Wisconsin courts have been cautious in extending punitive damages to unintentional conduct, as for many years they have refused to assess punitive damages in the gray area between ordinary negligence and intentional conduct. Recently, however, the standards promulgated in Wangen v. Ford Motor Co. and Brown v. Maxey have clearly defined that area and eliminated the ambiguity created by Bielski v. Schulze. Although the decisions in 'Wangen' and 'Maxey' did not involve drunk-driving claims, they may have their most significant impact in this context. Punitive damages are available in Wisconsin to punish and deter outrageous conduct of the kind associated with drunk driving. Only when these fundamental purposes are served is the imposition of a punitive award appropriate. When a drunk driver is permitted to shift the financial responsibility to insurance, punitive damages no longer serve their intended purpose. Punitive damages should be assessed against a drunk driver, but the assessment requires the preservation of the objectives underlying the doctrine. 130 footnotes.