mandatory retesting for drivers over 80

[InSlovakiaTheCapitalOfCourseIsBratislava]

It’s been a pretty even split on the mandatory retesting for over seventies, and a bit of ‘70 is too young but I’d support 80’, so, in the spirit of research, a refinement to the original query

This is not an opportunity for the ‘what about terrible younger drivers who are reckless and cause accidents’ - it’s agreed to be a problem.
Nor is is ‘what about drink/drug dricing’
Nor is is ‘what about the backlog of driving tests that currently exists’

Its a ‘is it unreasonable for over 80s to do pass compulsory driving test in order to hold on to their licence’

Tje recommendations from the FAI for a little boy killed by a 92 year old pensioner suggested it, there’s Scarlett’s law proposal in NI and someone in the previous thread shared a graph which showed a U curve of accidents against age - high for the 17-25, decreased, ans rose sky high at 80

I agree that something needs to change. I don't think it's ageist to say that cognition and reaction times can deteriorate as we age and the last person who can admit this is the person themselves. My dad is 75 and hasn't driven in about 3 years now and he'd been curtailing his driving for a good few years before that. He was an excellent driver when younger, but I could see his confidence declining over time. My FIL was a police driver and at 74, I can see major changes in how he drives now, including lapses at junctions that would never have happened even 10 years ago. I would regard myself as a competent, confident driver, but I think I probably improved about 7 years ago when I had to pass my CBT to drive a scooter.

I've been behind some slow elderly drivers, which can be quite frustrating, but ultimately not the end of the world, but I am more concerned by those who can't stay on the right side of the road, or pull out of junctions at really inappropriate times. Some of them are driving like they are drunk, and there is no one who would advocate for allowing that! I like the suggestion of a reaction test, without the need for a full retest. Driving is a privilege at all ages, not a right.

I would add those people who insist on driving in the middle lane of a three lane carriageway when the left lane is completely clear. The police should stop them and give them a ticket for driving without due consideration for other road users.

The determination of the FAI for xander irvine was that over 70s driving be more regulated/overseen

” in terms of section 26(2)(f): The current regime of self-certification of fitness for
drivers over 70 years of age is significantly defective. It relies on self-certification by the
applicant driver. It fails to identify unfitness to drive in applicants who either
deliberately or unintentionally fail to give correct information on the relevant
application form. It fails to recognise that driving ability may decline with age, or that
dementia sufferers may be unaware of their own condition”

https://www.copfs.gov.uk/about-copfs/news/fai-determination-with-significant-recommendations-published-following-death-of-xander-irvine/

Agree with this 100%. It makes perfect sense.

Yep, it is like some people are totally ignorant to the fact that cars can be adapted.

LlynTegid
Definity disagree with your view. SUVs provide much better view of the road. The vehicles constantly nipping in front causing drivers to avoid hotting them are the smaller vehicles.

I agree more with the reflex and eyesight check, done maybe with something online that's easily accessible rather than another long waiting list which would be more of a hindrance than a help. It is true though, experience absolutely counts for an awful lot regarding the actual driving as long as that driver is Compos Mentis!

Veryoldman

Yes they can ensure that eye tests etc are compulsory, and doctors and opticians can report those not up to standard to the DVLA, but surely it’s personal responsibility too. Unfortunately some older people won’t go to the opticIan as they know their eyesight inadequate, and they will be stopped from driving. I don’t know why the Govenment hasn’t brought in mandatory checks. It’s not necessary or realistic to retest older people, but it is necessary to ensure that everyone is physically and mentally fit to drive, so 10 yearly checks up to 70 then every three years at designated centres is required. Not that difficult to set up and could save lives. I will write to the transport minister, might help if others did too.

Regarding eye tests... I could not read a number plate at the distance needed. I went to the optician, had an eye test and got glasses that solved that issue.

Considering Technology has moved on, I feel that it would be best to have AI tracking system on young drivers, newly qualified drivers, and over 70s to monitor their driving instead of retesting them.

You have too much trust in AI.

What, like doing basic things like recording footage that shows when the driver is not following the Highway Code? Most cars have this already in them like a speedometer, blind spot alert mechanism etc…

I live in the USA, in Maine, and whatever your age we have to renew our driving licenses every six years, which isn’t a retest but does include a compulsory eye test. This seems reasonable to me regardless of age.

Isn't that what the black box does? And it's very difficult to get insurance for a young driver without it. It's almost compulsory.

Maybe everyone should have to be retested every 5 years? Why not? There are so many appalling drivers, that I do question if some people should be on the road at all.

I always wonder why it’s considered ageist to have additional checks in place for the very elderly drivers when it’s a known fact that for the majority eyesight and reflexes decline, but it’s not considered ageist to discriminate against young drivers. I mean why should they have a test, once they’ve had x hours of driving aren’t they good enough?

People wanting to take their test for the fist time are having to wait months. The capacity for retesting everyone every 5 years just does not exist.

I am usually the first person to call out agism against older people on MN but I agree with this 100%.
It boils down to the wants of the individual should not override the safety of everyone else.

I don't understand why anyone would object to testing people who have a significantly higher probability of being medically unfit to drive.

If you pass the test you can continue to drive anyway. If you don't, well surely if you are a responsible person you want to know if you are not fit to drive, plus you would want to stop before you caused serious damage to either yourself or someone elses life/family.

There is also the fact that it protects people you care about from other potentially dangerous drivers. Who wants their kids and grandkids being mown down by someone driving that can hardly see ?