Elderly Drivers.

Hotblack Desiato

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

A GP or other medical professional is unlikely to expose themselves to possible litigation by saying some one is fit to drive when they are not.

There have been several examples given on this very thread of the exact thing happening that you're saying doesn't happen.

wil

I suspect there is another factor that may also be a consideration in relation to elderly drivers, aside from health and other age related issues.
Few, if any drivers over the age of 60 ever did a proper driving test. Gerry Ryan claimed to be the last to avail of the free licence. And very few would have done any formal training or even be all that familiar with the ROTR. Many have developed some pretty bad habits over the years, and while quick reactions can make up for many mistakes, those reactions get slower. Speed and distance judgement can deteriorate too.
Just as there are some young drivers who take too many risky chances, there are some elderly drivers who should never got a licence to drive when they were young and never improved over the years. We all know relatives who would scare the @&€€ out of you when you sit in their car. Not every driver is a natural driver, and if you never learned in the first place, well then you may only have bad habits to fall back on.

fly_agaric

Sam Russell wrote: »

What percentage of drivers are over 65? Are the fatalities of this group significantly out of kilter vs the rest? And are they likely to be the cause of these fatalities?

Yes, they are the questions that would need to be answered to see if the special measures suggested (blanket age ban) are really needed to combat this scourge of the elderly demon drivers ruining road safety for the young people...

I had a look at 2011 census yesterday. There is a "modes of commuting" theme in it that might give insight into 1st (% of "habitual" drivers 65 and over) but public data does not give ages of respondents I think. As you said yourself, the accident information does not say what caused the car accidents; only demographics of the drivers, casualties etc.

I don't think the data is there in public to answer any of the questions; if it is I hope someone posts it!

fly_agaric

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Exactly, the fraction of miles driven by 70+ drivers is tiny but their representation in accidents is not.

Just to give all the age groupings from "ROA21: Drivers of Cars Involved in Fatal and Injury Collisions by Age Group, Sex, Year and Statistic 2006-2012"

0-17: 1.75% [of 44,125]
18-20yo; 9.53 %
21-24yo; 12.11 %
25-34yo; 26.78 %
35-44yo; 20.18 %
45-54yo; 13.43 %
55-64yo; 8.41 %
65+; 7.81 %

It is not tiny but 65 and over "age group" still has the 2nd lowest representation in these figures. The question(s) cannot be properly answered from this, but in absence of anything other than news stories being put up, they are not jumping out from this data as an age group of concern who need special measures brought in to keep them from getting behind the wheel.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This is akin to the Healy-Rae "let them drive while pissed on the back roads" guff.

No, I don't think saying that the elderly should not be "age banned" off the road is the same as saying the right sort of drink drivers should get a pass in good old rural Ireland. I think it is possible to believe older drivers should not be banned at a certain age, and also believe that drink (or drug) driving should lead to automatically losing ones licence.
We all have comfort zones when it comes to driving I think.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Problem is that sooner or later they'll encounter something outside their comfort zone, accidentally going onto a motorway perhaps and driving on until they reach a toll plaza, having no clue what to do and throwing a u-ie - Just be hopeful it's not you and your family they smack into.

Thanks for your no doubt sincere concern for my welfare. I don't have a family myself, so I should be okay on that score!

Irish Steve

There's another factor in these statistics that skews them, the over 65 group is exactly that, and with the way that the age demographic is changing, it covers an age band of at least 20 years now, all the other bands are only covering at maximum a 10 year band, which is an immediate discrepancy that is skewing the figures.

Fortunately, the majority of elderly drivers are not "speed freaks", so the number of serious accidents or fatalities tends to be lower, but if we were to look at accidents, around towns and in places like supermarket car parks, I suspect that those same older drivers will be a higher percentage of those levels of incident, and that will be attributable to reduced mobility, and poorer vision, both of which when combined with the poor design of a lot of modern vehicle mirrors are contributory to the minor fender bender type of incidents that are happening every day of the week.

Modern vehicle design is also no help here, it used to be possible to see the corners of the vehicle from the driving seat, but way too many of modern designs mean that it's not possible to actually see the corners, so working out if there's enough clearance to get into a space, or how far the end is from the wall, or fence, is a guess rather than an informed decision. That's no help when trying to get into a tight space, and some of the modern supermarket car parks are so poorly designed, I find myself wondering if they have been designed by a non driver, the road layouts are appalling, the size of the spaces makes it almost impossible to get in and out of vehicles without causing damage to adjacent vehicles, and the position of the spaces is no help either.

The American system where spaces are at an angle to the internal roads, and those internal access roads are one way, causes much less aggravation, and makes it much easier for drivers to get in and out of the spaces, and the heaviest use roadways are kept as far as possible from pedestrian routes, which is a much better concept than the Irish shambles, where at too many sites, the busiest piece of road is outside the entrances to the largest stores, massive insanity.

And yes, there was and is a reason why a significant number of people never passed a test, part of the problem was the delay in getting a test, but that's nowhere near the full story, maybe if it became a requirement to retake the test (including the theory test) after certain categories of offence, (and ALL drink and drug offences after the mandatory ban) the worst offenders might be taken off the road, if they couldn't pass the test 20 or 30 years ago, the chances are that they still won't be able to pass it now.

We need a change of attitude, there cannot be an automatic right to use a motor vehicle, there is a certain skill level that has to be reached before a person is allowed to have unrestricted use of a vehicle, and if that standard can't be met, then that is the bottom line. It may well mean that the training system has to be drastically revised to ensure that the student learns the essential skills that are fundamental to a safe driving experience. The system now is a lot better than it was even a few years ago, but we've a long way to go before it meets the standard that should be in place for all drivers, which is the norm in most European countries.

As for the political will to make it happen, I suspect Hell will freeze over before some of our political elite even consider changes to the system, let alone bring it in.

Isambard

well I agree (but they are 10 year group not 9) what skews it also is that 18 to 20 group, which is massive with 3%+ for each age within. These stats are obviously not suitable, I think a different picture would emerge if each age was shown separately. The 7.81 for drivers over 65 compares favourably with the 55 to 64 group at 8.41%.

byhookorbycrook

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

There have been several examples given on this very thread of the exact thing happening that you're saying doesn't happen.

Then it's up to those giving those examples to do something about it. I know neither my gp or consultant would back me to be "fit" if I weren't.

3 x 80+ year olds killed on our roads over Christmas. 2 x 80+ year old female lone drivers. The third an 80+ year old man driving the wrong way down a motorway.
How to deal with this problem? We can't. It is up to each individual to decide when it's time to hand over the keys. I hope that I reach that decision for myself before I become a danger to myself and others.

magicbastarder

Deleted User wrote: »

3 x 80+ year olds killed on our roads over Christmas. 2 x 80+ year old female lone drivers. The third an 80+ year old man driving the wrong way down a motorway.
How to deal with this problem? We can't. It is up to each individual to decide when it's time to hand over the keys. I hope that I reach that decision for myself before I become a danger to myself and others.

going by your username, you're already on the way there, or have another few decades to go, by which time cars will probably not require drivers.

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

going by your username, you're already on the way there, or have another few decades to go, by which time cars will probably not require drivers.

My username is not a reflection of my date of birth, just the year of my divorce!

ED E

Can anyone familiar with the statute/AGS procedure confirm if there's such a thing as roadside vision test here? The brits do it and seems to make a lot of sense. The PO steps out a distance (something like 30m) and then asks you to read a numberplate. If you can't they refer you to the NDLS for retest and revocation.



Interesting lil poster from there too.

ShaShaBear

My husband and sometimes myself when travelling with him have witnessed more than several elderly drivers who are clearly in no fit state to drive either almost causing an accident, actually causing an accident involving themselves or causing an accident involving other drivers and leaving the scene totally oblivious to what happened. A woman we'd gauge to be 70+ went around a roundabout local to me with a pedestrian crossing on it and completely ignored the Yield sign and the crossing pedestrian, who jumped out of her way and almost got mowed down by the driver who had right of way who had to swerve to avoid the elderly driver. She continued on her way without so much as blinking. I've seen a lot of them drive the wrong way on one-way streets and we got stuck behind one today on the way home doing 30 in a 100 zone.

There are definitely younger people causing severe accidents but as someone else pointed out, they generally get better with time, whereas an elderly driver already having problems is only likely to get worse.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

tayto lover

Deleted User wrote: »

3 x 80+ year olds killed on our roads over Christmas. 2 x 80+ year old female lone drivers. The third an 80+ year old man driving the wrong way down a motorway.
How to deal with this problem? We can't. It is up to each individual to decide when it's time to hand over the keys. I hope that I reach that decision for myself before I become a danger to myself and others.

When do you get your bus pass Mary?

Isambard

ShaShaBear wrote: »

My husband and sometimes myself when travelling with him have witnessed more than several elderly drivers who are clearly in no fit state to drive either almost causing an accident, actually causing an accident involving themselves or causing an accident involving other drivers and leaving the scene totally oblivious to what happened. A woman we'd gauge to be 70+ went around a roundabout local to me with a pedestrian crossing on it and completely ignored the Yield sign and the crossing pedestrian, who jumped out of her way and almost got mowed down by the driver who had right of way who had to swerve to avoid the elderly driver. She continued on her way without so much as blinking. I've seen a lot of them drive the wrong way on one-way streets and we got stuck behind one today on the way home doing 30 in a 100 zone.

There are definitely younger people causing severe accidents but as someone else pointed out, they generally get better with time, whereas an elderly driver already having problems is only likely to get worse.

one Swallow doesn't make a summer.
Just because some older drivers are incompetent is no reason to tar all of them with the same proverbial.
There's lots of drunk drivers age (say) 35, you wouldn't propose banning all 35 yr olds.
I'm all for increased proficiency and health checks, but across the board, not based on an arbitrary age.
Yes I see a fair few incompetent older drivers but I also see a lot of incompetent middle age women driving, many of whom have never taken a test. There would be howls of protest if I suggested they should be off the road.I also see lots of overconfident aggressive younger drivers and the standard of driving of a many male drivers isn't too great either.

AndrewJRenko

I'd rather see regular testing of skills and competency for ALL ages, say every five years or so. The idea of one lifetime test is fairly ridiculous and ineffective.

seamus

I'd be broadly in agreement with everyone else here; this isn't an issue of applying an age limit per se, but more to do with proper recognition of risk factors.

We are very slow to take away licences from anyone in Ireland. The old canard of "social isolation" is brought into play and used as an excuse for allowing incapable people on the roads. Just in the last six months a drink-driver was allowed to keep his licence to give him time to "find a woman" to drive him around.

There should be a regular re-test, every 5-10 years or so. A driver's NCT if you will. Not the full driving test, but a simple set of checks. An eye test. Followed by a simple oral (or multiple-choice) test where you identify road signs and answer 30-40 basic questions on the rules of the road. This ensures that you're up-to-date with the rules and haven't forgotten other ones. Then a ten-minute spin around a track to ensure physical and practical competence.

You don't lose your licence for failing, instead you have 3 shots at passing before you have to go back to a learner's permit.

The Gardai should have the power to revoke the licence at the roadside and order one of these simple re-tests.

That's not an ageist policy, but it would have the effect of removing older drivers from the pool when they're no longer able. And it means everyone else will read up on the rules of the road and have to think about road safety at least once a decade.

tayto lover

tayto lover wrote: »

When do you get your bus pass Mary?

Not long now, Dear. Trouble is I'll have the same problem as those 2 x 80 year olds. There are no busses out here in the sticks! It's a mile to the nearest one and shur I'd be in town just as quick.

Seriously though. I would hope that I would know when to call a halt to driving. I agree with other posters who suggest regular testing.

plodder

Just to give all the age groupings from "ROA21: Drivers of Cars Involved in Fatal and Injury Collisions by Age Group, Sex, Year and Statistic 2006-2012"

0-17: 1.75% [of 44,125]
18-20yo; 9.53 %
21-24yo; 12.11 %
25-34yo; 26.78 %
35-44yo; 20.18 %
45-54yo; 13.43 %
55-64yo; 8.41 %
65+; 7.81 %

Maybe 25-34 year olds should be re-tested every couple of years. They seem to be the ones with the worst accident record.

Irish Steve

That is such a skewed meaningless set of supposed statistics, as there is so much essential information missing from it. We don't know what the total numbers of drivers is in each age group, and without that, as the groups are nowhere near the same size in terms of age spread, we might just as well have a table that shows the percentage of green cheese in a lime ice cream. As presented, there is no worthwhile analysis of any sort that can be made from that table, it's a pointless exercise in confusion as presented.

AngryLips

magicbastarder wrote: »

OP - the rules regarding licences and age are easy to find.

Also, can you quantify how big an issue this is before removing all elderly people from the road? One swallow does not make a summer.

Off topic but I wish the anti-cycle brigade did the same ...now please resume normal services before anyone has anything more to say about cycling.

fly_agaric

Irish Steve wrote: »

That is such a skewed meaningless set of supposed statistics, as there is so much essential information missing from it. We don't know what the total numbers of drivers is in each age group, and without that, as the groups are nowhere near the same size in terms of age spread, we might just as well have a table that shows the percentage of green cheese in a lime ice cream. As presented, there is no worthwhile analysis of any sort that can be made from that table, it's a pointless exercise in confusion as presented.

True, but slightly harsh. Its not quite completely useless or causing confusion for the sake of it/lying with stats I think, just almost worthless!
The non uniform age bands up to age 65 are not a big problem.
Most of the bands are 10 years. The younger one(s) that are not could just be aggregated to one 17-24 band with 23.4 % of the car drivers involved in the accidents over the 6 years.

The older band covering a large range of ages is more of a problem; who knows maybe almost all of those accidents are for 70+ age group, which might be more interesting.
The missing information (actual cause of the accidents, key figure of the numbers of drivers on the road by age; maybe amount these drive too) is of course real issue; without that it is impossible to put it in context or actually draw any firm conclusions about questions in the thread from it.

Anyway would agree with others who have suggested more checking after drivers get a licence, a sort of "nct" on the driver rather than the car maybe every 5 years or so (in addition to medical checks on 70+) rather than a hard age cutoff.

plodder

It's amusing how people talk about evidence based this and that, but they are only interested in evidence which backs up their own prejudices.

Irish Steve

plodder wrote: »

It's amusing how people talk about evidence based this and that, but they are only interested in evidence which backs up their own prejudices.

Do you actually have a point to make here, or are you just trolling for the sake of it?

fly_agaric

Was having another dig around in that data (God knows why at this hour) and one thing that does pop out of it is that there is some association between age band and the 3 outcomes for the car drivers (killed, injured, uninjured) in the accident. Suppose that is not a shocker; health etc must come into it (apart from seriousness of the accident, probably many other things I cannot think of).
65 and over age group drivers seem to be more likely to be killed in the accident (which was mentioned earlier in the thread) with some of the other age groups (a "0-24" [17-24] yo aggregated group; 45-54 yo) less likely, but effect is not as strong.

plodder

Everyone knows that the people who pay the highest insurance premiums are young drivers, not old ones. The driving test is the barest of tests of basic competence. And it's years of experience that makes good drivers and not the box ticking exercise that the test represents. We have medical tests for drivers over a certain age, and as far as I can see that system works well enough. On another thread I mentioned the fact that my daughter passed the theory test a couple of years ago, and because she did not start driving until recently had forgotten absolutely everything she learned. Tests are not the be all and end all. I would have far greater trust in a driver with a 40 year clean record who never passed the test, over a driver who passed it last week.

Isambard

plodder wrote: »

Maybe 25-34 year olds should be re-tested every couple of years. They seem to be the ones with the worst accident record.

only if you don't read it right. An average of less than 2.7% compared to over 3% in the 18 to 20 group, and even then I bet the 25s are worse than the 34s by a big margin, These statistics are of no use.

AndrewJRenko

plodder wrote: »

And it's years of experience that makes good drivers

How did you come to that conclusion?

foggy_lad

TheQuietFella wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/1230/841845-fatal-crash-cork/

Is it time now to put the elderly people off the road?

Is there an age limit on when you cannot drive?

I appreciate that living in rural communities can be difficult but incidents

such as the ones in the above link are not the first and won't be the last!

Older people have usually more driving experience and drive more sensibly than younger people, particularly younger men. They are less likely to be in a hurry to get to work or elsewhere and usually drive a bit more slowly than younger drivers so far less likely to cause accidents or deaths on the roads through their driving!

People with the attitude that anyone in front of them is driving too slow if they are below the speed limit and are a danger because of that need to be put off the road until they retire as they generally don't change their dangerous attitudes on courtesy on the roads towards others till they reach old age.

plodder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How did you come to that conclusion?

I'm tempted to just say from years of experience. But, there's the whole thing about 10,000 hours to become an expert at something as well. You can argue about the exact number (10,000) and you can argue about other factors like natural ability, but I don't think there's any doubt that practice, even beyond passing the test, is critical. That's one of the reasons why the Novice license thing was brought in, that you are only really at a minimal level of competence when you pass the test,