Why Changing the Language Around Road Trauma Matters
It’s a Crash, Not an Accident: Why Changing the Language Around Road Trauma Matters
Words have power. For those affected by road trauma, the distinction between “accident” and “crash” is more than semantics—it’s a matter of accountability, justice, and respect. The Road Trauma Support Group NSW (RTSG) is leading the charge to end the language of denial and reshape the way we talk about road safety.
Jo’Anne Duke’s life ended in unimaginable pain. In 2019, as she was driving home from work, another driver recklessly sped onto the wrong side of the road and crashed into her car.
Jo spent her final moments trapped in the wreckage, enduring extreme pain, before succumbing to her injuries, some thirty-five agonising minutes later. Her killer, who never expressed remorse or sorrow for the devastation he caused, was eventually convicted of Dangerous Driving Occasioning Death and served only two years and four months behind bars. The potential maximum sentence for that offence is ten years.
Tragically, less than a year after his release on parole after serving approximately one and a half years, he reoffended by allegedly breaking and entering into a home, and allegedly inflicting grievous bodily harm to the occupant. For Jo’s husband, Mick Duke, the leniency of the justice system and the dismissal implied by the term “accident” only compounded his grief.
“Calling Jo's death an 'accident' is like saying that the killer was not to blame and somehow dismisses the fact that the perpetrator broke the law intentionally and committed a very serious crime", Mick says. "If it had been called 'homicide', her killer might have faced real justice, and he wouldn't have been free to harm someone else".
Jo’s story illustrates how dismissive language minimises the severity of road crimes and fails to honour the lives lost.
David Vidal, too, knows the unbearable pain of losing a loved one to a road crime. His son, Constable Aaron Vidal, was struck and killed by a red-light runner while riding his motorcycle home from work. Aaron’s death left behind a grieving fiancée, pregnant with their first child, and a devastated family. The offender received a two-year intensive correction order—a sentence David found deeply inadequate.
“If Aaron had been killed with a knife, it wouldn’t be called an accident,” David says. “A car was the weapon, and the trauma is the same.”
Driven by this injustice, David took action. He approached the NSW Police Force, requesting a review of how they classify road incidents. Supported by the Commissioner’s Executive Team, David pushed for a shift away from the term “accident” to terms that reflect the gravity of the events, such as “crash” or “vehicular homicide.” This change was implemented not only for road incidents but also for rail, aircraft, and marine crashes, and workplace incidents.
“The move is more than a matter of semantics; it’s a profound step in recognising the criminality associated with road crimes and the trauma experienced by victims and their families”, says David.
The RTSG’s Road Collision Reporting Guidelines are part of a broader effort to reshape how society talks about and responds to road trauma. Research* shows that the term “accident” perpetuates a sense of inevitability, suggesting that crashes are unavoidable acts of fate rather than preventable outcomes of reckless or illegal behaviour. In fact, 58% of fatal crashes in NSW involve reckless driving, 52% involve speeding, and 37% involve drunk driving—actions that are entirely preventable.
“Replacing “accident” with “crash” or even “homicide” is a step toward accountability. The term “homicide” reflects the seriousness of road crimes, especially when lives are lost due to criminal negligence.” Says Mick Duke.
According to the research, the majority of NSW residents agree, with 64% supporting the use of “vehicular homicide” for such incidents, and 73% advocating for harsher penalties for offenders under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The RTSG is not just about changing words; it’s about transforming systems. Their advocacy includes practical solutions like:
Implementing stricter sentencing guidelines for road crimes to reflect the gravity of offenses.
· Minimum mandatory custodial sentences
Establishing victim impact panels to hold offenders accountable and foster empathy.
Requiring mandatory alcohol interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers.
Expanding road safety education in schools and licensing programs.
For families like the Dukes and Vidals, changing the language around road trauma is a way to honour their loved ones and demand justice. As Mick Duke poignantly says, “Changing the words won’t bring Jo back, but it ensures her death is treated with the seriousness it deserves.”
The road toll in NSW continues remains stagnant with 340 fatalities in 2024 the same as 2023, which at the time was a 25% increase from the previous year. Each of these deaths sends shockwaves through families and communities. By adopting responsible language and advocating for systemic reforms, we can shift the narrative, honour the victims, and work toward safer roads for all.
It’s time to end the language of denial. It’s not an accident—it’s a crash. And it’s a call to action we cannot ignore.
*The Human Impact of Fatal Road Crimes in NSW, by RTSG and FiftyFive5/AccentureSong
31 January, 2025