lived, so I had to work fast.  I had two questions for her.  One, I needed to switch to Wednesdays for two weeks in May because I was to be away.  She kind of blinked at me, hesitated, but then said 'Welllll, I guess that's okay.  But you could just skip the classes.'  I guess most people skip a fair amount of classes, which explains why some of them have said they've been there for a year or more.  I was adamant about not missing classes if I didn't have to- it only means I spend more time with these people watching dumb videos.  This was good news, though, because it meant I got to spend some time with my parents on my birthday and I can still aim for being done with ADAPT at the end of July.

The second question was about AA.  I had attended my first meeting the night before, but wasn't sure how on earth I was going to prove this to her since she'd not said anything to us about it nor given us anything to get signed.  She said 'Oh, didn't I give you the form already?' and I said no.  She handed me one- she only had two copies with her, so I guess most people were skipping AA and staying in the class for 30 weeks.  No thank you..  The form was as one of the other members had described it the previous week: you write your name, the name of the place you went to your AA meeting, the topic discussed, and a few sentences about what you learned.  No one signed it except your counselor.  There was no way of knowing if you really went or not.  I guess for some programs, you have to get proof of attendance, but not for ADAPT or VASAP.  So, obviously it's pretty easy to cheat on this requirement.  Then why make a requirement in the first place?  And from what I've seen so far, VASAP and ADAPT are not really geared to helping someone with a real alcohol or drug problem.  AA is a much better program for someone with a problem, so why make this requirement so loose?  I probably should stop complaining because this means I don't really have to go to AA.  But I'm not a bad person and I have trouble cheating.  I'm not quite sure what I'm going to do yet.  My point here, though, is that someone with a real problem gets ignored in these programs and I'd venture to say that at least half of the people in my class have a problem.  I'd have to say the other half may not rely on alcohol, but they think nothing of getting totally wasted and driving home afterwards and have already shown through multiple DUIs that they will continue to do this.  Going to VASAP or ADAPT is not keeping them from doing this or teaching them why this is wrong.  So no one is learning anything from any of this and that just irks me.

Ann's paperwork took a long time.  She didn't come out of her office until 6:30pm.  It was obvious that we weren't getting out of there on time.  I'd spent about 45 minutes on the cold, hard folding chair and my ass was already numb.  I saw the title of the film was written on the whiteboard and I groaned.  It was Life as a House.  I'd already seen this movie three times.  It has very little to do with alchol and drug dependency, but the main character struggles to make amends in his life before dying, so I guessed that was why Ann chose this film.  It's a little bit of a stretch, but whatever.

Some of the other members of the class started to talk about what happened last week.  They said a new member of the class had switched to another night because he was upset that it had been so disruptive.  They were bitching about it and trying to figure out who it was, but no one recalled the man.  I did.  I was a little put-off by this.  Ann was correct in addressing the situation with those who were at fault, but she should never have said how she knew about it.  If this fellow had returned to class- or if he ever does return to class- there's a good chance the others will figure it out and make matters worse.  I wouldn't mess with some of these guys and Ann definitely did not use good judgement on this.

Ann came out and as she fussed over loading the video (a VHS tape that had seen better days), she told us that the movie addressed Step 4 from AA.  Step 4 is about making a moral inventory of ourselves....well, the movie only focuses on that for about ten minutes total and it would have been more accurate to say it was akin to Step 9 (making amends).  Ann also told us that the lead in the movie had a car accident and that's why he's seeking to right his life.  I nodded my head- I try to make sure I'm very nice to her and compliant in class- all the while wondering 'Has she ever even seen this movie?'  The lead character has cancer, not a car accident.  It made me realize that either she hadn't seen the movie in a long time or she's never watched the whole thing, herself.  She said she shows this film every year, but so far she's spent the majority of time in her office with the door closed.

The movie was funny, but not because of the content.  The other members of my class made constant remarks and I found myself laughing a lot.  I appreciated them that evening because otherwise I think it would have been agonizing sitting there watching a movie for the fourth time.  The only times I was truly bored was when they'd leave for smoke breaks (they were permitted to do so) and the room would be quiet.  

As predicted, Ann stayed in her office almost the entire time.  She left only once to use the bathroom.  Towards the end, someone noticed that it was already after 8pm and they all started growing impatient to leave.  One of them knocked on Ann's door and she came out asking 'Is the movie over?', looked at the TV and said 'It's not over yet'.  There were protests that it was 'over enough' and it was already 8:20pm.  A few minutes later, the movie finally ended and she addressed the class.  She said a few words about it, no questions, no discussion really, and reminded us that we didn't have class the following week.  And that was it.  Everyone made a mad dash for the door.

On the way out, I was behind two of the members and I heard one say that his wife texted him that there was a police checkpoint on one of the roads that night (it was St. Patrick's Day).  I didn't think much of it, but he was trying to avoid it.  It didn't really occur to me until I started driving that it was probably in my best interest to avoid it, too.  I don't have a real license, just a restricted one and they might harrass me as a result.  I drove home and saw the road block, but it started just past where I needed to turn.  But that's also the dumb part.  I turned onto a major road that eventually takes you to another place to get onto the highway the police were blocking.  If you were out drinking and driving that night, all you had to do was make the same turn I did and you could easily avoid them.  They'd have been better off moving it up to before that intersection so you couldn't avoid it, but, hey, whatever.  I counted myself as lucky that night, but I find that sad.  I wasn't out drinking and driving, I was out paying for my conviction, but I knew damned well I may not have had an easy time of it regardless.  How long would it be like this??

My First AA Meeting

As part of my ADAPT program, if I only want to go to 20 classes, I'm required to go to 19 or 20 AA meetings (my ADAPT counselor seems confused about the real number of meetings).  As with all the other probation requirements, I've been dreading this.  I've been to several AA meetings in the past with an alcoholic relative and a college friend of mine when he got busted for public intoxication.  The people I've met have always been very pleasant, some more outgoing than others, but for the most part, they're decent people all there for a common goal: to overcome their reliance on alcohol.  I think AA is a great program for those who need it; after all, it helped my relative tremendously and they have never had a single relapse in 20 years.  But mostly what I remember of the meetings is that they were incredibly depressing and there tended to be a lot of people that like to whine.

I'm not in need of AA services.  I'm not an alcoholic.  I know first-hand what one looks like and the last 20 years I've scrutinized myself when I take a drink to make sure I don't see any tendencies...and I just don't have them.  Oh, I've detected them in other people, but not myself no matter how hard I look.  Maybe you could argue that I had a problem with alcohol the night of my accident- that if I hadn't had any wine at all, I wouldn't have had an accident.  I can argue that's not necessarily true and the real reason for my accident is my stupid decision to look for my cell phone while I was driving.  The hundreds of other scrapes on the same Jersey barrier seem to indicate that there are countless others out there who have scraped that same wall (it juts out and it's on a sharp turn in the highway) and it's highly doubtful that alcohol was behind each accident that occurred there.  My husband and I saw a news clip a month ago about that same stretch of road and how dark and dangerous it is for motorists. I was driving that same road a few months after my accident, reached down for something, and almost had the same thing happen again and there was no alcohol involved.  And my BAC the night of the accident is not a useful factor in this argument, since it was greatly skewed due to a medical condition. 

The point is, if I'm not an alcoholic, how am I going to stomach all these AA meetings?  I could skip this requirement and go to 30 weeks of classes with ADAPT, but after my first class, I think I'd rather go to AA than spend an additional 10 weeks in that hell (and pay another $200 to boot).  So, it's the lesser of the two evils in this case. 

When I had been going to the AA meetings with my relative, I'd already heard all the down-and-out stories before- hell, I've lived them throughout my own childhood.  I know first-hand what alcoholism does to someone, their life and those around them. It's been a long time since I'd gone to a meeting, so maybe because the pain of my situation was still raw back then, my impression of the meetings had been affected by that. 

No matter what, though, I really wasn't looking forward to sitting around and talking and talking and talking about alcohol.  Ever since November, I think about alcohol every day, several times a day.  It's ironic, isn't it?  I didn't really think or care that much about it before- I could have a beer or not, I could pick up wine for dinner or not, but now it's on my mind all the freaking time.  The trial, the programs I'm in now, they all make you think about it constantly.  It's a weird thing for me.  It hasn't made me think that alcohol is evil or bad in any way- it's still people that give it a label.  To me it's still just a liquid in a bottle and some people just can't handle it. 

I haven't had a single alcoholic beverage since almost five months and it's not because VASAP or ADAPT asked me not to or that I'm afraid I have a problem, it's because it still makes my stomach turn to think about it after what I've been through.  I had plenty of opportunity in the months between the accident and the trial, too, when I wasn't under any program's supervision, but I just didn't care for it.  Lately, I've been thinking about whether or not I'll ever drink again and I think I eventually will, but I just don't care that much about it either way.  Now, though, between ADAPT and the AA meetings, I have to sit for a total of 2.5 hours per week listening to people (or videos) talk about alcohol over and over and over again.  It seems overkill to me.  I'm well aware this is not the case for everyone and I'm just talking about myself.

I spent a lot of time choosing which meeting to go to.  The AA website reveals there are a lot of them in the area.  However, I've learned not to trust websites entirely because information can easily be out-of-date.  The AA meeting schedule I got from my first VASAP contact was over a year old.  The majority of meetings are held in churches, so I started going through the internet looking for the church website to see if they listed an active meeting.  I wanted to make sure (1) I went to a safe location and (2) I went to a larger meeting.  When I went with my college friend, there were only six others in the meeting and they actually made us all speak.  That was unusual since AA is supposed to be all voluntary- no one should make you say anything at all.  But I was trying to avoid the small meetings just in case there was a repeat of this.  I did not want to disclose why I was there and I did not want to bring up painful memories from my past.  I worked on a cover story, that I was there to get more information for a friend of mine- which is technially true since I have a friend that I am worried about- but ideally, I would go to a bigger meeting and this would not be an issue.

I settled on one in a nearby church, in a good area, but thankfully at the last minute I double-checked their website.  The AA site had the meeting listed as open, which means that anyone can go- friends, relatives, anyone curious about the program.  The church's website showed that this was a closed meeting, which means only those that have a problem with alcohol are welcome at the meeting.  I did not want to be rude and go against the wishes of the other AA members, so I had to quickly find another meeting.  I found one that was held at a hospital.  My husband volunteered to go with me.  He'd never been to AA before and was curious.  He'd had a few family members that were alcoholics (and never sought help), so he had some interest of his own.

I honestly couldn't have picked a better meeting.  Not only was it a large crowd, but everyone was exceptionally friendly.  It's a shame that they only meet on Wednesdays because in another month, I have another obligation starting up that same night.

The meeting format, itself, was not unfamiliar.  There was the traditional Serenity Prayer and opening readings.  The host opened it up for a topic of discussion and the perfect topic was presented: How do you fight the 'blahs'?  My husband and I looked at each other- we'd been going through our own 'blahs' for about six months.  We have had a string of very bad luck in the past two years and we were succumbing to the 'blahs'.  Both of us were somewhat down between work, our home life, our recent marriage, and our social life.  We'd been wallowing in self-pity, disappointment, and general sadness for a while and it was ironic that this was to be the topic for the night. 

And what we heard did help us!  I was so happy about that- my husband even said maybe he should come more often since this was the cheapest therapy we could get.  The others talked about coming out of self-wallowing by doing something nice for someone else, getting up and moving, not holding everything in and talking with someone as means for getting out of the 'blahs'.  And my husband and I talked the entire ride home about how we could do things differently.  I really want to believe this was Divine Intervention; we really needed this.

So, my outlook- in a single evening- was changed.  I'm not going to say I believe every meeting will be as useful, but at least last night's was and maybe at least some of the future meetings will be, too.  Even if you're not an alcoholic, the issues they deal with are the same damned issues we all deal with and the only difference is how you deal with them.  In the case of an alcoholic, they want to turn to the bottle to avoid issues, so their added challenge is to find another means of working things out.  But we all have our own method of avoiding things- whether it's delaying facing the inevitable, pretending things don't exist, keeping ourselves so busy so there's no time to deal with issues, or just internalizing things.  We don't all turn to an intoxicating substance, but we're all dealing with same crap.

So, maybe, just maybe, I'll get something more out of this than just a means of getting through probation.  Here's to hoping!

The only bad thing, though, is that just before the host opened up the meeting for discussion, he said 'If you have something for me to sign, please send it up now'.  I looked at my husband and whispered, 'CRAP!  I'll bet I was supposed to bring something!'  So, now, tonight at my ADAPT meeting, I'm going to have to corner Ann, the counselor, and get her to tell me just what I have to do to prove I went to a meeting.  The only thing I have to show is that I picked up a new schedule.  Hopefully, she'll give me credit for this one- after all, if there was something I had to take with me to get signed, she failed to acknowledge this when I asked her about it in her office and in class last week.  CRAP!

ADAPT, is this a joke?

I was assigned to ADAPT (Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Team) through VASAP.  This is a more intensive program designed to provide additional education for an offender and prevent alcohol and drug relapses.  I landed in this program thanks to my BAC certificate.  As you may have seen in my other posts, my certificate was thrown out in court because of a medical condition that greatly exacerbates breathalyzer results.  This doesn’t matter to VASAP.  Ironically, one of VASAP’s initiatives is to acquire state-of-the-art equipment for their district and train law enforcement on its use.  This would mean that VASAP representatives would be well-versed in what can skew a breathalyzer test and my medical condition, among many others, is commonly known as a problem for these units.  VASAP doesn’t care if you were able to prove in court that you have one of these medical conditions, which makes no sense to me. 

At my VASAP intake appointment, they scheduled me for what they were calling ‘my first class’ for ADAPT a week later.  However, when I arrived at the ‘class’ I learned that I was actually there for yet another intake appointment and this did not count as one of the 20 classes I would have to take.  I find this ridiculous.  I went to two VASAP appointments to get registered and now I’m in another appointment to register for ADAPT before I can take a single class.  It had been almost 2 months since my conviction- why is this such a prolonged process?

At the initial appointment, the Director of the ADAPT program had me fill out more paperwork.  It was the same information I’d already filled out with VASAP-three times by then- and they were all working from the same file, so I’m not sure why there was so much redundancy.  I talked with the woman about my situation and she suggested I call my case manager to see if I could get out of ADAPT.  But she warned me that my case manager was ‘old school’ and probably wouldn’t do anything to change my situation.  This reminded me of my trial where I was stuck with a surly judge and dependent upon someone’s mood to determine my outcome.

My case manager told me that I would have to remove my certificate from the court’s documentation for her to consider changing her decision, but she had never seen anyone do this before.  To do this, my lawyer told me that I would have to go back to court and plead my case…again.  Since the costs of going back to court are greater than the amount for the program, I figured it wasn’t worth my time even if it would prove that I’m correct.  So, I’m going to stick it out with ADAPT.  I do feel kind of bad about that because maybe if I’d won this point, I could have helped others facing the same problems.  But I’m not rich, so I have to let it go.  Money plays a BIG hand in what happens to you after a DUI arrest, I should note.  And that’s just a sad fact. 

So, I’m going to ADAPT.  According to the documentation I’ve received both from ADAPT and VASAP and what representatives  have told me, this program, like VASAP, is supposed to be there to help people with problems or potential problems with drugs and alcohol.  However, through my own experiences, I’m learning that both programs are really designed to waste your time, take your money, babysit you during your probation, and remind you over and over again that you were convicted…..as if I need to be reminded.  Maybe I’m a minority, but I already remind myself of this about every five minutes.  I feel ashamed, humiliated, sad, angry, and generally down about the whole thing.  It’s been hard to keep my chin up.  I have to constantly tell myself that I’m not a bad person.  But the point is, when the handcuffs were put on, that was all I needed to convince me that I will never take even a single drink and drive again.  Of course, in my situation, even if I had not had a single drink, I would have still had a false reading on the breathalyzer that might have landed me in jail, anyway. 

Last week, I went to my first ADAPT class.  It was an absolute joke.  My counselor, let’s call her Ann, has problems with focus and hearing (she says ‘Huh?’ a lot).  She’s a very nice, kind woman with good intentions.  I was in her office for about five minutes before I realized this was not going to be what I thought.  When I’d heard about VASAP from the reps at that office, I was told that it was classroom instruction for alcohol education and safety.  I thought, ‘Well, if I have to go through this, maybe I’ll learn something new’, trying to stay positive.  When I was assigned to ADAPT, I did freak out at first because I was upset that I was being lumped in with people that probably did have an alcohol problem.  I do not. But, again I hoped to learn something new and get something out of this.  My very first impression of my counselor and the class has taken this hope away from me. 

I was in Ann’s office and she asked me to provide a receipt to prove I’d paid my initial $75 to the program director the week before.  I showed it to her.  Why this was necessary, I don’t know.  The director had a copy of the receipt in my file.  Then Ann asked me to write down my phone number and an emergency contact on a piece of paper.  This was the fourth time I had to write this out and all of this was in the file that she held in her hand.  Why did I need to furnish this yet again?  She asked if I had any questions and I said I did.  I wanted to know about the AA commitment.  She told me that I had to go to one meeting per week.  I asked what we needed to provide proof of attendance and she started to say something about getting a paper from AA, but she interrupted herself and asked ‘Do you hear a phone ringing?’  I was a little dumbfounded and told her ‘No, I don’t’.  She started laughing and said she hears that a lot, but it’s usually nothing.  I tried to get her back to answering my questions, but she talked over me and sent me out to sit in the classroom.  I figured that maybe if I was patient, she’d address this during the class.

I took a seat at the end of a row.  There was a man in front and to my left and a man at the other end of the row to my right.  They were very jovial fellows and talking about their situations.  Apparently, they have a lot of friends that were also convicted of DUIs, but in another district and none of them were sent to VASAP, let alone ADAPT and this was a mix of first-time and repeat offenders.  I started getting annoyed with this.  I had my suspicions already that I had been given a raw deal based on my experiences at the trial, and here was potential confirmation.  If I’d had a different judge or was convicted in another district, there was a good chance that I would never be in VASAP or ADAPT.  Now, this goes against what I learned from the VASAP website that implies all DUI offenders are sent to VASAP.  Well, as I mentioned in another posting, the courts and related programs seem to use or not use so-called ‘standards’ as it suits them. 

As I was sitting there, listening to their amusing banter, several others came in and one-by-one they went into Ann’s office to make their weekly payments.  There were five others and I was the only female.  I checked my cell phone and saw it was already 7pm.  A few minutes later, Ann came out and began speaking to us about the program.  She affirmed to us newcomers that each class was $20 and payment was due each week.  She also said that there would be two additional counseling sessions at $35 each and at least four urine tests (also $35), though she never said how these would be arranged.  She told us that the $75 we already paid covered the first two classes.  One of the men in the class asked if the remaining $35 went towards a session or urine test, but Ann said ‘No, that was the ADAPT intake fee’.  Immediately, the other newbies started swearing and saying things like ‘rip-off’ and ‘scam’ and ‘What did I pay VASAP $375 for?’  Instead of taking control and explaining this further, Ann used this moment to explain how little money she made from the program.  She laughed and said she made $7k last year and I really think she expected us to sympathize.  She was wrong.  The others started throwing questions at her about this.  One man said ‘You made $7k last year for two hours a week?  Well, that’s a good side business!’  I agreed.  I had been thinking about looking for a second job and this started to look like pretty easy money to me.  Ann said that she made little, but the counselors did pretty well.  Wait, she had told us she was a licensed counselor…so who was she talking about?

The class eventually settled down and Ann began talking about the AA option.  You could do 20 weeks and 20 AA meetings or 30 weeks and no AA meetings.  The others were muttering things like ‘waste of time’ and ‘boring’.  I already guessed which option I would take.  I had no intentions of spending any additional money or time on this program, so AA was looking pretty good.  There was an angry, young man in the second row that asked ‘What is AA and how much does that class cost?’  Ann explained to him that it was free, but you can make a donation, and that it wasn’t a class.  I was surprised because this fellow was there on his second DUI conviction, but he didn’t know what AA was?  Not only did I suspect he had been living under a rock his whole life, but this reaffirmed my suspicion about the so-called ‘standards’ regarding being assigned to VASAP.  Even if this fellow hadn’t been to ADAPT, VASAP still requires a minimum of 10 AA meetings.  So, it looked like he was one of the ‘lucky’ ones that had not been assigned to VASAP after his first conviction.

My paperwork from VASAP had listed a third alternative- 25 weeks and no AA requirement.  So, I asked Ann about this.  She started to explain, but another man walked in.  He sat down and Ann started joking with him; apparently he’d been through this program at least once before because she was familiar with him.  This went on for about ten minutes before she refocused on the class.  She said ‘What was I talking about?’ a few times and then gave up and told us that we would now watch a video.  So much for getting my question answered….I figured I’d wait until after class to talk with her when maybe I could get her to focus again.

Ann handed the remote to the man that had just walked in.  She turned the TV on and fumbled with the sound.  As she did so, another latecomer walked in.  He went straight to her office.  Once Ann was content with the settings, she went into her office and closed the door behind her. 

What happened next solidified my fear that I was, indeed, in hell.  The video started and what came on?  The Dr. Phil Show.  OH MY GOD.  It was bad enough I was going to have to spend 20 hours of my life in this program and an additional $600-700, but I have to be subjected to Dr. Phil on top of that??  And as the program began, everyone except me and the fellow in the row in front of me turned to their cell phones and started texting and making phone calls.  Every so many minutes, one or another would get up and go to the restroom and half of them started breaking into bags of food (even though there is a sign that reads ‘no food or drink in class’).  Eventually, the man in Ann’s office joined us and he, too, began playing with his phone.  He and the fellow with the remote began a loud, sustained conversation that lasted the entire program.  And when the commercials came, the fellow with the remote sped through them as well as part of the program.  The man in front of me protested and the man with the remote began to chastise him saying ‘You WANT to watch all of this?  You WANT to be in here longer than you have to?’  He had a point, but I couldn’t help thinking that Ann might realize what was going on if we managed to watch a 40 minute program in 25 minutes. 

At about midway through the program, the man with the remote announced to everyone that he had a method to cheat on the AA portion of the requirements.  He said Ann was to give us a form and we would make copies of it.  Each time we went to a meeting, we had to write down what the topic was and what we learned and hand that in afterwards to Ann.  He said you could just make it up, no one would check it.  I started to tell him that Ann told me something different, but he just kept going on about his foolproof method of cheating.  He also informed the class that he would sell us his urine for $35 a pop.  The angry, young man asked ‘Does the powdered urine work here, too?’ Though I find this highly entertaining, I couldn’t help from realizing that this was absolutely absurd.  And where was Ann during all of this?  Everyone was incredibly loud and Ann’s office was right there beside us, but she didn’t hear this? 

Towards the end of the program, the man with the remote told us that we needed to get something out of this.  Ann would come out and ask us questions about it, so we had to be prepared.  This was preposterous.  After all, he was making the most noise and it was hard to hear anything and he was speeding through most of the program.  I started to say something about that, but I decided that I would refrain from comment at least until my second class.  A few minutes later, the second latecomer went outside the room to take a phone call. 

At this point, the man in front of me went into Ann’s office.  I had heard him whisper that he had switched from Wednesdays to Thursdays, but now was considering switching back because he didn’t want to deal with all the negativity.  I could only guess that he was telling her about the chaos in the classroom, but I wasn’t sure.   He came back a few minutes later and then Ann came out of her office.  She looked around the room and noticed the missing man and asked where he was.  Someone told her he was outside, so she started to head out the door. She saw that the fellow with the remote had his phone in his hand and announced ‘You can’t use cell phones when you’re in here’.  The others put their phones down, but as soon as Ann left the room, they picked them back up. 

A few minutes later, the video (thankfully) ended and we sat around waiting for Ann to return.  When she did, one of the men asked where the other guy had gone.  ‘His ride is here’, she said, and this prompted some swearing from the others because he had shown up 30+ minutes late and left early.  The man with the remote stood up and said that he was supposed to get a ride from the man that left and Ann told him to go ahead.  This prompted more swearing because we all knew he was lying- I’m sure even Ann knew this.  As soon as he was gone, she half-apologized for the behavior of the two guys that left.  She said they were always a little disruptive, but tonight was particularly bad and she didn’t know what was going on.  Maybe a little supervision would have been in order, Ann, rather than sitting in your office with a closed door if you know they have these tendencies. 

Ann told us that sometimes she asked questions about the programs, but I gathered tonight was not one of them because she began to explain her methodology.  She said that most of the time we’ll watch videos, but every once in a while she will lecture.  This was just great- she confirmed that every Thursday I’ll be subjected to this absurdity.  She said that some counselors make everyone turn their chairs into a circle and talk, but she found over the years that this was offensive to people, so she used videos instead.  That seemed pretty lame to me.  We’re each paying quite a bit of money and this is what we get? 

Ann interrupted her train of thought and focused on the angry, young man in the front row.  She wanted to know what was wrong because his expressions were betraying his hostility.  He explained he was pissed off for having to be there.  He went on to say that if it wasn’t for a deer, he wouldn’t be there.  He’d been out drinking one night and on the way home, five deer jumped out from the side of the road.  He hit one of them and his truck rolled three times.  He’d walked two miles to find a police officer and was found to be above the legal limit.  He blamed the whole thing on the poor deer.   Now, Ann had an opportunity to change the subject and limit his tirade, but instead she kept it going.  She wasted another 15 minutes of our time talking about this with him.  Frankly, I didn’t care.  From his own admission, the man had definitely been drunk, and to me, that’s that.  On top of this, it wasn’t his first offense.  I had no sympathy for him and I didn’t want to hear his excuses- especially on my time.  Ann was trying to tell him that it was the drinking that caused the problem, but he didn’t want to hear it.  In his mind, if there was no deer, he wouldn’t have had a problem.  In my mind, the deer could have been a person.  Would he have given a shit if it had been?  Or would he still be sitting there saying ‘If it weren’t for that person, I wouldn’t be here’?  Ann took the moment to tell us that by the end of the program, she generally asks everyone to come up with one problem that they have with drugs and/or alcohol.  The angry, young man again started on his tirade trying to say he didn’t have a problem with either.  Ann used more time to try to help him see he did, but it was going nowhere.  Eventually, she started telling us about the time she hit a deer (this had nothing to do with alcohol) and how dangerous dark roads are.  I started shaking my head.  It was time to go.  This was ridiculous. 

Finally, she stopped and said that we would be having a double class the following week because she would be out of town the week after that.  We were expected to be there by 5:45pm and would stay until the normal time (8pm).  We would watch a movie.  She said it was a ‘Hollywood movie’ as if that would make us feel better about an extra hour in class.  It was all I could do to keep from rolling my eyes.  Great- 2 hours in these uncomfortable chairs with these annoying people.  And it seemed a bit unfair.  If we missed a class, it meant tacking another week onto our program, but if she missed a class, it meant 2 hours of class instead of one.    On top of this, she told us that the Dr. Phil Show we’d watched that night was a three-part program.  We had just watched the second part and when she got back in town, we’d see the third.  In other words, the torture would be continued.

She dismissed us and I jumped into her office to ask her a question.  There were a few others waiting and I didn’t have much time, so I asked her what would happen if we couldn’t make an AA meeting one week- could we double up the week before or after?  She said she simply expected us to make 19 meetings (what happened to 20?) and just asked that we not do them all in a row.  But we never did find out how to prove we went, so I have to wait until the next class to ask about that. In the meantime, she had told us that we were expected to go to a meeting between this class and the next.  Well, whatever, I’m going- I’ll figure it out later.

My experience thus far comes to one simple conclusion:  This is a joke.  Who came up with this crap and who thinks this serves some kind of useful purpose?  I realize that a conviction means punishment, but couldn’t they make the punishment a little more useful not only to us, but to society?  VASAP’s primary function is to promote highway safety.  How is ADAPT helping them to achieve this based on what I’ve seen so far?  And how does this type of class serve their other purpose to help people that really have a problem?  Will watching Dr Phil really help people come to terms with their alcohol and drug problems?  Will watching a ‘Hollywood movie’ help?  Maybe one person in a million will see the light of day from these programs, but not the average person in my class, especially if every week we’re left alone in a room with no counselor making sure we’re paying attention.  I saw the VASAP class on my way into the room that night.  They were sitting at desks with paper and pen and it looked like they were having a real class.  That’s what this should be like- give us something to do, something where we can use our minds, and come to terms with what we went through and try to discourage us from doing it again.  I’m the only one in my class that’s there for a first offense.  Isn’t that a pretty big clue that maybe the system is a little screwed up and not achieving its goals? 

VASAP

VASAP is the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program.  The program's main goal is to improve highway safety.  They do this through objectives that include public awareness, acquiring of and training in state-of-the-art equipment for drug/alcohol detection, helping with the proceedures involved for DUI offenders on probation, and providing case management to ensure that each offender's probation requirements are fulfilled.  This is a non-profit group prides itself on being totally funded by DUI offenders sent to the program and not tax payers dollars.  However, that's not entirely true.  They do also receive federal highway safety grants and other government-based grants to subsidize their activities.  But, let's take it at face value that the majority of their funding comes from people like me that are convicted of a DUI and sent to the program. 

So far, my experience with VASAP has not been entirely unpleasant (the employees seem very nice), but it has raised some serious questions and doubts in me about the system and its effectiveness in acheiving its goal.  I'm confused about the so-called 'standards' that VASAP is supposed to provide and enforce, as well.  One of the things I'm learning through my experience is that 'standard' is a loose term and I find it frustrating that they, like the court system, uses standards when they want to or when it suits them and abandons them just as often for the same reasons.  I understand there are high degrees of variation in any court suit or situation, but this just seems kind of cock-eyed and highly subjective.

For example, I've heard from many first-time DUI offenders are not sent to VASAP.  This violates what's on their website that reads DUI offenders are sent to VASAP as part of their probation requirements.  It seems that this is more likely based on which district in which your offense was committed, which judge you got for your trial and what mood he/she was in that day.   On a side note, this seems to be a factor used in determining your fines, as well.  I'm a first time DUI offender with no criminal record, a good citizen, and a professional with a degree beyond college; probably not your average person that might appear in that courtroom.  But, I happened to get a very angry judge who was in a particularly bad mood the day of my trial.  Even the prosecutor and arresting officer told my lawyer that this particular judge used to be more open-minded, kind, and fair, but over the years he'd become more and more bitter.  We tried to ask to postpone the trial since it was going to be lengthy and his docket was overwhelmed that day, but the judge denied it.  He told us to take the time we needed.  However, as the trial continued, we found ourselves speeding things up because the judge would constantly interrupt us (my lawyer, my expert witness, myself, the prosecution, and the arresting officer) and started reading other paperwork.  He wouldn't look at me or anyone else when we were speaking, and kept rolling his eyes to the ceiling as if he were bored.  He would make comments about speeding things up and then he would tell my lawyer to slow down because this was important, but then interrupt again and tell him to hurry up.  He was very rude to everyone involved.  It was awful and we were all flabbergasted.  My question in the end was, did I get a fair trial?  Obviously this man was bitter about his job and maybe he had just had a fight with his wife the night before and it all seemed to be trickling into my trial.  I paid a lot of money to try to straighten this out and in the end, did I get robbed?  Had I committed this offense in the next district over, would my lawyer have had the time he needed to prove my case?  And if I'd still be conviced, would I have been sent to VASAP?  Who knows, but there seems to be a distinct possibility that these outcomes might have been different.

After the trial, I reported to the VASAP office in the courtroom.  I filled out some paperwork and I was told I had to report to my local VASAP for an intake appointment within 7 days.  According to the VASAP website, you're supposed to be given 15 days.  I guess this is another 'standard' that can be changed depending on where your trial is held.  The VASAP representative told me that I had to wait about 3 days for my paperwork to get to the other office, so that meant I really had about 4 days to schedule my intake appointment.  And keep in mind we're not talking business days- they were counting the weekends, too, when VASAP isn't even open.  Wow.  It's a good thing I was able to take off time from work in such short notice (keep in mind that VASAP is only open normal business hours and the first appointment would take at least an hour).  I had to surrender my license and I was given the green sheet of paper that allows me to drive until I can get a restricted license or actual plastic license.  This green sheet of paper contains all the information about when I'm allowed to drive and where.  The woman told me that she put 'AA meetings' on the paper because VASAP may require me to attend 3-4 AA meetings as part of the program.  This information was not true as I would come to find out.  In fact, I would be required to attend somewhere between 10 and 20 AA meetings depending on what level of treatment to which I'd be assigned. The representative told me the VASAP program fees were $375.  Ouch.  I asked about payment arrangements and she said they would allow for that. 

When we were done, the rep told me that I would have to wait for my green sheet to be signed by the judge, but it would probably only be another half hour and then I would be free to leave.  Wrong.  This tells you what a jerk my judge was:  he held everyone there that needed something signed by him until after all the other trials were completed.  We wound up sitting in the courtroom for an additional 3 hours as a result.  From the grumbling I was hearing and based on what the rep told me, this was not normal. 

I called the local VASAP office a few days later as instructed.  They told me that I had to come in to schedule my intake apppointment- it cannot be done over the phone.  So, let me get this straight...I have to make an appointment to come in to make an appointment for my intake appointment?  Yeah, this sounds like government to me. 

I went in a few days later and met with one of the local VASAP represenatives.  She had me fill out more paperwork and reviewed my green sheet.  She asked me 'are you a member of AA?' when she came to the part where the original rep had given me permission on the sheet to attend AA.  I quickly explained she had done that in case VASAP ordered me to attend meetings and she seemed to shrug.  I kind of wondered about that.  I was told that if permission to attend something is not on the green sheet, you can't drive there.  So, did this mean, by this rep's reaction, that the AA meetings were not part of the program?  I would later learn that no, it did not, but her reaction was still odd. 

One of the things I had to write down was my BAC the night of the arrest.  Well, as you may know from my other posts, my BAC had been incorrect due to a medical issue.  In fact, my certificate was dismissed during the trial because of this issue.  So, I talked with the rep about this and told her about my acid reflux and how it distored my BAC and her exact words were 'that'll do it!', agreeing with me that it was incorrect.  She did make a note of it and told me to talk with my case manager once I was assigned to one.  We discussed payment options.  I plunked down $150 and made arrangements to pay in $75 increments over the next several months.  She scheduled my intake appointment for two weeks later.  I was a little put-off by this.  First of all, I was confused by the paperwork that said I had to have an intake appointment within 7 days of my trial.  The rep told me they had meant I had to come in for my initial appointment within 7 days and I had fulfilled that. Well, why on earth doesn't it say just that on the paperwork?  Why make it more confusing than necessary?  Seond, this meant that the start of my classes/treatment was delayed yet another 2 weeks, extending my time with VASAP.  I just wanted to get started, get through this, and get it over with, but it seemed I was out of luck.

So, two weeks later I went back to that office for my intake appointment.  There were about 5 others in the room with me.  A woman came in and said she was our case manager.  She went through the different levels of treatment and the costs associated with each.  If you got the lowest level of treatment, you would attend 10 VASAP alcohol safety and education classes, had to attend 10 AA meetings, and there was no additional cost outside of the $375 VASAP fee.  The second level was more intensive education and you'd be assigned to the ADAPT program (Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Team...the acronym doesn't make sense, I know) for 20 classes and 20 AA meetings and there was additional costs involved.  Beyond that, you could be assigned to facilities for intensive treatment and rehab with additional costs, as well.  We watched a video after that (I'm beginning to learn that all these programs rely heavily on videos), which talked about the offender's experience in Virginia and what to expect.  Throughout this, I tried to keep an open mind.  I knew I had to go through all this, but I was trying to find something positive.  I assumed I'd be sent to the safety and education classes and I kept trying to say to myself 'well, maybe I'll learn something new'.  However, now I'm highly doubtful about this.

We were told that we had to wait around and in the order that we checked in, we would be seen by our case manager for an interview.  She had us fill out yet more paperwork.  This time the paperwork included questions about our history of usage of drugs and alcohol.  Included in this was a page with a table with about 25 yes/no questions.  I answered everything 100% honestly...or so I thought.  Some of the questions were a little confusing, so I hesitated on a few questions, but did the best I could.   I left the question blank where it asked what your BAC was at the time of arrest.  I made a note in the comments section about my BAC certificate and waited to be called. 

I thought this was going to be a real interview.  It was not.  Instead, she simply read through my paperwork.  I almost started laughing when I saw my case manager get to the yes/no table and she laid a copy of it over my answers.  Her copy had the flagged answers cut out from the paper.  Sooooo scientific.   Wow.  But it did worry me because standardized tests didn't really seem appropriate here.  There is a major human factor in this situation that was being ignored.  And those questions, as I said, could be misleading, so I wasn't sure I answered them all correctly.  It wasn't until she was done reading and finished writing up my assignment and had me sign her paperwork that she asked if I had any quesitons. I felt rushed.  So, all I could get out was my concern about the BAC certificate.  She had seen I had left the BAC question blank, but filled it in based on what I'd had written down at my first appointment.  I explained the situation to her.  I was really worried because we'd been told that over the course of treatment/classes we'd be expected to take breathalyzer tests.  If my BAC was even a 0.0001%, we could be sent back to court.  I told her that I can't control that with my medical issue.  I had no intentions of drinking during the program, but that it may come up positive if I happen to have an attack the day of testing.  She made a note of it and told me to talk with the counselor when I reported for treatment/classes.  She told me what time/date to report for my first class and where to go. And that was it.  She had several more people to see and ushered me out of her office.

Silly me, I just assumed that if there were any red flags that might send me to anything but the lowest level of treatment/classes, she would have explained that to me.  I went away on business for a week and didn't read through everything until I got back.  What I read just freaked me out.  I had unknowingly been assigned to the second level of treatment/classes- to ADAPT.  These classes addressed alcohol and drug addiction and were designed to prevent relapses.  Huh??  I'm by no means an alcoholic and I found it personally offensive that this is where my case manager was sending me.  I was so angry and hurt.  I grew up with an alcoholic mother and I knew damned well what all this meant and I did not belong there.  I started wondering why she did this- was it my BAC certificate?  The case manager hadn't said anything about if that comes into play in their decision-making or not.  Was it something in the questions?  After all, as I'd said, some of them may have been misleading.  For example, one of the questions is 'Have you ever attended an AA or NA meeting?'  I had been to several with my mother and one with a college friend when he was convicted of being drunk in public.  I answered 'yes' because at face value, that's the honest answer, but I had put a note beside the question remarking why I had attended.  But was this ignored by her little cut-out sheet?  And another question had been 'Have you ever experience any of the following after drinking or doing drugs?'  The choices were sickness, the shakes, paranoia, black-outs, etc.  I'd been to college and had my fair share of hang-overs, so I circled 'sickness'.  Had I mistaken the meaning of that answer? 

Besides the personal aspect, this assignment meant 20 classes at $20 a pop plus additional drug testing and counseling ($35 each) and 20 AA meetings.  I went from believing I only had 2 months of classes to 5+ months.  And I had to sit on this for two days because it was a weekend and there was no one to call until Monday.  And that Sunday I was to meet with the ADAPT director for my initial session. 

That Sunday I met with the director of the ADAPT program, a very kind woman, and talked with her about the situation.  I asked her point-blank, why was I in her office?  She read through my file and read me my case manager's comments.  She said it looked like the decision was soley based on my BAC certificate.  I was relieved- the personal affront was removed, but it did not solve the problem.  She told me to call my case manager the next day and see what I could do.  She also told me that my case manager is 'old school' and not very open-minded.  Had I been assigned to the other case manager at that office, I probably wouldn't have been sent to ADAPT.  So, again, I'm left to subjective decision-making and hoped that the case manager wouldn't be in a bad mood the next day. 

I was scheduled to attend Thursday classes with a counselor, which start at 6:30pm and ends at 8pm.  I paid $75 to the director.  This included the first two classes and a $35 intake fee.  The director explained I would have two additional counseling sessions ($35 each) and at least four urine screenings (also $35 each).  The average total cost- in ADDITION to the VASAP fee of $375- is $645.  Wow.  I already had my doubts, but this was really starting to look like a scam and a ridiculous burden on my schedule.

Monday I called the case manager and asked her how she made the decision to put me in this level of treatment/classes.  She read through my file and said it was soley based on my BAC certificate.  I breathed a sigh of relief.  I actually felt better that nothing I'd written had implied I needed real treatment.  But there was still the issue of the certificate.  I asked about that; after all, if the judge threw it out, how is it that VASAP was still able to use it?  She explained that all the paperwork from the court and arrest are sent to VASAP and used to determine treatment.  They only get a certificate or they don't (because of a refusal) and there was nothing in between.  She said the court would have to have removed the certificate from my paperwork and it had only been removed from my sentencing.  But, my point is: if it's proven to be invalid, then it's invalid.  That's just not right.  I started thinking about all I'd read online about other factors that come into play that can distort the breathalyzer results.  VASAP must know about these issues since one of their objectives is to obtain state-of-the-art equipment for detection and to train law enforcement.  They're supposed to be experts in the equipment.  Apparently, though, it doesn't matter.  My case manager said I should call my lawyer.  Later, he told me that he'd only been successful in changing this one time- apparently these decisions are entirely at the discretion of the VASAP case manager and my lawyer was unsuccessful in getting my case manager to change her mind.  I thought back to what the counselor told me about my case manager and realized that I was again, like at my trial and arrest, dealing with a gray issue in a black and white environment. 

Throughout this time period, I was growing more angry about the amount of time I was spending just trying to get registered for all of this.  It's now almost two months after my trial and I still hadn't started my classes.  This delay means that I'll be in classes at least until August/September and that's assuming I do not have to miss any classes.  I also learned at my ADAPT initiation that the AA meetings are supposed to be one per week- consecutive weeks- which mean I would be spending 1.5 hours at ADAPT classes plus an hour or so at AA EVERY FREAKING WEEK.  That's a lot in my book.  I would also have to attend a MADD meeting (free, thankfully) after I completed my ADAPT classes.  And they lock you in that meeting.  Yes, they actually lock the doors.  That runs about 1.5-2 hours.  On top of this, there is the additional individual counseling sessions that are at least an hour and the urine screening which can take another hour.  Once you've completed your AA and ADAPT requirements, there would be more random alcohol/drug screenings and meetings with my ASAP counselor.  I began wondering how on earth I was going to fit all this in, plus the extra financial burden is hard to swallow. 

I don't want to sound like I'm a crybaby because after all, I was convicted.  The circumstances of that night are highly questionable, though, and I feel that I've been unfairly convicted.  Had I not been suffering from acid reflux that night, my on-scene breathalyzer results would have been well below the legal limit and I feel confident I would not have been arrested.  The judge relied soley on the testimony of the arresting officer and his field tests were questionable.  I feel that because we were rushed, the judge was in a foul mood, and we had little time to delve further into the situation, this never really came out.  But I'm trying to just accept that 'hey, what happened, happened'.  I just feel that this is now going beyond ridiculous.  My time committment and additional financial burden have been increased because of something I cannot control and there is no appeal process for this part of the probation.  There seems to be checks and balances here.  I just can't get over the additional time and money obligations that I have because I have acid reflux.  It just seems ridiculous.

Breathalyzers...who knew they could be so misleading?

One of the things I learned- or rather, was reinforced- from this event was that the government is not necessarily always on the peoples' side. Oh, I know that the whole purpose of heavy punishment for drunk driving is to benefit the people as a whole.  Vehicles are essentially weapons and when you get behind the wheel drunk, you're playing with a loaded gun.  No matter what happened, I am grateful that we have laws that protect us from those who don't take this seriously.  But sometimes it seems the government is the parent that says 'because I said so' with no logic or interest that maybe...just maybe...they're not always right. 

My lawyer told me some frightening things about the use of breathalyzer machines.  Assuming that a device is properly maintained and properly callibrated, it can measure BAC fairly well.  However, it doesn't take into account temperature and other factors that can skew results.  Diabetics and acid reflux sufferers can show high BAC results even if they haven't had a single drink.  Using an asthma inhalers or dental adhesives can create false results.  If you burp or hiccup before your test, you can show false or skewed results.  Tobacco smoke blood, vomit, dirt, moisture, and other such things can also provide misleading results.  If you work around paint lacquers, cement, varnishes, glue, or even some types of automotive materials you can produce false results.  Even eating foods baked with alcohol or taking cough syrup, using mouthwash, mouthspray, or (in some cases) lip balm can distort results.  Temperature plays a big part, too- not just the air temperature, which the machine is supposed to be callibrated to- but your body temperature.  The only thing I was told at the station that could affect my results was the burping and hiccupping.  The officer explained to me that there would be a 20 minute observation period where I was not permitted to do any of these things.  Other than that, I had no way of knowing that any of these other issues might present a problem with my test. 

At the time of the test and since days, weeks before, I'd been suffering from severe heartburn.  It had been exacerbated by the events of the day and gotten worse just before I left the restaurant the night of my accident.  Who would know that would be a problem?  Even the officer had been surprised that my BAC was so high and had risen since the field test, but there's a good chance he didn't know there were so many variables that could have affected my results, either.  I didn't know that I could have asked for a blood test, either.  That might have cleared up some of the doubt.

In my case, it turns out I have acid reflux.  I guess I should be grateful that incident this prompted me to go see a gastroenterologist.  I've apparently been suffering with this for quite some time as evidenced by a number of ulcers found during my endoscopy. They also found the valve separating my stomach and throat is herniated.  It was an ah-ha moment for my lawyer.  The breathalyzer would have greatly skewed my results because my stomach was constantly emitting alcohol and this was not stemming from my lungs.  So, the math would have been right, but the breathalyzer was wrong...I should have been found to be under the legal limit.  And this could explain how the field results were lower than the in-station results, which were taken at least an hour apart (though there is some debate on reliability of the field units).  It made me feel much better about the judgement I'd given myself that night when I decided to drive home.  If I'd truly been that drunk, I think I'd know...hell, I'd be on the floor passed out if the breathalyzer results had been correct.

My medical issue was used to dismiss the BAC certificate from my case.  This meant that the case was judged soley by the police officer's observations of me and the field sobriety tests (and there's a whole separate load of issues I've found with those).

What worries me is how many others have been in this situation who weren't drinking or were below the legal limit and were falsely arrested or convicted based on inaccurate readings from the breathalyzer tests?  And why is it that we had to fight this so hard on this issue when so much evidence has been produced for the courts that this is a serious flaw in the machines?  The government has disallowed the selling of these units to the public.  That concerns me.  So, okay, we know there's a problem and results can be misleading, but we're not going to let anyone outside the agencies that use them test them.  Huh?  Why hide that?  Wouldn't access and unbiased testing improve the machines' accuracy?  Isn't that in the best interest of everyone? 

Besides exterior factors that can lead to false results from the machines is the issue regarding callibration.  On my certificate, there was a window where this information should have been visible, but it was blocked out.  My lawyer told me that is where the callibration test of the machine would show up.  However, because they'd had so many cases where this was an area of debate, it was decided that this would be blocked out on the certificate.  Again, huh?  So, your life is in the balance based on the results of a machine that may or may not have been working properly at the time it was used.  Even something small could throw it off- like temperature.  In my case, the machine was callibrated back in the summer.  It was winter when I was tested and the air temperature could easily have changed since then- it was very cold in the station and I'm guessing it's not the room is not the same air temperature in the summer.  My lawyer had to ask for the information about the machine, but the police were not entirely forthcoming about it.  They were given the date it was last callibrated, but now how it was callibrated to see if it was done properly.

This just begs examination.  I feel in some ways I was robbed.  If my field breathalyzer had shown under the legal limit, and I know it would have, then I doubt I would have been arrested.  My field sobriety tests were questionable- both in the results and how they were conducted- so I'm pretty sure none of this would have happened.  I had 4 glasses of wine over a period of just over 5 hours with water in between the wine.  According to the charts all over the internet and what I learned in Health Class in high school, the average person can have 1 serving of alcohol per hour and stay below the legal limits.  I've always been very careful to follow those guidelines.  The math would show that I would be somewhere between a 0.045% or 0.075% BAC that night.  My accident was due to a mistake I made at the wheel, a mistake I almost made again a few weeks later.  It's a bad spot on the road (there was even a news report on it a month ago about how dark and dangerous that area is for motorists) and if you're not paying 150% attention...well, the results were on the barrier I scraped because there was a rainbow of scrapes on the same wall from countless other mishaps at the same spot.

Now, I'm facing a whole new array of issues due to the breathalyzer results and now I'm paying twice as much to get through probation.  And these results were dismissed in court- keep that in mind- but the system just keeps going back to them and using them at will. How is that appropriate?

I'm not advocating that we get rid of these units.  I'm simply saying that if they're faulty or there are questionable issues that throw them out of whack, then these issues need to be addressed.  There needs to be some mechanism to make sure a defendent is properly protected throughout their arrest, trial, and probation if they are convicted.  For example, if that means that law enforcement can offer someone a blood or urine test or something else to supplement the breathalyzer, then so be it.  Yes, there are some issues with other tests, but relying on a sole piece of equipment seems dangerous.  The cost can be charged to the defendent.  I would have gladly forked over money for that rather than go through all of this. 

I'm also not debating all the hurt some drunk drivers cause where there are injuries or even death involved. I'm not complaining on their behalf.  I'm someone that was definitely not drunk driving that night, but I'm caught up in a legal system that can't handle the gray areas.