ILNews

Letter to the editor: Distracted driving results in tragedy

April 28, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Letters to the Editor

Distracted driving results in tragedy

To the editor:

The other day as I was reading through the March 17-30, 2010 issue of Indiana Lawyer, my attention was called to David Temple’s article “Be smart: Don’t use cell phone while driving!”

On March 18, 2010, a very close friend was stopped at a stoplight near his family home in Minnesota. Carefully strapped into his car seat and soundly sleeping was his 14-month-old son, Grayson Paul Earl Jett. A woman reached to the passenger floor for her fallen cell phone and slammed into their stopped car. Grayson sustained head injuries and later died at the hospital. The police reported that Grayson’s death was completely preventable.


Grayson is – was – just 22 days younger than my own daughter. Daughters, sons, moms, dads, brothers, sisters, and others are dying needlessly every day due to distracted driving. I myself am guilty of cell phone use including texting, checking on Facebook, and making calls in the car. But not anymore.  


It should not take a personal loss to change our habits so innocent people are not impacted by our bad choices, but, it so often does. There is nothing more important than the lives in our vehicle and those around us. Grayson’s mom recently posted on Facebook that “if anything positive can come from this tragedy, it is that we are smarter and safer drivers, and the consequences of distracted driving have real bite.”


Thank you for bringing attention to this important issue. May your readers remember Grayson and others who have senselessly died and keep their eyes on the road while behind the wheel.

Safe travels,

Aimee R. Eller
Fishers
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT