Alcohol Exclusion Laws make it harder for law enforcement to do its job; are Prohibition-era policies that prevent 21st century problem solving; are more likely to increase drunk driving incidents than to decrease them; and mean that fewer patients with drinking problems receive effective treatment, resulting in additional health care costs.

Alcohol Exclusion Laws make it harder for law enforcement to do its job.

• AELs obstruct the prevention of crime in which alcohol contributes to criminal behavior.

• AELs keep repeat DUI offenders behind the wheel and on the street by preventing detection.
  

Alcohol Exclusion Laws are a Prohibition-era policy that prevents 21st century problem solving.

• AELs are an arcane provision that has been unanimously renounced by the very group that drafted the model law in 1947.

• Originally a measure to protect insurers, AELs have actually contributed substantially to the $19 billion in annual alcohol-related health care costs.¹

• Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maryland, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Washington have prohibited AELs.²

AELs are more likely to increase drunk driving incidents than to decrease them.

• AELs were designed to deter “anti-social” behavior by denying insurance coverage to people with injuries sustained while under the influence.

• In reality, many physicians are reluctant, unless medically necessary, to measure blood alcohol content for fear the patient's insurer will deny payment if the result is positive.³

• Alcohol is the leading cause of injury, and injury is the leading cause of death to people under 44 years old.⁴

Alcohol Exclusion Laws make it so that fewer patients with drinking problems receive effective treatment, resulting in additional costs to the health care system.

• More than 40 studies show that brief alcohol interventions in health care settings, including ERs and trauma centers, reduce DUIs, alcohol-related arrests, and injury-related hospital readmissions.⁵

• A recent study demonstrated that every $1 spent on alcohol screening and intervention for an injured patient saves $3.81 in overall health expenditures. If a brief intervention were offered to every eligible injured person in the U.S., the resulting savings from health-care costs alone would be approximately $1.8 billion annually.⁶

• Trauma patients who received just 30 minutes of post-screening counseling have been demonstrated to have 48% fewer readmissions to the hospital and 28 fewer drinks per person per week than patients who did not receive counseling.⁷

¹Cimons, Marlene. “Challenging a Hidden Obstacle to Alcohol Treatment.” Ensuring Solutions to Alcohol Problems (March 2004).
²For up-to-date information on state Alcohol Exclusion Laws, consult the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism's Alcohol Policy Information System: www.alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov
³Runge, Jeffrey W. “Screening and Intervention for Alcohol Problems in the Emergency Department: Ideal Versus Reality.” Alcohol Problems Among Emergency Department Patients: Proceedings of a Research Conference on Identification and Intervention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2001).
⁴American Medical Association Advocacy Resource Center. “Supporting Repeal of the Uniform Accident and Sickness Policy Provision Law” (August 2004).
⁵Ibid.
⁶Gentilello, L.M., et al. “Alcohol Interventions for Trauma Patients Treated in Emergency Departments and Hospitals: A Cost Benefit Analysis.” 241(4) Annals of Surgery (2005).
⁷Gentilello, L.M., et al. “Alcohol Interventions in a Trauma Center as a Means of Reducing the Risk of Injury Recurrence.” 230(4) Annals of Surgery 473-483 (1999).