Harvard Law Record, digital copy posted on November 14, 2017 in “Opinion”
Preventing Death by Underride
I met Ralph Nader in September 2016 at his Breaking Through Power Conference in DC. In June 2017, he asked me to write an Op-Ed on our efforts to bring about improved regulations for underride prevention.
So, why would the various engineers & inventors & manufacturers choose to not collaborate? Seriously, I cannot think of any other reason than that they hope to get the competitive edge with their underride prevention technology. Make a higher profit. I’m willing to listen to other possible answers to my question.
Just think what that means. . . one more way that the value of human health and life is taking a back seat to economic gain.
But really, who is gaining and who is losing? I know that this is a simplistic look at the matter, but we shouldn’t forget the fact that Research & Development of technology to stop cars from going under trucks (or trucks from going inside cars) is not inexpensive. Crash testing is costly — the crash cars and crash trailers and crash dummies and cameras and analytical tools, not to mention the crash team.
So why on earth would we want multiple manufacturers and engineers to reinvent the wheel — wasting precious resources, time, money and ultimately human lives because of the delay?
Back in 2014, we were told by one manufacturer that, “we are not competitive about safety.” It is imprinted in my brain. Frankly, I’m not so sure I believe it, and the whole thing makes me very frustrated and angry and makes the grief all the more painful. Let’s pull our resources together and act like we truly want to solve this preventable problem.
Previous post on this: Grateful for commitment to Underride Prevention R & D, but is it enough?
I am very grateful for the seemingly sincere commitment to research and development of underride prevention technology on the part of engineers whom I have met in these last four years. I often thank them personally. And, as I participate in crash testing and discuss the outcome of the testing with them, I gain an appreciation of the complexity of the problem.
But I have to ask myself if it is enough, if it is made the priority that solutions to save lives could and should be given. How much faster could we start making truck crashes more survivable if we put our mind to it?
I was reflecting last night on the three crash tests which I viewed in the last week in three different states. They involved the testing of underride prevention technology designed by three different engineering teams. All of a sudden, the question popped into my head, “How much faster would we be able to get effective underride solutions available to install on trucks if everybody that is working on the problem — or even thinking about it — would truly be collaborating?”
It is totally ridiculous that we allow marketplace competition to inhibit communication and slow down the process. Isn’t it, or is it just me? How many more lives could be saved if we more effectively put our heads together?
That was the original idea when we conceived of the Underride Roundtable. Are we willing to do it like it’s never been done before and make this a joint effort?
Let’s follow the lead of medical researchers:
One of the most important ways the CMTA accelerates the research process is by putting together teams of top scientists recruited from an international body of scientific and clinical Key Opinion Leaders in CMT. The STAR program’s unique character stems from the willingness of the scientists to come together to advance CMT research collaboratively, sharing and communicating ideas, discoveries and research findings.
The CMTA’s funding and operations focus is on translational research that will lead as directly as possible to therapeutic treatments of CMT. Truck Industry Could Take a Cue From Collaborative Medical Research Strategy
People are counting on it — whether they know it or not — because every day we delay is costly . . .
Afterthought: Why would manufacturers & engineers not collaborate on underride research?
I was reflecting tonight on the three crash tests which I viewed in less than seven days in three different states with underride prevention technology designed by three different engineering teams. All of a sudden, the question popped into my head, “How much faster would we be able to get effective underride solutions available to install on trucks if everybody that is working on the problem — or even thinking about it — would truly be collaborating?”
It is totally ridiculous that we allow marketplace competition to inhibit communication and slow down the process. How many more lives could be saved if we more effectively put our heads together?
That was the original idea when we conceived of the Underride Roundtable. Are we willing to do it like it’s never been done before and make this a joint effort?
Previous post on a similar topic: Urgent Underride Discussion of Deceleration Forces/High Speeds. Don’t Dawdle.
When a stronger more effective rear underride guard has been designed by a manufacturer, why would they offer it as optional rather than standard on their new trailers?! And we’re talking about an insignificant increase in cost for the improved guard, according to one guard engineer.
For that matter, why do we offer any proven safety equipment as optional on vehicles?
Do we want people to die?
Find out how your state fares on truck underride deaths from 1994 through 2015. There is quite a range of numbers. But whether you live in Hawaii — which reported 1 underride fatality in that time period — or California — which reported 426 people killed because a large truck entered their occupant space during a collision between the truck and a passenger vehicle, it’s too many in my book.
And remember, Death by Underride is definitely undercounted — some crash report forms don’t even have a check box for underride. And underride can happen to anyone at anytime and anywhere.
Underride Fatality Data from FARS by State
Let’s STOP Underrides!
Some might be hesitant about the comprehensive underride protection legislation mainly out of concern over the Retrofitting Requirement of the STOP Underrides! Bill.
Ask me if I would be willing to compromise and take out the retrofit requirement! How many people might die as a result? The trailer which we crashed into is probably still on the road with a weak rear underride guard. Along with millions of others.
Why is it that they are being allowed to “get away with murder” just because it will cost the industry some money to strengthen these rear guards?
Just imagine for a moment that somebody had done something in 2008 to introduce a Comprehensive Underride Protection Bill. But let’s say that they decided not to require retrofitting; so only new trailers would be improved starting in perhaps 2012.
So the Great Dane trailer built in 2007, which we crashed into on May 4, 2013, would not have been required to be retrofitted. It would have been left with its original rear underride guard which was designed to meet the 1998 federal (current) standard and, therefore, would have been weak and ineffective.
My daughters still would have been killed! They would not have been protected from Death by Underride — despite the fact that a solution would have existed which might have prevented their untimely deaths.
So, ask me again. . . “Do you want to compromise and take the retrofit requirement out of the STOP Underrides! Bill?” What do you think?
Find out how your state fares on truck underride deaths from 1994 through 2015. There is quite a range of numbers. But whether you live in Hawaii — which reported 1 underride fatality in that time period — or California — which reported 426 people killed because a large truck entered their occupant space during a collision between the truck and a passenger vehicle, it’s too many in my book.
And remember, Death by Underride is definitely undercounted — some crash report forms don’t even have a check box for underride. And underride can happen to anyone at anytime and anywhere.
Underride Fatality Data from FARS by State
U.S. Map PV Fatalities Truck Crashes in 2015 per IIHS
PV Fatalities in Truck Crashes 2015 per IIHS
PVEH_LRGTRK_UNDERRIDE_FATS_STATE_2015B
Progress is being made on the prevention of truck underride tragedies. But we have a long way to go before comprehensive underride protection is on every truck on the road. That is why we are working hard on every front to raise awareness of the century-old underride problem — along with proven and promising solutions.
But not everyone seems to get the sense of urgency which drives us to insistently call for resolution of this issue via the STOP Underrides! Bill posthaste. That’s why I decided to create this simple graphic to drive home the point that the price we pay, as a result of our delay in taking meaningful action, is too costly to accept any further meaningless excuses:
Based on analysis by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety of NHTSA’s truck crash fatality statistics (FARS), this graphic reflects the 600 truck/car collisions which annually occur, on average, at the sides and rear of large trucks — leaving out front collisions: potential underride tragedies which we want to prevent with the STOP Underrides! Bill.
Some years ago, I noticed the way that the prophet Daniel, in Daniel 9, got on his knees and repented on behalf of his people. . . God’s people, for wrongdoing that he was not directly responsible for — appealing to God to act mercifully.
This week, I thought of that again and determined to stand in the stead of all those who have turned their backs to the underride problem — unknowingly or not. Perhaps we all play some part in not getting to the bottom of those terrible tragedies.
In any case, on behalf of all those who have not been held accountable, I repent of our country’s indifference to this preventable highway carnage. I ask the Lord to forgive our callous attitude, misplaced priorities, and neglect. May He stir up a sense of urgency that we might all take appropriate action and work together more creatively and effectively.
What are we waiting for?! Let’s get on with it! We’ve got people counting on us — whether they know it or not.
