To think older drivers should be re-tested

[katedan]

I have just read a SM discussion about older ( 70+) drivers and if they should be retested or have medicals to keep their drivers licences. It got quite confrontational on the discussion as those who were older felt it was unfair to generalise. This is an issue close to my heart as my dad now early 80s does not understand the risks associated with age around slower reflexes and impact of impaired memory on driving. Surely most people over 70 will consider themselves still as sharp as before and sadly people with dementia etc are not aware it is happening as it is the people around them that notice first so compulsory medicals and re testingg every 5 years over 70 would ensure drivers on the road were still safe to themselves and others. So AiBU?

The state retirement age for some people is already 68. I anticipate that it will increase to 70 for younger people. So people will still be employed & possibly need to drive to work.

I think that there should be a test for over 80s
The stats in the news show an increase in accidents

In the news recently, there was info about possible introduction of black box technology for over 80s, with restrictions to drive locally & no night driving

Some countries do not allow over 80s to drive hire vehicles

Ageing population

In the future there may be robot automatic cars for everyone

I've always thought ALL drivers should be retested at regular intervals.

It’s not about the age of the driver, it’s now long ago they passed their test. I think there should be a ‘refresher’ test every 10 years.

I passed my test in the early 90s, haven’t driven since then, and could jump in a car today. Won’t do it of course, but continue to be asked why not every time someone hears this.

@Underella578

In the future there may be robot automatic cars for everyone

Highly unlikely - they havn't even "automated" trains which operate in a far more structured/secured environment which in theory would be far simpler than driverless cars. It's science fiction and not likely in our lifetimes.

*how. Eyesight tests should be mandatory every two years, too!

I understand what you're saying but I dont feel a blanket age limit would be fair.

You do have to declare to the DVLA and your insurance company if you have dementia though and I believe most are told to stop driving.

They do have to start renewing every 19 years, and have to fill out health declarations.

I think retesting the riskiest drivers would be the better step for road safety.

The insurance industry keeps copious information on this (it's key to their profits) and its consistently younger drivers who cause greatest harm.

So a much tougher test in the first place - perhaps annual until 25 and then one top-up at 30?

This is of course assuming that the aim here is to improve road safety, not feed erroneous stereotypes against older people.

It would probably be more effective in terms of road safety to ban new young drivers from carrying any passengers under the age of 21 who don't hold a full license.

Yes I know this would be massively inconvenient for some, but one of the biggest risk factors for car accidents is a new young drivers showing off to a car full of his mates. It would also prevent a senario where the young driver kills or maims several of his young passengers as well as himself.

It always amazes me that you can pass your test and never/rarely drive afterwards but still keep your licence and are free to jump behind the wheel at any time. I know a number of young people who for reasons of location (city) don't have a car (or access to one most of the time) but on rare visits 'home' are free to get behind the wheel and drive again. I believe to fly a plane you need to do x number of flying hours per year to keep your licence but you can go for years without driving a car and jump behind the wheel today.

I was incredibly surprised to read a 'how often do you get your kids eyes tested thread on here the other day. There were people who posted who didn't get they're eyes tested regularly even as adults, let alone not bothering with children.

I do think that eye tests should be mandatory - not the 'can you read that number plate?' one - a proper one from an opticians before you do your test.

Like others have said, if there was more joined up thinking going on doctors and opticians should be able to inform the DVLA if a person should not be driving whatever their age.

Ffs *their not they're. I need a brew.

Where I live the worst accidents are often caused by women driving after a long break. It’s getting so bad now the police are posting leaflets through the door reminding people that refresher driving lessons exist for a reason.

@00100001

Why just 70+

I think we should be tested every 5-10 years form when we pass.

Yes I agree with this, although perhaps it should be more frequent over the age of 70 as you are more likely to have deteriorating reflexes, eyesight etc.

Every 10 years for under 70s and every 5 years thereafter?

My grandfather is 93 and was still driving, no way should he have been on the road, not the best vision, very shakey, was dangerous.
My father has now taken his keys off him and locked his car in the garage.

I dont think it would be bad to be tested (or enforced refresher lessons) every 5-10 years. I also think that maybe the driving test should include driving at higher speed. I had additional lessons for driving on the motorway, as my driving test was mainly done on suburban roads. I think driving on a motorway is possibly a more useful skill than reversing round a corner!
I think once most people have learnt to drive, they can easily get into bad habits.
If you live in rural areas are you tested on winding lanes with national speed limits? (Genuine question although I'm always a bit puzzled at the idea at national speed limit on windy lanes that are not wide enough for 2 cars to pass easily)

Testing older people is a good step but there are plenty of other things that should be brought in more urgently.

1. Require multiple tests as you buy bigger and more powerful cars, in the same way we have with motorcycle licences. If a 17yo wants to ride a motorbike you can't immediately jump on a 1000cc superbike, they have to start with a small capacity bike and gain experience first. The same should be the case with larger cars like SUVs and powerful cars.

1. Newly-qualified drivers should not be able to carry passengers for three years.

1. Newly-qualified drivers should be restricted to 50mph in their first year, and 60mph in their second.

This is ageist discrimination!!!

If you retest. Retest everyone.

If they a medical is required, then everyone should have a medical. This might pick up the drug addict and alcoholics and people with MH issues that drive.

I'd also like to see the TRUE facts about why this is being reviewed. There's a lot more needs sorting out in this country before you get to turning your attention to older drivers.

I'm pretty sure theres a part of the brain that doesnt fully mature/develop until the age if about 23 , which is why teenagers and younger people take more risks.
I am appalled at some of the (unsafe) situations I deliberately put myself in age 18 or 19, unrelated to driving.

My mother has dementia, diagnosed December 2015. She had a few near misses in late 2014.
In early 2015, I told her the car needed 'massive works' doing to it so it stayed at the garage for the whole year. Each time she asked, it was still being fixed....
Her doctor suggested a VOSA review after her diagnosis. She failed it and her licence was revoked.
Fortunately she lived in a built up area with lots of shops & decent buses, GP & dentist within walking distance so she didn't need drive in her every day life.
I think we all should have a retest every 10 years & compulsory eye tests every 5years even if you don't wear glasses.

It's not ageist to state that reflexes slow, cognitive abilities decline and eyesight worsens with age, these are facts.
I'm probably going to have to take DFs car keys off him at some point soon before he has an accident as DM won't have the conversation (thanks Mum). Imagine the indignity of having your right to drive taken away by your adult DD at the age of 87?

Sure there are less accidents because there are less octogenarian drivers, I'd be interested in seeing stats based on percentage of people driving at that age though and it will be a growing issue with an ageing population.

Think it should start at 80 though with 5 year tests to begin with, and the black box for insurance is a good idea.

Actually, there is a driverless bus in the town I live in.

That was at the pp who thought that driverless cars are sci fi. They exist and are being tested in may sites.

Excellent point about having to work until 70 yet not being able to drive. Also lots of people felt on the elderly for childcare.
In my experience it is younger drivers, usually male, who are dangerous.
As my driving instructor said, the easiest segment of society to get through a driving exam are young males, however they happen to be the section of society who then are the most dangerous.

The difficulty is that our modern lifestyle requires cars. People rush to get a licence at 17 and spend their entire lives driving. What are they supposed to do when their transport is removed at 75? Also this is the age group when it becomes harder to use public transport due to disability, and the age group when retired people are most likely to move to somewhere quiet away from public transport hubs. The fact is, people need to drive. Driverless cars are the only way to resolve this imo.