Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

To be shocked that dh thinks deaf people should not be allowed to drive

77 replies

StoorieMidori · 07/08/2008 12:17

Started with this news story.

I am aware of arguments for and against deaf drivers (and have deaf friends who drive), but wondered what the MNers thought.

So Yes or No, AIBU????

OP posts:

alardi · 07/08/2008 12:28

Is your DH's view that the deaf man is at fault for trying to drive at all? I have a gut feeling that it is a dodgy thing for a deaf person to do, but I'm not an expert on the safety of how important sound is to driving. Presumably if it's legal, it's probably reasonably safe enough (as judged by people who know how to assess how risky it would be). So your DH is in the wrong.

wannaBe · 07/08/2008 12:31

hmm.

On the whole a deaf driver wouldn't be at any greater disadvantage to any other driver, as most of driving is visual rather than audible.

But in a situation where a driver wouldn't be able too see the lights of an emergency vehicle, but wouldn't be able to hear it either because of his disability, I can see how some might question whether it is appropriate for someone with a hearing impairment to be driving, the argument being that if the driver was not deaf, he would have heard the siren and would have been able to get out of the way in time.

Having said that, the same could be said of someone driving down the road listening to an ipod on headphones or with their music turned up so loud that they would fail to hear anything else.

nailpolish · 07/08/2008 12:36

well he must have passed his test like everyone else so therefore is allowed to drive

smurfgirl · 07/08/2008 12:40

Oddly enough I was thinking about this yesterday, it wouldn't make a difference I think because although obviously someone who is deaf would not be able to hear outside noises like fire engines neither can people with music playing really loudly in the car.

edam · 07/08/2008 12:41

The driver of the fire engine was clearly in the wrong, going through a red light over the speed limit without slowing down and checking for other vehicles. The poor dead man was an innocent victim and it is wrong to try to put the blame on him.

deepinlaundry · 07/08/2008 12:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

milknosugar · 07/08/2008 12:49

i dont think anyone can put any blame on the deaf man in this incident, however i think the law on who can drive should be a lot more strict.

one of my kids only avoided getting run over because the driver of the car he ran out in front of heard me scream his name and slammed the brakes on. he would have hit him if he had been deaf or had music blaring. so if im honest i would prob ban deaf people and radios. i also think a lot of old people are driving who shouldnt be. and tbh i shouldnt have passed my test, i was so nervous i was really really awful, worse than my first esson and somehow i still got through.

i think cars should be viewed as the potentially fatal objects they are, the law is far too lenient for people who abuse them.

bigcar · 07/08/2008 12:51

The article also says how bad visibility was at that juction, so maybe a hearing person wouldn't have known exactly where the fire engine was, even though they could hear one coming. There are crashes every year between emergency vehicles and other cars or pedestrians, this wasn't a one off.

deepinlaundry · 07/08/2008 12:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ChopsTheDuck · 07/08/2008 12:53

loud music increases chance of accident though. When I learned to drive I was taught to drive with the windows slightly down and use my ears as well as my eyes. I can't have the radio too loud in residential areas as I wouldn't be able to pick out other sounds.

I'm hearing impaired and did my test by looking at the examiner's hand signals. I got a minor for forgetting to cancel my indicator (can't hear them) and was warned that I do need to remember use my eyes to compensate for not being able to hear.

perosonally I think driving with no hearing at all would be dangerous, and it's not something I could really do.

ReallyTired · 07/08/2008 12:55

I agree poor man. I disagree with the suggestion that profoundly deaf people should be banned from driving. My FIL is very severely deaf and he is a very good driver.

If we are going to ban people who are deaf from driving then we need to ban people driving with squawking kids. Or ban pregnant women from driving, or those who are colour blind.

What would have been the opinon if the deaf man had been riding a bicycle.

I agree that the driver of the fire engine was totally in the wrong and he will have to live with it for the rest of his life.

DustyTV · 07/08/2008 12:56

for everyone involved.

Upwind · 07/08/2008 12:58

I think you should have to resit your driving test every 10 years. If you show you are observant enough to pass, that should be okay, hearing loss or no hearing loss. My grandmother persisted in driving despite failing eyesight until family were forced to intervene.

My parents are the worst drivers I have ever come across - none of their DC will get in a car with them but they don't understand why they have so many accidents! They are a danger to themselves and everyone on the road.

I would be very much against banning music/radios because I find it helps keep me alert.

EffiePerine · 07/08/2008 13:05

yes to retesting

my mother is licensed to drive and she refuses to reverse. And needs Dad there to tell her what gear she is in.

Original poster

StoorieMidori · 07/08/2008 13:05

Thanks for feedback everyone.

I agree that it is a horrible and sad situation for all concerned.

OP posts:

wannaBe · 07/08/2008 13:11

agree that everyone should resit their test every 10 years. I bet a lot of people would fail second time round.

I don't necessarily think music should be banned but there should certain mb a level - there is a car that drives around here and you can hear his music (including the words) two streets away . There is no need for music to be that loud. none at all.

Upwind · 07/08/2008 13:14

I can imagine the outrage of drivers who failed a resit

I think a lot of older people never learned how to navigate roundabouts safely or how to use motorways.

thomsc · 07/08/2008 13:22

From what I recall of my Fire safety badge at scouts, fire-engines do not have automatic right of way at red lights (unlike ambulances, I think). They may drive through a red light if it is safe to do so, but shouldn't assume right of way.

Deaf people driving? why the devil not? As people have said, most driving awareness is visual (most) and I'm sure we are all guilty of having the radio up, or having the odd screaming bairn to deal with.

theyoungvisiter · 07/08/2008 13:22

how sad - but I can't see that banning deaf drivers is the solution.

According to that logic we'd have to ban deaf people from ever going near a road. What if it had been a deaf pedestrian after all? They would have been equally at risk from the fire engine as they wouldn't have been able to hear the siren either.

Sadly some disabilities do put people at greater risk from injury - but the solution isn't to ban them from participating in society. We seem to have evolved into thinking that any risk is unacceptable. I'm sure deaf drivers are aware of the small limitations their condition puts on their driving and if they accept the risk, so should the rest of us.

Upwind · 07/08/2008 13:27

I think that is an important point theyoungvisitor. So many people today behave as though we can and should eliminate risk.

theyoungvisiter · 07/08/2008 13:42

I agree with your point about taking retests as well Upwind - it's ridiculous that people who learned to drive 40, 50 or even more years ago in completely different road conditions are never required to show they are up to date with new road laws and so on.

One of my great-aunts had always let her husband do all the driving in their marriage, although she had a license. When he died she got back behind the wheel for maybe the 3rd or 4th time in 40 years. Needless to say she was a complete liability - she's dead now though (not from a road accident fortunately!)

stoppinattwo · 07/08/2008 13:45

He could have been at an equal dis advantage had he been a deaf pedestrain.....He was causing no harm to anyone by being a deaf driver. It is for the driver of the emergency vehicles to assess the safety of running a red light in an emergency situation, and to proceed with caution.

IMO deaf drivers are in no way different to any other driver, They may not hear someoen beeping them but if they are driving correctly as should any driver, then there should be no need for them to be beeped by any other driver.

I cant think of any instance where there is a warning sound that isnt backed up with a visual aid (signs and flashing lights)

stoppinattwo · 07/08/2008 13:47

Oh and on a side note.......................nobody has a right of way through a red light except for a postman carrying a declaration of war

thomsc · 07/08/2008 13:53

That's one for the pub quiz stoppinattwo!

notcitrus · 07/08/2008 20:11

The DVLA think that deaf people can drive fine, without even needing an endorsement on their licence - driving is 99% visual, and deaf people are used to making better use of their vision, because they know they might miss an audible signal.

Some insurers even give discounts to deaf drivers because their visual awareness means fewer accidents - not that I've ever found one of these insurers in the UK...

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread