We ran an article about a man being charged with manslaughter after he was involved in a car wreck that resulted in the death of a pedestrian. It's unclear whether he is Type 1 or Type 2, but because the issue surrounding this story is about low blood sugar, I thought it would be a relevant topic to chat about here. He claims he was in diabetic shock, the police say he was negligent. Check it out here:Manslaughter Charge for Man 'Driving While Diabetic'
After reading the article, yes he should be charged. The witness in the accident (his 18 yr old passenger) stated that they told him to pull over, so he was obviously showing signs of hypoglycemia. He had an opportunity to raise his BG but instead bought booze and ice.
Punishment fits the crime, although the manslaughter charge will probably lead to a settlement being paid to her family and no jail time for him.
No one should get behind the wheel if their brain is compromised in anyway. In my opinion driving while low is just as bad as driving tired, drunk, or drugged.
The article was a little crude though, just because his blood sugar was low doesn't mean the poor man was "grossly negligent" in general. I go low a little less than once a day and I am not negligent in my care at all.
As a diabetic behind the wheel we all need to take responsibility in recognizing signs of hypoglycemia or if you've developed unawareness its your job to test your blood sugar before you start the engine. I feel bad for the guy and the family, but this situation was completely preventable and the fault lays on the driver.
After reading the article, yes he should be charged. The witness in the accident (his 18 yr old passenger) stated that they told him to pull over, so he was obviously showing signs of hypoglycemia. He had an opportunity to raise his BG but instead bought booze and ice.
Punishment fits the crime, although the manslaughter charge will probably lead to a settlement being paid to her family and no jail time for him.
I believe that we are trained...or should be trained to check our blood sugar before driving.....I believe he should be charged. The passenger asked him to pull over...He deserves the consequences.
I believe that we are trained...or should be trained to check our blood sugar before driving.....I believe he should be charged. The passenger asked him to pull over...He deserves the consequences.
I've read the article and saw the news report and my view isn't going to win me any friends on this topic but it has to be said when I finished the article it broke my heart.
Why I think this man should be charged with a crime, because as Angela stated we should be testing before we get behind the wheel to drive, so this man should have tested before driving and that would have told him to get something before driving or he should have tested before leaving the store that he stopped at.I know myself that if I make stops that I have time to test at, I do--it's time conusming and costly but I've always so afraid that something like this will happen to me and I would never be able to handle that.
So for the reason that I think that he shouldn't be charged with a crime is because not all of us are able to notice the warning signs or we no longer have the warning signs. I say this because for myself I have had a similar situation happen to me where I didn't notice the signs and was combative and had to be forced to take care of myself. So when this man says he didn't have the warning signs or didn't notice them I can understand that.
Now after all of this it doesn't mean that I believe that he did nothing wrong, he did he took the LIFE of another human being.
"If it's true that we are what we eat, then I am fast, easy and cheap" -- Barbara Johnson
I am surprised so many people are so quick to condemn this guy. To play devil’s advocate, we don’t know what kind of shape he was in when the passenger asked him to pull over. If he was semi-conscious, who knows his level of comprehension. I’m sure I would want justice if I was a friend or family member of the lady who was killed, but I don’t think this is a black and white issue like a drunk driving accident would be. If the guy checked his sugar regularly and didn’t have a history of hypo-related troubles, is this accident something he should have foreseen? I’m not 100 percent convinced. We all have unexplained highs and lows at times - managing diabetes is not an exact science.
From the info currently available - and I’m reserving my judgment until I have all the facts - it seems the police may be setting a dangeroous precedent. If a guy with high blood pressure has a heart attack while behind the wheel and kills a pedestrian, should he be charged with manslaughter if he survives the accident. After all, some would argue that if he didn’t get his high blood pressure under control, he was a ticking time bomb. If he continued to eat cheeseburgers or failed to get his blood pressure under control, is he guilty of manslaughter? I realize this hypothetical is not exactly the same as the current news item, but conceptually it is the same. Just my two cents. Either way, its a sad situation. I would want to hear all the facts before declaring him guilty. This could set a dangerous precedent - its a slippery slope
You bring up good points, DNH. My two cents: the burden is on the driver to determine if they are in a condition to drive safely. If someone were driving, and got something in their eye, and had to look away from the wheel - an uncontrollable situation - the guilt would still lie with the operator of the car if they hit someone. When you get behind the wheel, you're assuming a huge amount of responsibility for whatever may happen - I would have to find him guilty as well, given the information we have about what took place.
In his defense, if he had hypo unawareness, really, other than testing before driving, he couldn't have done much different. I'm not disagreeing with the charges, b/c he didn't say he tested before driving. But, this seems like a case ripe for misinformation in the media. Did you watch the news clip? He said he tests all the time, but the DNH article said he had uncontrolled D.
Occasionally, I have a wacky CGM sensor moment where it reads normal, but I'm actually low and don't feel it. I'm just being honest here. Also, can everyone here promise they test before they drive 100% of the time? Before my CGM, I probably tested about 95% of the time before driving.
You're right that we didn't include a note in the text with Campos' statement that he tests regularly, but it was in the video posted along with the story. We could have included in the text -- might have made the disagreement between law enforcment and Campos more clear.
However, you are incorrect in claiming we provided false inormation by saying Campos' diabetes was uncontrolled. This is the lead from the story: "A 59-year-old man is being charged with manslaughter and reckless driving nine months after prosecutors say his uncontrolled diabetes led to a crash resulting in the death of a pedestrian." I understand its a matter of symantics, but the prosecutors are claiming his diabetes is uncontrolled. That is their assertion and the basis for bringing the charges. We just reported law enforcement's position in the case.
I do agree with you concerning testing before driving. Its the responsible thing to do. I test before I drive and even pull over sometimes if I'm on a long trip. However, it sounds like this guy made a stop at a convenience store. I'm not sure how long before that stop he last checked, but I know if I am running errands, I don't stop and check after each stop if they are quick stops. I'd like to hear more about this case and about Campos' actions. But, as others have noted, this incident resulted in horrible consequences. I'm not saying Campos did nothing wrong (I don't know if he did yet), but I can understand how someone with diabetes could have an unforseen low that results in a crash. I do not think it should be considered a crime in all cases.
This is an very interesting, thought provoking story. T1's have the burden(?) of making sure our bs is at an appropriate level before engaging in many activities. It is easy to say this person should have tested earlier, as if that is going to solve everything. The main response should be "I am responsible for all of my actions." If I have hypo-unawarenes, I should test more often, especially while exposing others to any dangerous activity.
I think it is exactly like drunk driving cut and dry. No we dont know what condition he was in but most DD think they are fine before they get behind the wheel. Then again they do not carry breathalyzers around with them to test to see if they are ok to drive or not. Diabetics do and should. I would feel the same way if it was Riley in his shoes.
You hear so many stories of people under the influence of alcohol (it was their decision to drink) but there are many elderly drivers who are impaired because of age - they are not required to take a test before getting behind a wheel.
My only point is that some people take alcohol or medicines that impair their driving yet diabetics are prosecuted for not taking their medicine. I think that is wrong just like putting all elderly in the same catagory.
You're right that we didn't include a note in the text with Campos' statement that he tests regularly, but it was in the video posted along with the story. We could have included in the text -- might have made the disagreement between law enforcment and Campos more clear.
However, you are incorrect in claiming we provided false inormation by saying Campos' diabetes was uncontrolled. This is the lead from the story: "A 59-year-old man is being charged with manslaughter and reckless driving nine months after prosecutors say his uncontrolled diabetes led to a crash resulting in the death of a pedestrian." I understand its a matter of symantics, but the prosecutors are claiming his diabetes is uncontrolled. That is their assertion and the basis for bringing the charges. We just reported law enforcement's position in the case.
[/quote]
WHOA! Don't freak out. I know it was a quote and not what you were asserting. It was obviously a summary.
My point was that this phrase is being used w/o any explanation, so the public could be made to believe that having a single serious low means you're not in control. Nothing to do with you.
You hear so many stories of people under the influence of alcohol (it was their decision to drink) but there are many elderly drivers who are impaired because of age - they are not required to take a test before getting behind a wheel.
My only point is that some people take alcohol or medicines that impair their driving yet diabetics are prosecuted for not taking their medicine. I think that is wrong just like putting all elderly in the same catagory.
[/quote]
The elderly should be tested to make sure their reaction time is good still if not they shouldnt have a DL. My boys are epileptic they have to have their seizures under control for at least one year before they can even think about getting a DL but to be honest I do not believe they should ever get one because break through seizures can happen at any time. You have no control what so ever over that yes taking their meds can help prevent them but it doesnt mean they will. There is no testing for them either and while they once under control might never have one again there is a chance and they know it and should be held accountable for taking that chance. Driving is a privilege not a right. It makes me so very sad that they may never get to drive but that is life for them.
I have gone low while driving many times. I reach into my purse and drink my juice box. But I know also that, as I get older, my responses to lows have changed. I'm not always aware of my lows and I also sometimes don't believe I'm low, even when someone is there telling me I'm low or after I've tested my blood sugar (which, I know, sounds crazy, but nothing makes sense when I'm low). So this story really gets to me. I mean, I feel a whole lot of sympathy for the man, because you are not rational when you're low, and even someone in the car with you telling you to drink juice might not do the trick. It's hard to train yourself to respond sometimes. I try to tell myself that if I'm EVER confused, AT ALL, I should test, because I never get confused if I'm not low. Also, if I'm ever super-emotional and want to cry or freak out, I'm probably low. But it's hard. When you get into that state, it's hard to think, "Oh, I don't really want to cry while I'm on the phone with PECO, I'm just low."
Anyway, this article has given me food for thought, and I'll really have to be more vigilant of my blood sugar while driving. I don't drive very often at all because I walk to work. But still.