Should elderly drivers need to resit their test?

joe stodge

I was out doing the shopping this morning and twice in less than 500meters I seen 2 elderly people preform leathol manovers on the the road.

The first was on the malahide road in Dublin (it's a duel carriage way with a bus lane and a central divider) the lady driving the car seemed to have missed her turn. Instead of waiting until the roundabout just up the road, she decided to preform a three point turn and head back up the bus lane into on coming traffic. She looked to be early 70s or so.

The second was less thsn 500meters up the road. The is a right turn on to a one way road serving a small retail park (lidl, woodies and a few others) as I went to turn I noticed a lot of horn honking and how the traffic suddenly stopped, all of a sudden an elderly man in a micra comes down the road against the flow of traffic and pulls out onto the malahide road. The man looked to be late 70s.

Should there be some age when you have resit your driving test?

both drivers were very lucky they didn't hit anyone.

fermanagh_man

Could also mention quite a majority of them drive at dangerously slow speeds

Holsten

100% yes.

After a set age they should.

beauf

How about any driver of any age who does something stupid and dangerous should be made re-sit it.

Can you report it to the Garda and ask them to check CCTV footage of it.

TwoShedsJackson

Holsten wrote: »

100% yes.

After a set age they should.

And that age should be set to my age +1 years, in perpetuity.

frozenfrozen

In the NDLS centre when I was getting my provisional license, a man (not very old, but still) said "Sure I can't read that writing how can I be expected to fill this out" ..which was pretty funny considering he was reapplying to be allowed to pilot a big metal killing machine

joe stodge

beauf wrote: »

How about any driver of any age who does something stupid and dangerous should be made re-sit it.

Can you report it to the Garda and ask them to check CCTV footage of it.

CCTV? There are no cameras in the area.

greenbicycle

I dont think you can just pick an age and insist on a test. One mid 70 year old might be highly competent and another could be as bad as the people descriped in the OP.

Driving tests can be stressful and i doubt the majority of drivers would passed if they had to sit the test again. Why pick on older people who are as able and aware as a younger driver.

I agree there has to be a way of taking dangerous driviers off the road, and a decent percentage of them are elderly but i am not sure what the best way to do that is without hindering safe and competent drivers yet above a certain age.

My name is URL

People should have to resit it every 10-15 years or so imo.. regardless of age.

Iwasfrozen

Yes, and it should be every 5 years.

greenbicycle wrote: »

I dont think you can just pick an age and insist on a test. One mid 70 year old might be highly competent and another could be as bad as the people descriped in the OP.

Driving tests can be stressful and i doubt the majority of drivers would passed if they had to sit the test again. Why pick on older people who are as able and aware as a younger driver.

I agree there has to be a way of taking dangerous driviers off the road, and a decent percentage of them are elderly but i am not sure what the best way to do that is without hindering safe and competent drivers yet above a certain age.

Because they drive on the same road and incompetent old drivers are a danger to everyone.

beauf

joe stodge wrote: »

CCTV? There are no cameras in the area.

Usually shops and retails parks have camera's. Thats all.

beauf

incompetent drivers of any age are a danger to everyone.

tayto lover

My name is URL wrote: »

People should have to resit it every 10-15 years or so imo.. regardless of age.

Will ya stop giving them ideas FFS.
They have us fleeced already.

spiritcrusher

Well, on my drive home this evening it took me 20 minutes to drive a section that usually takes me less than 10 thanks to being stuck behind an oul wan doing roughly 40kmph most of the way. Nearly caused some impatient guy in an Audi to go over a wall as he overtook both of us where the road wasn't really wide enough for overtaking.
Once a driver makes it not possible to drive in 5th gear on straight road with nothing coming they're dangerous.

kowloon

A reduced test might be better, otherwise the system won't be able to cope. With a lot of elderly drivers the problem is vision or other health issues.

henryporter

We'll all be old someday (unless some auld wan runs us down), but yes of course those over a certain age should have driving competency tested - not only for their sake but all the other road users as well.

beauf

spiritcrusher wrote: »

Well, on my drive home this evening it took me 20 minutes to drive a section that usually takes me less than 10 thanks to being stuck behind an oul wan doing roughly 40kmph most of the way. Nearly caused some impatient guy in an Audi to go over a wall as he overtook both of us where the road wasn't really wide enough for overtaking.
Once a driver makes it not possible to drive in 5th gear on straight road with nothing coming they're dangerous.

I would have thought there was two people that need to resit the test.

tayto lover

What about all the little boy racers who pull out in front of you with the wheels spinning or who fail to indicate at junctions?
At least the elderly are not going to smash into you at speed.

Statistics still show that the most dangerous drivers are young males between 18 and 24 years.

Cuddlesworth

Never going to happen, there is 0 political will there.

If you implemented 10-15 year interval testing at least half of the drivers on the road would fail. Drivers over 70 would be decimated.

Cuddlesworth

tayto lover wrote: »

Statistics still show that the most dangerous drivers are young males between 18 and 24 years.

Define danger. The risk of a car crash per mile driven? Guess which gender and age groups top that list.

Rightwing

My name is URL wrote: »

People should have to resit it every 10-15 years or so imo.. regardless of age.

Let's make it every year while we are at it, and charge then €500 to do it. :rolleyes:

corsav6

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Define danger. The risk of a car crash per mile driven? Guess which gender and age groups top that list.

Go on, tell us please, I'm no good at guessing.

tayto lover

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Define danger. The risk of a car crash per mile driven? Guess which gender and age groups top that list.

I'm sure you can prove that assumption.

Here's my proof -
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/specialist/knowledge/road/roads_need_to_cater_safely_for_all_users/young_drivers.htm

beauf

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Define danger. The risk of a car crash per mile driven? Guess which gender and age groups top that list.

Can you be specific about what stats you are referring to. I think the stat is they have a higher fatality rate. mainly because they aren't as robust as a younger person in a accident.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Define danger. The risk of a car crash per mile driven? Guess which gender and age groups top that list.

You can guess all you like, because that statistic is not available. But don't let that stop your spurious argument.

My name is URL

Rightwing wrote: »

Let's make it every year while we are at it, and charge then €500 to do it. :rolleyes:

We should charge people €500 for making such ridiculous leaps

bumper234

Over 65's should be made to sit a reduced test every 5 years. Not the full rigorous test but one that tests their competence and ability. This should be free (pensioners ya know) and be bought into law. I know it's an unpopular suggestion and yes i know there are TERRIBLE drivers aged 18 to 80 but after 26 years of driving i have just seen so many bad (confused?) elderly drivers.

Larianne

joe stodge wrote: »

Should there be some age when you have resit your driving test?

Most definitely. Well perhaps not a full test, but some from of cognitive assessment which looks at your judgement, spacial awareness etc.

I was recently speaking to an occupational therapist and it was her opinion, through experience with speaking to patients and patients' families, that there are a heap of older/elderly drivers who should not be on the road at the moment due to poor cognition.
She also stated that some families are reluctant to take the keys from the person at risk as it is taking their independance away (and, means that the relative would have to rely more on the family member(s) ).

zenno

Instead of having everyone resit a driving test every 10/15 years, it would be much better if folk had to sit the theory test instead every so often. The driving test in this country is a farce.

tayto lover

Larianne wrote: »

Most definitely. Well perhaps not a full test, but some from of cognitive assessment which looks at your judgement, spacial awareness etc.

I was recently speaking to an occupational therapist and it was her opinion, through experience with speaking to patients and patients' families, that there are a heap of older/elderly drivers who should not be on the road at the moment due to poor cognition.
She also stated that some families are reluctant to take the keys from the person at risk as it is taking their independance away (and, means that the relative would have to rely more on the family member(s) ).

Then rather than discriminate against all elderly drivers both safe and dangerous should it be left to doctors to decide? Should they have to have a medical inc eye-test and simulator type test? People cannot be discriminated against on the grounds of age.

beauf

I dunno how you see so many bad drivers who are elderly. Most of the bad drivers I see are not elderly.

That said I think average speeds have rising as has general aggressiveness and impatience. So I think less able drivers will struggle much more these days than they would have in the past. It harder to drive these days than it was 20yrs ago.

beauf

Larianne wrote: »

...She also stated that some families are reluctant to take the keys from the person at risk as it is taking their independance away (and, means that the relative would have to rely more on the family member(s) ).

Thats one reason. Another thing is its difficult for a son or daughter to take over from their parent. A parent may not accept that change in status/power of roles.

bumper234

beauf wrote: »

I dunno how you see so many bad drivers who are elderly. Most of the bad drivers I see are not elderly.

That said I think average speeds have rising as has general aggressiveness and impatience. So I think less able drivers will struggle much more these days than they would have in the past. It harder to drive these days than it was 20yrs ago.

I wouldn't say harder to drive but certainly more challenging.

beauf

zenno wrote: »

Instead of having everyone resit a driving test every 10/15 years, it would be much better if folk had to sit the theory test instead every so often. The driving test in this country is a farce.

Also the people who have just passed a test are some of the most accident prone of all!

beauf

bumper234 wrote: »

I wouldn't say harder to drive but certainly more challenging.

Whats the difference?

Sheldons Brain

frozenfrozen wrote: »

In the NDLS centre when I was getting my provisional license, a man (not very old, but still) said "Sure I can't read that writing how can I be expected to fill this out" ..

Was he behind the counter?

Everyone might well do a retest after 10 years. But it is ridiculous that now everyone has to trail along to one of these NDLS and the opportunity is not taken to give you a quick rules of road MCQ while you are there.

miss no stars

beauf wrote: »

Whats the difference?

It's easier to do the mechanics of driving - no fecking around with chokes, power steering, ABS and so on.

It's more challenging because of things like the increased number of vehicles on the road.

ComeraghBlue

after 65 they should resit

bumper234

beauf wrote: »

Whats the difference?

I'm driving 26 years and it's no harder to drive a car in fact i would say the driving process has gotten easier. It's more challenging because more vehicles/pedestrians, more traffic, faster speeds means you have to be more mentally aware of whats happening around you (especially in cities).

tayto lover

ComeraghBlue wrote: »

after 65 they should resit

On what grounds?

bumper234

tayto lover wrote: »

On what grounds?

On what grounds would you say a 12 year old or a 15 year old would not be allowed to drive a car on the public highway?

beauf

miss no stars wrote: »

It's easier to do the mechanics of driving - no fecking around with chokes, power steering, ABS and so on.

It's more challenging because of things like the increased number of vehicles on the road.

Not sure that kinda stuff was an issue in everyday driving. Choke was only an issue if the car had a problem, or trouble in the cold. No power steering was really only an issue for parking such.

tayto lover

bumper234 wrote: »

On what grounds would you say a 12 year old or a 15 year old would not be allowed to drive a car on the public highway?

On the grounds that the law says you have to be 17 to even hold a driver permit.
The law says absolutely nothing about 65 year old people.
So where's your grounds?

bumper234

tayto lover wrote: »

On the grounds that the law says you have to be 17 to even hold a driver permit.
The law says absolutely nothing about 65 year old people.
So where's your grounds?

laws could and imo should be changed.

beauf

bumper234 wrote: »

I'm driving 26 years and it's no harder to drive a car in fact i would say the driving process has gotten easier. It's more challenging because more vehicles/pedestrians, more traffic, faster speeds means you have to be more mentally aware of whats happening around you (especially in cities).

My comment (taken in its entirety) was clearly talking about the driving environment being more difficult. Not that turning a wheel or using a clutch has got harder....

tayto lover

bumper234 wrote: »

laws could and imo should be changed.

Why?
Where's your evidence that 65 year old people are dangerous on the roads?

beauf

Ins't there problem here that people don't report drivers. If the Garda kept getting the same car reported, then they could check it out. Can they suggest a person is unfit to drive?

Pumpkinseeds

65 seems like a reasonable age for a resit and I think there should be a resit every 2 years from then on. After all people are at retirement age. Very elderly people should not be driving, they are a danger to themselves and to others. That is not being ageist, it's being realistic. I hate to see an elderly person behind the wheel if I'm honest about it, a 70+ year old should not be driving, I don't care how spritely they are.

I find the idea that someone passes a driving test and can continue driving until they drop dead quite disturbing.

tayto lover

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

65 seems like a reasonable age for a resit and I think there should be a resit every 2 years from then on. After all people are at retirement age. Very elderly people should not be driving, they are a danger to themselves and to others. That is not being ageist, it's being realistic. I hate to see an elderly person behind the wheel if I'm honest about it, a 70+ year old should not be driving, I don't care how spritely they are.

I find the idea that someone passes a driving test and can continue driving until they drop dead quite disturbing.

Statistics do NOT support your argument -

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24204489

Holsten

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

65 seems like a reasonable age for a resit and I think there should be a resit every 2 years from then on. After all people are at retirement age. Very elderly people should not be driving, they are a danger to themselves and to others. That is not being ageist, it's being realistic. I hate to see an elderly person behind the wheel if I'm honest about it, a 70+ year old should not be driving, I don't care how spritely they are.

I find the idea that someone passes a driving test and can continue driving until they drop dead quite disturbing.

No I wouldn't agree with this at all.

If at for example 65 they take the test again and pass then they are fully capable of driving a car.

As long as they can pass let them drive just like anyone else, a blanket ban over a certain age would be a complete no go for me.

cabledude

My father in law was in the NDLA office yesterday applying for his new licence. He told me that there was a man just ahead of him also applying for his licence. This man was in his 80's. He was accompanied by his daughter. This man was hard of hearing, wore very thick glasses and had trouble getting up out of the seat. He also seemed very unsteady on his feet and walked very slowly.

And yet, the official in the NDLA office had no choice but to submit his licence application.

The medical certificate part of the driving licence test seems to be a major weakness in the system. How did the gentleman that my dad in law told me about get his cert? I understand that the test is basically to ensure that you are not blind and that you are not missing legs. There seems to be no physical competency metrics included in this test. Is hearing checked? Is peripheral vision checked? Are reaction times checked? These are all important for safe driving, yet they are not checked.

Why is this?