to think 93 is too old to still be driving?

[Goldidi]

Last night I met a man at a new group I've joined. He is 93 and still doing a lot for himself which is great, but I did feel uncomfortable when I found out that he drives himself 10miles to and from this group. He is obviously getting on, he is rather deaf even with his 2 hearing aids, he walks with a stick, etc. It's been playing on my mind all day as I am actually rather concerned about the safety of someone of that age driving as his reactions are obviously slower than a younger person, even when he hears/sees what is going on. I do appreciate that driving gives him more independence but is it worth compromising on safety for that independence?

So AIBU in thinking that there should be a cut off age where people need to undergo a medical test or a reactions test to show that they are still capable of driving safely? I would propose about 70ish for that cut off and maybe do the reactions test every couple of years.

I think everyone should have a compulsory eye test every five years and the over eighties should have a test-lite every 5 years. Asking doctors to sign that someone is ok to drive isn't workable as doctors are not going to want that responsibility.

People can be blase about the dangers they pose to others and only think about their convenience. Also vanity stops some middle aged people getting eye tests as they have always had perfect sight and don't want to admit to getting older.

I think it depends on the individual. DP's Dad, for example, is 63, and we are really beginning to question if he should be driving. Whereas my Great Gran, who died at 96, would have been an excellent driver until her final week, when she became ill (would have been, as she never drove) - sharp as a tack, perfect eyesight and hearing. I agree with the poster who said that drivers should have to retake their test every 10 years. I see lots of eejits on the roads wround here, spanning all age groups. Mandatory retesting might keep them on their toes, or discourage them from developing the 'bad habits' that so many drivers develop.

I live in the heart of Constable Country, near a village full of elderly inhabitants. I have seen driving that would make your hair curl!
IMO, if you need a walking frame to put fuel in your vehicle, then its fairly obvious that your reflexes are going to be impaired!

"I would propose about 70ish"

So now we will no doubt one day have to work until 75, if we are found unfit to drive, can we have our pension earlier?

"IMO, if you need a walking frame to put fuel in your vehicle, then its fairly obvious that your reflexes are going to be impaired!"

Luckily that is only your opinion and not a doctors opinion, otherwise lots of younger disabled people could not drive.

There are different factors in what makes a safe driver.

I know plenty of 70 yr olds who are skiing black runs, riding horses daily, still working - I'm sure they can manage to drive a car!
The very elderly tend to be self regulating with short well known journeys. I don't think they are a big danger.
A regular test for any age would be a good idea.

My step-FIL has Alzheimers, cataracts in one eye only (so that's ok, apparently), and the reaction times of a snail on Mogadon.

He is still driving. At 15-20 miles an hour, infuriating other road users.

He terrifies us all but the doctors have cleared him.

I think that doctors need to tighten up. When I said it depends on the individual I meant that people like your FIL shouldn't be driving Tanith.

Trouble is, that its so variable - there are 70 year olds who are still mega fit and well, and others (like my mum) who is vvvv frail and can't boil an egg safely anymore.

I don't think there is a need for blanket retesting, but I do think there should be a better system where you can raise concerns about someones driving and it would trigger an assessment. From experience, its incredibly hard to get anything done, even if the driver is an obvious hazard

Some bad drivers are safer on the roads than you might think, as they are so obviously bad that people give them a wide berth. I think this applies particularly to old bad drivers as they tend to drive slowly, rather than young bad drivers who often drive fast. I am thinking of an old guy I drove behind recently, who was pottering along the middle of the road at about 15mph, then he got to a roundabout and pulled out onto it - and just stopped randomly while going round the roundabout.

Cataract in one eye is ok,Tanith,because luckily we have two eyes.There are people out there who have lost an eye,with a lazy eye so reduced vision,with other eye problems - none of that is an issue as long as the other eye is fine!

My mum stopped driving when she had her cataracts (one at a time) until after her operations. I assumed she'd been told she wasn't allowed to drive but from what you've said Pride it must have been her own decision that she didn't feel safe.

I do completely agree that young drivers are the most dangerous but around here they are pretty safe and have been for the past 5 years. The reason behind that is that one of our sixth formers was paralysed when he was in an accident caused by one of his friends. He is a very visible reminder to all of the pupils who were in the school (the only one in a 10 mile radius) at the time and he comes into school every year with the fire brigade to talk to our sixth form and year 11 about his crash. Some of the pictures the fire brigade show are horrific and definitely put the young people round here off driving too fast as far as we can tell. I believe the accident statistics show a marked reduction in accidents involving young men in our area since that scheme started, it's such a shame that the young man had to be hurt so badly for the message to get across.

Birds, but surely, a younger disabled driver would have a specially equipped/adapted car, which would help?
I don't know why I always get dragged into these discussions! It's. It and dried for me. After a certain age, people need to be assessed. And the police need the power to revoke your license on the spot, if you aren't fit to drive. Even as a temporary measure, you get it back when you can prove you are fit to drive.
A 16yo was killed and her friend injured in my town a year or so, by a bloke in his 70s. He had an automatic car. The day before, he ploughed into a tree, because he got confused, and put his foot on the accelerator, not the gas. The police told him to hand in his license, he refused. The next day, a young girl lost her life. It's been concluded, that he did exactly the same thing. CCTV footage o the accident shows that at no point in the accident did his brake lights go on. If the police had had the power to remove his license, she would still be alive.
I know that many elderly people can drive safely, bu many are bloody dangerous.

Actually, if you lose an eye, or sight in an eye, you need to contact dvla and they will assess your case individually

Yes,Saggy - but that is a different scenario from early cataract in one eye.Obviously we have no idea how bad Tanith's father in law's cataract is (though if doctors have cleared him to drive he must still be within the legal standards of vision for driving)
"Cataract" can be insignificant,or have a severe impact on vision,or anything in between,so, Goldidi, maybe your Mum was advised not to drive,or she may just have felt herself that she wasn't confident enough.

Sorry,that has been a bit of a side issue. I do agree with reassessment,but testing everyone over a certain age would be expensive,and involve testing an awful lot of elderly people in excellent health with good vision. I think saying "many elderly people are bloody dangerous" is an exaggeration.Some are,and so are some young people,and people with no common sense,and those with drink or drug problems...

Hmm! You need to live in the villages around here! It's like Death Race 2000 when the old folks get in their cars!
I never said that youngsters weren't dangerous. As a rider though, they are miles more considerate than their older counterparts, surprisingly.

Were it just his sight, I wouldn't be so concerned. It's the combination of the rest of it that makes him such a danger, in my opinion - "oh, and he's also nearly blind in one eye", iyswim

The doctors' point of view is from his patient's. It will get FIL out and about; he drives so slowly, he's unlikely to hurt himself if he does hit anything.

So far as I'm aware, there is no data according to age group for the causes of accidents. I think it would make interesting reading if there were. Younger men are more likely to have accidents due to speed: we never hear about the elderly driver who tries to reverse across a major traffic-lighted road junction, who toddles along at 20mph along the M4, who drives the wrong way down a one way street because he remembers 20 years ago when it was 2 way.

I must live in a young area - I don't see any of this elderly driving! However I don't disagree that it happens - for years our elderly neighbour's parking method was to back slowly into our car,stop when there was a gentle bump,and move forwards an inch or so...

You need the statistics for accidents related to the actual numbers of drivers in a particular age group,don't you and including the seriousness of the accident.The big picture might mean an elderly person kept more independant at the expense of occasional damage to property was a fair trade off.(Probably wouldn't say that if it was my car of course...) Young men having accidents due to speed tend to cause fatalities and a crash at speed causes a lot of damage,an elderly person driving slowly is an irritation,so it would help to know what proportion of elderly drivers are involved in accidents,and what those accidents are.

A re-test every 'x' years is probably never going to happen but a regular 3/5/10 year (or whatever) check of every driver's ability and fitness should be fairly easy to arrange and could be made self-funding.

A version of the advanced motoring organisations' initial driver assessment (IAM and/or ROSPA) could easily be used.

There would be no 'failure' as such (unless the driver was grossly incompetent), merely given any necessary advice or if needed a recommendation that a driver attend some refresher training. Of course, anyone who refused could then be told to re-take their test.