Driving with diabetes (risk of hypoglycaemia)

[UnaCorda]

I've been reading about a server at a fast-food restaurant who helped a customer who was suffering from low blood sugar and was in danger of losing consciousness. Obviously that's great that this woman was observant and knew just what to do in that situation.

However what bothers me is that this customer was in her car in the first place, potentially putting people at risk. Surely if you have a condition that means you could lose consciousness - whether it be diabetes, epilepsy, a heart condition, etc. - and you can't reliably control this with medication or by some other means, you don't get behind the wheel? Someone shared a story of a colleague who was killed by ending up under a truck having left work already knowing she was hypoglycaemic. Obviously a terrible thing to have happened, but this colleague could so easily have killed multiple other people not just herself.

Am I not understanding something about this situation, or AIBU?

For type 1 @Sotiredofthislife?! I'm sorry, that is awful. I've never had any restrictions put in my access to testing and can't believe how short sighted that is. Who can get by on less than tests per day. Awful

Yes, Type 1. Fortunately, my child is young and will get DLA (fingers crossed) so the cost of testing is covered in that way. The diabetic team give us an extra pack every time we visit them from their seemingly endless stash but they can't give more on prescription. I get away with putting in prescriptions a few days early but when I tried to ask for additional strips after 14 days, the surgery phoned me and wanted answers. It is too much hassle, frankly, as I am a lone parent and work full time in a demanding job. Path of least resistence.

I think people saying typos happen for no reason, are unpredictable etc, aresuggesting that following basic driving safety is hard/too hard

But hypos do happen and whilst we are fairly new to all of this, it is clear to me that diabetes is different in everyone, that life changes, stress, emotions, weather conditions, etc. etc. etc can all impact on the likelihood of having a hypo at any given moment. And that's without thinking about what you may or may not have eaten and the last time you may or may not have eaten. It's not too hard - it's common sense if you have the condition - but with the best will in the world, sometimes things go wrong. It's not an exact science, is it?

@BellaBarlow When i was diagnosed 24 years ago the prevailing feeling was that it was a health condition rather than a disability."

It's not that diabetes has changed its definition its more to do with the change from the disability discrimination act to the equality act. Under the equality act you are protected due to having a long term health condition or disability. I don't refer to myself as 'disabled' but an employer for example couldn't refuse to employ me purely because of my long term health condition or disability (with some exceptions)

@Sotired There are set guidelines, it's not down to your GP it's set by the CCG. They shouldn't be restricting strips, particularly with a child. 50 a month is ridiculous. Guidelines are 8 tests per day normarily. PM me if you want me to find your CCG policy.

But the OP suggested that people with diabetes shouldn't drive

Please tell me where I say this.

I think what she wants is for there to be some kind of legal comeback

There is, in certain circumstances.

*At least diabetes has the restrictions with the DVLA and is mainly controllable with medical support and a bit of determination.

I understand and agree with this, and my only issue is with people not demonstrating that determination.

i think what she wants is for there to be some kind of legal comeback - as with drink driving - should a person with diabetes be found to have been driving whilst hypo

I’m 99% sure we are, if found to be responsible for a car while hypo we can be convicted for dangerous driving. Even when pulled over if we don’t shut off the engine, remove the keys and move to the passenger seat we can be convicted.

Type one is legally a disability in that you are protected under the Equalities Act 2010. Whether you choose to define yourself as having a disability or not is up to you.

This entirely. I don't know why some people seem to object so strongly to having a disability - it's nothing shameful at all - but it is completely your own individual decision and not for anybody else to dictate.

You don't have to go around telling everybody you meet about your full personal health circumstances, but in a world where people with disabilities and serious health conditions are routinely discriminated against and treated shockingly, I wouldn't outright denounce your equality rights, as there might come a day when you need that protection in law.

People saying there should be a legal comeback - there is. You can be prosecuted in the same way as for incapacity through drink or drug driving. In addition, both the examples given by the OP should result in the drivers licences being revoked for having severe hypos while driving.

In terms of keeping an eye on blood glucose, continuous glucose monitoring technology is getting better all the time. My family can 'follow' my real-time blood glucose levels and I can see them on a watch, a smartphone, some people have even managed to get them on their car dashboard. It's really important that insulin users are given access to this technology to make these kind of accidents history.

There are set guidelines, it's not down to your GP it's set by the CCG. They shouldn't be restricting strips, particularly with a child. 50 a month is ridiculous. Guidelines are 8 tests per day normarily. PM me if you want me to find your CCG policy

Thank you. I will have a look and come back to you if I need to. As I say, early days and we are learning, learning, learning!

I understand and agree with this, and my only issue is with people not demonstrating that determination

If you don’t demonstrate the determination - turn up to appointments, order your prescriptions regularly, upload data for your team to scrutinise - then you are going to lose your licence. My child’s team demands an upload of data prior to an appointment. The testing machine plugs into a computer. It uploads the previous 500 readings with the time and date they were taken to a programme the medical staff also have access to. It is quite clear to anyone who knows anything about diabetes whether or not you are keeping a handle on your condition. We have the mobile number of our named nurse who I text if concerned - he looks at the data, we discuss via text what has happened and he makes a decision about changes to doseage. It’s really not rocket science. What else is it you want?

@Sotiredofthislife Speak to you DSN and GP, I get 150 strips a month and I have a CGM. I've had to start refusing strips and I'm genuinely disgusted when I see what others, especially Americans go through to manage their diabetes

What else is it you want?

Nothing!

Curious why you picked on diabetes. They have restricted licenses and the DVLA check with the doctor before it's renewed. They have 6 monthly or yearly reviews of everything including eyesight. Hypos are pretty horrible, no one wants to have a hypo so the vast majority of diabetics test regularly and carry equipment to deal with it and are aware of the signs of an oncoming hypo.

Shouldn't you be more worried that the DVLA doesn't require an eye check after you first pass your test? I'd be willing to bet that more accidents are caused by people driving with poor eyesight than because of a hypo. In fact unless medical conditions are reported by a GP or the driver themselves there are absolutely no further checks at all until 70.

The NHS and DVLA are pretty tight on health conditions and driving - a woman I worked with had a seizure at work and while investigations found it to be caused by stress she still didn't get her license back until she hadn't had a seizure for a year. The doctors reported it to the DVLA very quickly.

The vast majority of car accidents are caused by poor driver decisions. Should we implement an 'are you an idiot and/or aggressive driver' test before giving anyone a license? Maybe we should.

Driver failed to look properly – 42,189 accidents reported
Driver failed to judge other person’s path or speed – 21,211 accidents reported
Driver was careless, reckless or in a hurry – 17,845 accidents reported
Driver had poor turn or maneuver – 15,560 accidents reported
Loss of control – 12,151 accidents reported
Pedestrian failed to look properly – 8,687 accidents reported
Slippery road surface – 7,327 accidents reported
Driver was travelling too fast for conditions – 6,468 accidents reported
Driver was following too close – 6,040 accidents reported
Driver was exceeding speed limit – 5,102 accidents reported

Only the slippery road surface could possibly not be caused by poor decision making but even then it usually is - not having winter tires, driving too fast on icy roads etc.