to support the idea of re-testing pensioners driving

[dhdjdbrjrkbr]

Last week a guy in his 70s down my road accidentally demolished a bit more of his wall driving into it as he's going blind. God knows what he's done when out and about. I drive 2 hours a day, lots on country lanes where is nsl and often someone turns into an road in front of me and I have to do an emergency stop. Reactions and awareness do decrease with age. Especially as there is a UN versal bus pas it doesn't seem that mean to me.

[aprilanne]

my father in law is a danger .he goes at 12 mph on a 30 he is a nightmare .

[LurkingHusband]

BreakingDad77

Doctors and or Police just need to have power to write to DVLA to have your licence suspended to which you can appeal by retaking a test

They already have this power. If you are stopped by a policeman and fail the numberplate sight test, they will stop you driving on the spot and tell the DVLA. The grumbles above are where doctors refuse to write to the DVLA if the patient declare themself fit to drive. This is clearly discretionary, since MiL had her licence revoked (much against her will) when she was prescribed a certain medication. She was frothing at the mouth too, with all sorts of "he can't do that" nonsense, until she actually discovered he could.

The police less so, since they would actually have to have observed a moving traffic offence before they could get involved.

[BreakingDad77]

Lurkinghusband Well if they can that very annoying as they could have done that the first time my dad the crashed into something and not all the palava of having to reason with him. He is long sighted though so could possibly have got over that hurdle.

[emmelinelucas]

I used to be a Librarian, and I was shocked at how many elderly people would drive to the library, then search for large print books with a magnifying glass. I can remember 3 right now.
Also those who were waiting for cataract operations and borrowed talking books in the meantime.
There were some terrible near misses in the carpark. The library was attached to a primary school.

[funkyfoam]

Lots of examples on here of accidents that older people caused. ( Which are terrible of course) However a 19 year old caused the death of my daughters friend last year. Three weeks ago a 17 year old driving dangerously killed a woman at the end of my road and I can think of two other local examples of young drivers causing fatal crashes. I can't think of any for older people who on the whole stop self regulate themselves by stopping driving at night and only driving on roads they know. Dangerous drivers exist at all ages. People do want to keep their independence and who can blame them. As the years pass I expect many of the young people on here who at the moment want older people to stop driving will feel very differently when it actually applies to them.

[Stevie77]

I'm all for it. There's got to be a happy middle between self certification of fitness to drive and complete retesting. Regular eye tests, GP to certify and confirm no illnesses that could affect the driver exist. Then if there's doubt people could be retested if needed.

It may affect old peoples independence but surely public safety is above that? As said though, no gov is brave enough to suggest that.

[SirChenjin]

Yes, young drivers can be dangerous - but as someone said upthread, that's no reason to ignore the large swathes of older drivers who are dangerous. Accidents can and do happen on familiar roads - in fact, most accidents happen within a few miles of home (you can google this), so self-regulation is nowhere near enough.

[wonkylegs]

I have never understood why every 10 years I have to jump through hoops to renew my passport but with something that gives us the potential to easily kill other people we only have an initial point of scrutiny.
I have always supported retesting throughout our driving lives - it might improve the overall quality of driving on the road not just with the elderly but across the board. I'm not saying it has to be a full retake of the initial course maybe just a shorter check which is taken every 10yrs.

[HappyAgainOneDay]

There's too much generalisation about older people here. If there were a database showing the number of accidents caused by age groups of 10 years (eg 20-30; 30-40; 40-50; 50-60; 60-70; 70-80 etc), we'd find out where the highest percentage of accident causers is.

I knew a woman of 102 who still drove - but only down to her local village and back.

FunkyFoam You are right. Most of my friends do not drive at night. We are very experienced and know realise our limitations.

[plainjanine]

Chattymummyhere, your data clearly shows that the most accident prone are the youngest drivers: they have the highest numbers of accidents per 100,000 drivers (last column). The stats show a steady decline in the number of accidents per driver as age increases. If anything, the data supports an argument for not allowing anyone to drive until they are at least 20 years old.

[voluptuagoodshag]

Wonky legs I couldn't agree more.

[YvesJutteau]

"There's too much generalisation about older people here. If there were a database showing the number of accidents caused by age groups of 10 years (eg 20-30; 30-40; 40-50; 50-60; 60-70; 70-80 etc), we'd find out where the highest percentage of accident causers is. "

The important figure would be accidents per mile driven by age group, though. On your database the fewest accidents would be caused by 0-10 year old drivers, but that's because they don't tend to drive very much.

[SirChenjin]

There are some stats here showing the breakdown of accidents by age www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24204489

[emmelinelucas]

It may be true that younger drivers cause more accidents.
But wouldn't it be a good thing to stop drivers who can't see properly/have alzheimers, etc ?
Wouldn't the roads be safer taking people who are as good as blind off the roads - I think it would make a difference.
There will not be figures to prove it but I would bet that many, many accidents have not happened due to the diligence of other drivers when people who are to old to be competent have been on the roads. That doesn't mean that I am ageist (I am old).
Just realistic.

[AttilaTheMeerkat]

A comment that Stevie made earlier was interesting particularly with regards to the GP:-
"I'm all for it. There's got to be a happy middle between self certification of fitness to drive and complete retesting. Regular eye tests, GP to certify and confirm no illnesses that could affect the driver exist. Then if there's doubt people could be retested if needed"

I am not suggesting the above is not a good idea but my FIL would have fallen through such a net - and did.

He duly went along when required to self cert his driving licence with the GP and no illness (at that time) was apparent. He would have passed any medical set by the GP - but he still went onto just a couple of months later to have his driving licence revoked by a magistrates court. In order to get his licence back he had to retake both his theory and (extended version so not the standard) driving test.

Given later events they did him a huge favour by doing that when they did although of course he did not view it like that. The police did society in general a huge favour by taking him off the road because he was a real danger to himself

[BiteySwan]

Numbers of accidents per 1,000 miles driven would be interesting, too. I am (and always have been) very much in favour of retesting every 10 years. I take the point that younger drivers are, statistically, the biggest risk, but there are enough horror stories on here about older drivers, surely, to make the case?

[grimbletart]

How many younger people have deficient reactions compared to older people though grimble? That test measures physical reaction times, but driving is much more than just catching a pencil in mid air.

Don't dispute that for a moment SirC. I was merely responding to the emphasis put on reaction times. I've already said that I would be quite happy to be tested annually and have told my DCs to tell me as soon as they have any doubts about my driving.

Looking at your BBC stats which are numbers of deaths per million (so comparable incidence) it would seem that the first people take off the roads or test are the 20s to 29s, followed by the 80+, then the under 20s. It is actually the 60-69s who have the best records. And all you 30s to 50s do worse than over 50s.

[MoreBeta]

The problem here is that this generation was the generation that took to cars in massive numbers and immediately moved to places that were not served by public transport when they had children.

Now they are stranded without a car. My parents did this - retired at 65 and instead of moving to a place they could get on public transport moved to the middle of the countryside.

I don't drive at all and neither does DW. We planned our life around not having a car but so many of our friends will really struggle when they get older.

[SirChenjin]

Grimble - did you look at the death rates? Both ends of the age spectrum do badly in terms of fatality rates, with the mid-ages faring much better - it would be interesting to see what the causes of death and contributing factors are.

[BarbarianMum]

Young drivers are dangerous, in part, due to lack of experience. In general the same is not true of older drivers. My father was an excellent driver for many years. Now he's largely a lucky one

[grimbletart]

Err yes SirC. That's what my post was referring to. Both ends of the spectrum have the rubbish figures…..

[joanne1947]

As soon as I reach 70 I will need to tell the DVLA that I am fit to dive a car. I will also need regular medicals to enable me to continue driving a minibus and to tow a heavy caravan.
I think everyone over 50 should have to take a medical every 2 years in order to keep their driving licence. Easy to do and it would be good as the exam could show early symptoms of a treatable disease. Zero cost to the tax-payer as the person would have to pay the doctor for the test and that fee would include the cost of informing the DVLA of the result.

[SirChenjin]

My fault for trying to speak to Ds and type on my phone at the same time.
Fatality rates for rates for 70-79 and 80 plus and the younger end of the spectrum are dreadful. Which pretty much supports the premise of this thread.

Younger drivers need far better training for a longer period of time imo - but that's a whole other thread.

[emmelinelucas]

MoreBeta - oh yes I have that scenario in my family. They complain that they are isolated and lonely.
Move into town you silly old fools. Where there are facilities things to do.
We don't see a lot of our family, including grandchildren because they are not near a railway station or on a bus route,.
They have cars and don't understand how it is just impossible to see them. The grandparents with cars get to see our grandchildren. There are 4 sets of us.
We just cannot get there.
I don't think they understand.

[PatricianOfAnkhMorpork]

I have an issue with the accident stats. We all know that older drivers are statistically safer due to less accidents. But this doesn't account for two things:

1. the driver not reporting the accident to their insurance company
   
2. them causing an accident due to dangerous driving but not actually being in it themselves.
   
   I actually think they probably cause a huge amount of accidents or near-misses to those who are actively trying to avoid whatever dangerous manouvre they've just pulled.