A few posts and weeks ago, I wrote about a case that was in front of the U.S. Supreme Court about whether police may secretly place a GPS tracking device on the car of a suspect and track the car’s movements without a search warrant. I noted that using a GPS to follow the movements of a teen driver is becoming a technological option for parents who can afford it, and I wondered whether the Supreme Court might say something in its decision that would implicate parents use of these devices.

The Court has now ruled in United States v Jones. The Justices held unanimously that police may not, without a search warrant, place a GPS device on a privately owned vehicle, and that doing so violates the Fourth Amendment’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. The decision is not entirely clear about the rationale, because some of the Justices focused on the fact that the police planted the device on a privately-owned vehicle, and some focused on whether a citizen’s right to privacy includes where they drive their car.

Anyway, parents: this ruling says nothing about you using a GPS device to track the movements of your teen driver. The ruling does not apply for three reasons: First, you are not the police, but parents. Second, the car you are placing the device on is presumably your car, and even if someone else owns it, you will likely get their consent before you place the GPS. Third, teens under 18 remain under the control and oversight of parents in many ways, so I doubt that any court would say that a parent placing a GPS on a teen driver’s car violated the teen’s right to privacy.

So, if anyone tells you that the U.S. Supreme Court has banned placement of GPS devices and parents cannot track their teens with a GPS, that is not accurate.

Ever since I started researching teen driving agreements two years ago, I have hoped to have a model in both English and Spanish, and now, with fabulous help from Yale-New Haven Hospital, we do. You will now find on the landing page of this blog a Spanish translation of the revised national model teen driving agreement that I posted on January 12, 2012. This is very exciting because, of course, the Spanish speaking segment of the U.S. population is large and continues to grow, and it simply makes no sense to have this important tool of safer teen driving not available to that population. As this blog proceeds, I will venture to add Spanish translations for key posts when it is possible to do so.

My thanks to Jose Rivera-Vinas and Pina Violano of Yale New Haven Hospital for their help in translating.

Readers and friends: Happy New Year to all of you. Let me begin by explaining that it has been about a month since I posted on the blog, for two reasons: I have been hard at work on a handbook, based on the posts on this blog, for parents of teen drivers; and I have been working on a substantial revision of the national model teen driving agreement that I posted on this blog almost two years ago. So, sorry for the silence, but it has been productive! I am just about finished with the manuscript (working title: Not So Fast: Parenting Teen Drivers BEFORE They Get Behind The Wheel), and today I am pleased to introduce on the landing page of this blog my newly revised national model teen driving agreement.

Some background: In December 2009, after spending several months researching several dozen teen driving contracts from around the country, and using both my knowledge of teen driving and my experience as a lawyer with contracts, I posted three articles: one about what not to do in teen driver agreements (provisions that I thought were incomplete, misstated, misleading, misguided, etc.); one about how to negotiate a teen driving agreement (emphasizing that it should be a collaborative process); and one about how to work with and enforce a signed agreement. Then in February 2010 I posted my own national model, a compilation of best practices that I had gleaned from the best national models.

A few months ago, here in Connecticut, Commissioner Melody Currey of our Department of Motor Vehicles, convened a new Advisory Group on Safe Teen Driving and asked the group to do three things: come up with a statewide model teen driving agreement specifically for Connecticut; create a model curriculum for the two hour, mandatory safety class that Connecticut since 2008 has required parents to attend when their 16 or 17 year old has a learner’s permit; and produce an instructional video about critical safety information for parents to see during that required class. I was member of the teen driving agreement subcommittee. Over several weeks the subcommittee considered my model, a model developed by the Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, and host of others from around the country, and came up with a wide variety of improvements on the prior models (including mine) and a consensus recommendation for a new one. At a meeting in early December, the Advisory Committee adopted a new model for Connecticut, now available on the Connecticut DMV’s website:

http://www.ct.gov/dmv/lib/dmv/teenparentagreement_dmv_12_2011_final.pdf

The adoption of this new model for Connecticut led me to go back to my own national model and incorporate the improvements and insights that the Connecticut subcommittee had provided, which I have now done. The newly revised model is now available on the landing page of this blog, downloadable as a pdf. It is a national model but is easily adaptable to your state and family situation.

Here are the important improvements and features contained in this newly revised model from the February 2010 version:

• use of the word “agreement” instead of contract, to highlight that this is not a legally binding document, but a commitment to follow an agreed-upon set of understandings and expectations;
• use of the term “supervising adult” instead of “parent,” to recognize the reality that not every teen driver is supervised by a biological or adoptive parent, but sometimes by a guardian, relative, or family friend;
• an express direction to teens and parents to review and sign the agreement whether teen obtains a learners permit and then review it again and make any needed changes when the teen gets a license;
• a critical set of cautions for parents, asking them to consider whether their teens are ready to begin driving at all, to acknowledge the dangers of any electronic devices, and a reminder that parents are roles models for their teens and must be safe, responsible and defensive drivers at all times;
• a clear statement, to be reviewed and initialed by both parents, regarding the four greatest risks of teen driving: the delayed development of the part of the human brain that provides caution and risk assessment; the fact that passing Driver’s Ed and getting license makes a teen a beginner, not a safe driver; the fact that teens violating state laws can cause injury, death, property damage, and financial liability; and the types of conduct (speeding, reckless driving, etc.) that increase the risk of injury or death to the driver, passengers, other drivers, and pedestrians;
• a clear statement about the time period of the agreement;
• recognition that the teen’s driving will be supervised day by day by an adult;
• an understanding that each time a teen drives, the teen and adult will devise a “driving plan” for that trip
• a clear statement about seat belt use — all vehicle occupants at all times;
• regarding electronic devices, a simple statement focused on driver conduct (when the car is not in Park, no use of any electronic device for typing, texting, reading, video watching, or communicating with someone outside the car) (getting away from confusing state laws about electronic devices, many of which focus on regulating some gadgets while exempting others);
• a curfew provision intending to be customized to reflect your state’s law;
• a recommended three stage (a/k/a “graduated”) passenger provision (first phase - adult supervisor only, then add immediately family members, then add other passengers);
• clear rules on alcohol, drugs, fatigue, speeding, finances;
• a provision about who may report a violation of the agreement to a supervising adult, and the fact that any suspension under the agreement is in addition to penalties or suspensions under state law;
• a “call for a safe ride” provision, saying that the teen at any time and for any reason may call for a safe ride, and doing so will not be a violation of the agreement;
• an optional provision to appoint a third party as mediator if the supervising adult and teen have a dispute about the agreement; and
• a final written “Commitment to Safety” by the teen and supervising adult or adults signing and dating the agreement.

I am not aware of any teen driving agreement available at this time that combines all of these futures and best practices. I respectfully submit that this newly revised model is step forward, and hope that traffic safety organizations, DMV’s, insurers, auto manufacturers, driving schools and instructors, and others around the country will give it serious consideration.

Let me not for a moment take personal credit for this new model. What I have posted today arose from the excellent teamwork of the Connecticut DMV Advisory Committee and the Subcommittee that I was privileged to work with: Kevin Borrup of the Connecticut Children’s Medical Center; Police Chief Louis Fusaro of the City of Norwich, Ct; Deputy Commissioner Leonard Lee of the Ct Department of Public Health; Attorney Richard Hastings, of Ridgefield, Ct (who way a driving force in the initial formation of the Advisory Committee and to whom I am especially indebted for his energy, insight, and dedication); Pina Violano of Yale-New Haven Hospital; Ernie Bertothy and Bill Seymour of the Connecticut DMV, who have coordinated the Advisory Committee’s activities: Emma Morse, a student at Rocky Hill High School; Sherry Chapman, of Mourning Parents Act; and finally DMV Commissioner Melody Currey.

Finally, I recognize that, as many improvement as we have made, the work is never done, and as always I welcome comments, suggestions, and improvements from blog readers on how this newly revised model posted today can be further improved.

Thanks!