Letter to the editor. Good intentions lead us on a sloping plane

The discussion about Peth-samples, the alcohol marker phosphatidylethanol that measures alcohol consumption over time, has flared up recent times. Some believe that it is lawful, others that the current order is necessary to save lives. Then there are those who want to make it even stricter. A group of officials at the Swedish Transport Agency want everyone who seeks care to be forced to take Peth-blood tests and follow the doctors’ advice on alcohol if they want to keep their driving licenses, reported Skånska Dagbladet 20/2.

We at the Administrative Court have nothing to say about that part. We will loyally apply laws, regulations and regulations without interfering with our own opinions. Changing current law is ultimately on the Riksdag’s table.

My private opinion is that those who want the current system, or an even stricter one, are driven by good intentions. But then it was also something you usually say about good intentions and the road to hell.

It is to begin with It is unclear if the PETH samples even give a reliable answer about how much a person drinks. Not least, Peth seems to disappear variously from people’s bloodstreams, according to ST physician Tor Stålhammar (Medical magazine 29/11).

Of course, it is a major deficiency in legal certainty if a person can lose the driver’s license for the same alcohol intake that another person does not have to worry about. Especially when none of them need to have driven rattling even once.

What makes me even more worried, however, is the effects that the current order can have and all the more even stricter order where everyone is being tested all the time. Partly arouses the difficult ethical issues. On the one hand, it is a great way to get people not to seek care. And let’s for the sake of discussion ignore the risk of a sick person dying because he dares not ask for help, although of course it is an uneasy thought.

What happens At the next pandemic if people dare not test themselves for fear that their holiday celebrations are visible in any of the samples so that the driver’s license is smoking? Especially if the advocates of the tougher tags get what they want, and Peth-samples can be forced every time when a person seeks out care?

In Olaus Petri’s judge’s books it is stated that The law does not like everything it does not punish. Now a driver’s license revocation is not formally a penalty, although it can certainly be perceived as such. But the same principle should apply here as well. Hard grips may be needed, but they should be used with reason and restraint, and only where needed.

It is worthful to want to « save the children », « reduce traffic mortality », « promote equality » and yes, maybe even « restore the wetlands ». But without a rational impact assessment, all these goals will be nothing but cobblestones on the straight, wide road to Satan’s gloomy castle.

More about submitter: How do you write on submitter and answer

More submissions: dn.se/insandare