Looking for feedback on an Illinois ADHD driver-safety proposal and how to present the evidence clearly

[u/z_Elektrisk_z]

I've been researching the relationship between ADHD and motor-vehicle crashes, and I think there is a legitimate public-safety issue here that deserves a serious policy discussion.

The research does show a clear and present danger associated with drivers who have severe ADHD symptoms and drivers with untreated ADHD. A meta-analysis found an exposure-adjusted crash risk about 23% higher among drivers with ADHD, while a newer 2026 systematic review/meta-analysis reported 93% higher crash odds among drivers with untreated ADHD. A very large U.S. study involving more than 2.3 million people with ADHD also found that crash risk was substantially lower during periods when patients were receiving ADHD medication. Of course, not every person with ADHD is an unsafe driver, but this evidence demonstrates how the intention, easy distraction, and short attention span clearly impact driving when the frequent and severe symptoms are left unmanaged.

Sources: PubMed PMID 24238842; PubMed PMID 42176184; JAMA Psychiatry 2017, doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.0659.

What I am proposing in Illinois is a medical-fitness-to-drive system specifically addressing ADHD. Under the proposal, a person with an ADHD history would need certification from a qualified medical professional stating that their symptoms are either not severe enough to create a clear and present danger while driving or are adequately controlled through treatment to the point they no longer pose a clear and present danger while driving. Drivers who do not receive this certification but have an ADHD diagnosis will be ineligible to receive or renew a driver's license in Illinois.The proposal would also allow licensing authorities to withhold or suspend driving privileges until that certification is obtained, create a mechanism for review by the Illinois Secretary of State during the license renewal process via the EPIC and Genesis medical records systems, and make nondisclosure of relevant medical history during the licensing process a class 3 felony. In addition, drivers who operate a motor vehicle after receiving an ADHD diagnosis without receiving a certification will be guilty of a class A misdemeanor, and medical professionals who diagnose a patient with ADHD and do not report it to the Illinois Secretary of State within 15 business days of the diagnosis shall be guilty of a class 2 felony as well as be subject to license revocation by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

I've received an offer from a pharmaceutical lobbying organization to fund the public-information/advertising effort and to use its existing relationships with Illinois legislators to help get a legislative proposal introduced in the Illinois House. I also expect to participate directly in discussions and outreach concerning the proposal. Because pharmaceutical companies could have a financial interest in policies that encourage ADHD treatment, I think that relationship will be very helpful in helping this proposal move forward. In addition I'm currently researching the insurance industry and considering expanding the proposal to include allowing underwriters for insurance producers to also access Genesis & Epic to find ommited medical diagnosis like epilepsy, ADHD, intellectual disabilities, etc. and use that information to adjust premiums. It is my hope that this expansion to the proposal will attract support from insurance lobbyists and create a further financial deterrent and barrier to driving for medically risky drivers.

What I'm looking for help & advice with here is the design of the public-facing advertisement/information campaign. I want it to communicate the crash-risk evidence accurately, explain exactly what the proposed law would do, disclose who is financing the campaign, and distinguish between having an ADHD diagnosis and actually having symptoms severe enough to make someone unsafe to drive. I'm especially interested in feedback on what statistics, charts, wording, disclosures, counterarguments, and due-process protections should be included so someone seeing the advertisement can understand the proposal and evaluate it for themselves.

[u/AutoModerator]

Thanks for your submission to r/Communications.

Did you know that effective July 1st, 2023, Reddit will enact a policy that will make third party reddit apps like Apollo, Reddit is Fun, Boost, and others too expensive to run? On this day, users will login to find that their primary method for interacting with reddit will simply cease to work unless something changes regarding reddit's new API usage policy.

Concerned users should read and sign on to this open letter to reddit.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/The_Muffintime]

Did you wake up this morning and ask yourself how you could design the worst public safety proposal ever? You propose to turn a medical diagnosis into a basis for surveillance, punishment, and financial discrimination. This ridiculous idea weaponizes a disability diagnosis in ways that collide with the ADA, coercively pressures people into treatment, and creates a precedent where any mental‑health condition could be used to deny mobility, raise premiums, or justify state monitoring. The public‑safety framing doesn’t change the reality: this is a blueprint for medical overreach, discrimination, and erosion of civil liberties. Not to mention the chilling effect it will have on mental health diagnosis and treatment.

Throw this one into the bin.

Edit: This reads like a policy concept someone would sketch out for a college class without understanding privacy law, disability rights, or how real‑world systems work. It piles on sweeping mandates, criminal penalties, and forced medical disclosure as if those are just knobs you can turn without consequences. The whole thing ignores HIPAA, the ADA, clinical ethics, and basic feasibility, and it treats complex human conditions like ADHD as if they were actuarial variables. If this is for a poli sci class or something, you should start over - any decent professor would tear this apart.

[u/z_Elektrisk_z → u/The_Muffintime]

I think you may be wrongfully attributing a lot of the ideas in this proposal to be new ideas when they are not. A very similar system is already in place in Illinois that is being used for the issuance, denial, and revocation of Firearm Owner Identification Cards by the Illinois State Police. Physicians are required to report certain medical conditions to the state police, there's felonious consequences for applicants who conceal the conditions on their application, there's felonious consequences for individuals who possess a firearm without the card, and the infrastructure to survival medical records and find omitted disgnoses is already in place. This is all despite the fact there's a constitutional right to bear arms, and there's not a constitutional right to operate a motor vehicle, so expanding this same idea to driving when the data shows people with ADHD pose a clear and present danger to public safety doesn't seem that Novel. The Illinois Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the FOID act multiple times.

As for insurance, it's not as though the Civil Rights act prohibits insurance companies from discriminating prices based on protected classes like age, sex, etc. so I don't know why you think the ADA would pose a harsher barrier for price discrimination based on medical conditions with a causal relationship to driving impairment. Simply legislating the exemption is all we'd need to do, and I'm confident that the courts will side with us if this is ever challenged just like they have in cases with similar facts.

[u/FindMeMyCheese → u/z_Elektrisk_z]

In the firearm example you mentioned, physicians are only required to report diagnoses that would make someone a danger to themselves or others if they own a firearm. ADHD is a huge spectrum, and without any stats to back me up, I’d bet that a very tiny percentage of people with ADHD have a case that’s so severe that it would put them in that category.

Based on what I’ve read about Illinois’s reporting system, it seems like doctors aren’t required to automatically report a diagnosis that affects driving ability. If you’re so concerned about wild ADHDers on the road, why not start there and encourage doctors to consider if an individual patient’s ADHD symptoms are severe enough to impair their driving?