To think 17 is too young to drive

[KimberleyClark]

Three teenage boys (described as mid teens by police have been killed in a crash in the Highlands). I cannot begin to imagine what their parents are going through.

https://news.sky.com/story/three-teenage-boys-killed-in-highlands-car-crash-13421075

My SIL has forbidden my soon to be 17 DN to drive until they are 21. I'm increasingly thinking she is right. She is a paediatrician and not ignorant of teen brain development. AIBU?

How are they to get to work or college? Particularly in the Highlands, but also in most other parts of the country driving is required.

I'm against black boxes as there are too many problems with them. Insurance gets cancelled automatically if they don't drive frequently enough, for example.

You can't eliminate all risks from life. Locking all men away until they are 35 would mean there is hardly any dangerous driving or crime.

It already exists with insurance cost. Hardly any drive powerful cars.

Motorways are the easiest part of driving, and if you’re good enough to pass your test, you shouldn’t need to book multiple lessons to learn how to use them, especially as dual carriageways with fly-overs are motorways in all but name and can be accessed by learner drivers.

I think that’s a bit short sighted about black boxes TBH. A black box has worked really well for my daughter for the last year. Most teenagers we know have them and drive frequently to get to work so insurance cancellation isn’t relevant.
There are loads of positives, detailed reports on your driving on things like cornering and breaking, limits on speed, cheaper insurance etc. I think they should be mandatory for young people, I’m actually a bit shocked when parents are prepared to pay more money to not have one. I have driven my daughter’s car often and it really does make you think about your driving.

The motorways on our doorstep are busy and notorious for bad accidents and there have been several recently. It’s not my DC I’m as bothered about, it’s other drivers. A couple of extra lessons with an instructor just to familiarise will be worth it for us.

How to say “I don’t run a business” without saying “I don’t run a business”.

The cost of employment is high enough as it is. Paying for a taxi to ferry a young person from a rural pub at midnight could cost almost as much as the person was paid for their evening shift! It cost me £40 to take a 10 miles taxi trip across rural Suffolk at around midnight last year.

My DD passed 3 months after her 17th birthday. I wanted her to be the driver rather than be driven. I always looked at it as a vital skill, like learning to cycle or swim. But she’s always been sensible. I’m not sure how I’d felt if I had a boy, but probably would have done the same, I’d rather mine was the driver.

I don’t think you can control who the driver is. So you’re willing to take a risk on your DS/DD getting in a car with all their mates and trusting that 17 year old driver newly qualified driver?. Cars full of teenagers are 4 times more likely to be involved in an accident. We could change that by having rules around passengers like other countries do.

There’s a bit of an element of ‘oh that won’t happen to my DS/DD’ on here - but the risk is there and it’s considerable. Why wouldn’t people welcome measures to reduce that risk? Are every single one of their mates sensible?

I didn’t need motorway lessons, mind you I passed at 26 after several attempts and several years of lessons, rather than a 17 year old first time passer with a few o ths of lessons. I much prefer driving on motorways to driving on fast, bendy rural roads.

Here’s an articleabouttherisks of teenage driving from the AA. Note the case study features a crash where the driver was female.

https://www.theaa.com/about-us/newsroom/teenage-driving-risk-of-death-underestimated-by-eight-in-ten

Sorry, only read first two pages so may have been posted already. In Australia, or maybe just New South Wales, they have restrictions on young drivers. They seem quite evidence based e.g. you can drive a family member at night but not a group of friends the same age.

https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/targeted-restrictions-teenage-drivers-promising-approach-improving-road-safety
www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/driver-and-rider-licences/driver-licences/provisional-p1-licence

Yep this is my point. Car accidents are the biggest risk to our teenagers lives. Yet no appetite to change any laws to make this safer! And it would be so easy to do - other counties have.

Yep that would have a huge impact on accidents here. Most countries seem to have better laws around this than ours.

I’m sure I sighed a petition a while ago but nothing changes and more groups of teenagers die in cars.

People have always been remarkably accepting of the carnage on our roads, 1600 killed in 2033, that's the equivalent of 7 or 8 plane crashes. People would be up on arms about that.

That's a bit of a sweeping statement to say that 17yr olds have a had a few lessons when passing. We have just spent an absolute fortune on them as well as taking her out ourselves in a car we maintain for her. When you had these years of lessons were you going out everyday in a car to practice? My daughter went out with us or her instructor most days in all weathers and all times of day.

Do you have a crystal 🔮 ball? 2033, aye?

Don’t be a dick. It was obviously a typo and we are talking about 1600 teenage lives here…

Yep I find it utterly bizarre. And we could reduce those deaths easily. I guess it’s heads firmly in the sand…

You can't "forbid" an 18+ year old from doing anything and you'll struggle with a determined 17 yo.

The problem is that our society is set up so you have to drive for nearly everything and even when public transport is available, it's unreliable and expensive.

Considering that just about everyone needs to learn and the older you get the harder it is, I'll be getting my DD a course of lessons the moment she is old enough to take them.

You may well be right that 17 year olds either shouldn't be driving, or should have additional restrictions to mitigate risk.

However as far as this goes:

"My SIL has forbidden my soon to be 17 DN to drive until they are 21. I'm increasingly thinking she is right. She is a paediatrician and not ignorant of teen brain development. AIBU?"

The fact is that a 17 year old is in many ways an adult (including crucially the right to leave home, and therefore be able to drive despite being "forbidden" to do so), and a year later they're legally an adult.

Adults don't "forbid" each other from doing things.

As much as I could. My dad died before I was old enough to drive and my mum was a reluctant driver but did her best.

Laws can prevent people doing things until certain ages (with good reason). You can’t drink in the US until you are 21 example. So that is adults preventing other ‘adults’ from doing something.

The facts are that teenage brains are not fully developed until they are 21. Boys later than girls. Frontal lobe development is associated with impulsivity and risk taking. As evidenced by the stats on road accidents and teen deaths. These are plain facts.

I

Our brains (including the frontal lobe) are not fully developed until 25…

There is a huge difference in maturity between a 17 year old and a 25 year old..

I was referring to individual adults forbidding other adults doing something.

I was not referring to society/government forbidding it, as in your examples.

In fact, my opening paragraph is basically saying I'd be open to society/government putting those restrictions in place.

Yes I guess that’s the point isn’t it. As parents we can’t forbid anything once they get to a certain age (but we can not support financially). That is why changes in law are necessary.

Because even if I delay my son driving (which actually I won’t). I can’t control who he gets in a car with… So a ban on 17 year olds taking passengers would solve all these problems. They could get the practice and experience safely with adults and then take friends a few years down the line when they are more mature and experienced.

I can’t see any viable arguments against that…