Allowing a 17-year-old to drive - too much freedom?

[Breakupcharlie]

this is a reverse - I was going to do the whole thing of ‘my DD17 is paying for her own lessons but I think it will give her too much freedom’.

I grew up in a small village - it was two buses for well over an hour into town and then another one out for what would have been a ten minute drive to 6th form or work.

My mum said I wasn’t allowed to learn until after 6th form as she didn’t want it distracting me from my exams (I was on track for fairly good grades).

She admitted to me last weekend (6th form was ten years ago) that she said it would have gave me too much freedom and teenagers shouldn’t have that much freedom.

I can still remember waiting in the rain as my buses never aligned or I didn’t see my friends as the buses we’re a nightmare at the weekends. It’s really kind of bothered me and thinking it’s borderline abusive control?

Borderline abuse?

Because she wouldn’t give you money for driving lessons?

My father was the same. I got a part time job and paid for my own lessons.

It's not "borderline abuse" - it's just abuse, plain and simple. Limiting your access to something you legally have a right to do just because she didn't like the idea that you were growing up and would eventually leave the nest.

Freedom is good, but who will pay for it? Besides the lessons... the car, the road tax, the insurance?

My DD2 passed her test when she was 17 and drove herself to school for the whole of her last year. We live quite rurally and it was bliss not having to leave for work early each day. It also meant she could have loads of freedom to come and go to her friends which I thought was a bonus. No more giving her lifts anywhere. She was a safe and sensible driver and valued her freedom.

I think she was weird about it.

Parents helped pay for lessons for my brother and me, as soon as we were 17, they also bought bangers for us, but we had to pay insurance and petrol out of our part time jobs. We lived in a rural area and having a licence and car was very much needed.

DS is having driving lessons now he pays for half of them. I was just day dreaming this morning about when he passes and he'll be able to help with dropping off and picking up his sibling

My 17yo is learning to drive. I've paid for the lessons and bought him a second hand car which he practices in outside of lessons

Your mum did what she thought was best for you at the time, your mum not letting her 17 year old take driving lessons is not abuse.

I don't think it is abuse, but it may deny an option for help should you be ill or injured.

I don't think it's abusive. It is controlling but then as you don't need parental permission to learn to drive there was nothing stopping you from doing it yourself surely.

DH and his siblings grew up to believe if they ever smoked, got a tattoo or a motorbike they'd be kicked out.
I highly doubt it would've happened but I can see how FIL could convince them otherwise.
He tried to pull that shit on my DC and I swiftly put him in his place, not that I particularly want any of those things for my kids but if they're legally old enough then I'm certainly not going to disown them over it.

"Abuse" is too far but it is controlling behaviour.

Tell her that you probably would have got better grades if you hadn't been stuck on buses for hours every day!

as you don't need parental permission to learn to drive there was nothing stopping you from doing it yourself surely

A parent can easily pull the "my house, my rules" card. Especially as 17 is still a minor legally. Demanding the child coughs up their wages or trying to make them lose their job would quickly force the driving lessons to stop.

Your mum was controlling. Too much freedom from what? Sounds mean of her.

No, I wouldn't say it was abusive or controlling. A bit mean if she could afford it, maybe.

Ot would you have paid for the lessons, test, car and insurance yourself?

We live in a similar area so both of our children learnt to drive when they were 17. We paid for it and their first years insurance, they bought their cars. It was much better, for us as a family, that they could drive because they didn't need ferrying around all the time.

It does seem quite controlling that she wouldn't let you learn to drive.

@howtobe

Borderline abuse?

Because she wouldn’t give you money for driving lessons?

And how easy do you think think it is to get a job to earn money for it if your parents won't give you lifts to support that? Jobs can be thin on the ground in rural areas. Apart from ad hoc jobs with holiday cottages and babysitting, I needed to travel a minimum of ten miles to find a job.

I'm not saying it's abusive. I might make similar decisions about where I bring my own children up. But choosing isolation AND choosing to allow that factor to limit your children from options deemed safe and legal is controlling.

(and short sighted - my sister is now a very timid driver after learning late, which means trips to see them with their beloved grandson are less frequent than they'd like. And that's before you consider the associated controlling behaviours that went with the refusal to facilitate driving etc...)

I grew up in a similar setting, passed my driving test at 17 then barely went to college again, just pissed about at my mates house and lied about where I'd been all day. Ended up resitting all my a levels and going to uni as a mature student a few years later after doing very badly the first time.

Mine all started learning at 15, and so far 2 have passed their tests at 16. It's been incredibly handy having extra drivers in the house.

The other day one of them picked up my click and collect order from the supermarket, god bless him.

My 19 and 17 year olds drive themselves to work and back. My oldest drove herself to meet a friend in another country at the age of 17.

We bought a spare car which they share. As we're in the US, there's no major extra cost for insuring new teen drivers.

None of them have had any crashes, and they're all pretty sensible drivers. They each got over 70 hours of driving experience before they took their tests. They can drive in snowstorms, which is the most important skill round here.

I wouldn't call it abusive to not let your child learn to drive, but stopping them in order to curtail their freedom is a bit shit.

She sounds nuts, I would have thought a 27 year old who drives is less likely to drink

*17!

Why do people persist in reading things in the OP's post that are not there?

The OP could have afforded her own driving lessons, the issue wasnt the cost but parental permission.

Instead of being able to drive, the OP had to spend hours on buses, waiting around in the rain etc not for reason of finance or safety, but because the OP's mother didn't think she ought have that freedom, for reasons we have not been told.

Now there might be some back story we aren't aware of that would mean curtailing the 17 year old OP's freedom was a sensible thing to do, but if its simply the case that the OP's mother just didn't think teenage OP should be permitted to drive yet.. then yeah i think thats pretty controlling and I'd be a bit pissed off at all that time spent wasted on public transport, opportunities missed, miserable cold wet waits at bus stops that were unnecessary.

It’s all very well saying that kids should learn to drive etc, but where do people think the money comes from to maintain a car at seventeen?

I’d be amazed if a seventeen year old had the money for driving lessons as well as to buy a car, tax, insure and maintain it.

My DS is in the opposite position in that he has had some pressure applied to him that he should learn to drive, but he has no interest in doing so. But there are some who seemingly think that driving is the be all and end all and while it’s certainly much more convenient in some parts it really isn’t a necessity to learn to drive at seventeen.

My DS looked into it briefly, as I said I would contribute to lessons if he did want to learn. But having looked at the cost of cars, insurance, fuel, MOT costs etc etc etc his curiosity to learn quickly faded away, and he went back to having 0 interest what so ever.
We live in the London area though and TBH I think that owning a car is a waste of money here, since public transport is excellent, and most cars spend their time either sitting on driveways or station carparks.

As an aside, I used to work for an insurance company. One day I had a call from a customer wanting a recommendation for which car to buy her DS so it would be a low insurance group. She said that four of his friends had had cars that year, and he had been to three of their funerals.

For people saying “my child is a safe driver,” that’s just one example. It’s a bit like the people who say “my baby slept on their tummy and didn’t come to any harm,” when the evidence is there that it significantly increases the risk of SIDS.

Young drivers are considered a high risk. Doesn’t matter whether your child drives well, plenty do not.

She was just being protective. I was a rural mum of young teen drivers, it was a very scary time.

More people are killed on rural roads than other roads; and of those killed, most are young drivers. Every rural parent knows their kids are at high risk when they have just passed their testYou can check the statistics for yourself.

Seriously. This is not abusive.

The OP could have afforded her own driving lessons, the issue wasn't the cost but parental permission.

Yes, but could she have managed to pay for a car, car insurance, MOT, road tax, repairs to the car? Being able to afford driving lessons doesn't mean you can afford to drive a car.

Rural driving is incredibly dangerous - narrow country roads in the dark are not the ideal place for groups of 17 year olds to learn to drive. It's totally understandable that her mum was worried.

That's not to say I agree with a blanket "you can't learn to drive" but a rule of "you can learn, but you'll need to pay for everything yourself is acceptable imo.