Elderly Drivers.

patrickbrophy18 · 31-12-2016 5:06pm

Within each class of road user (i.e. motorist, cyclist and pedestrian), there are bound to be a lot of bad eggs irrespective of age. It's not just 66+ or under 25s because it will then turn into an old versus young (and vice versa) debate.

patrickbrophy18 · 31-12-2016 5:12pm

On a related note, it reminds too much of the bull**** from the article below:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/driving-curfew-proposed-to-save-young-mens-lives-26560955.html

Big Bag of Chips · 31-12-2016 5:52pm

It's the other side of the coin to what the OP is suggesting! If he thinks (all) old people should be taken off the road, then surely he'd have to agree that (all) young people should have a curfew and a mileage limit. As year after year the most deaths are recorded in the 16-25 and the 66+ age groups.

patrickbrophy18 · 31-12-2016 5:59pm

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

It's the other side of the coin to what the OP is suggesting! If he thinks (all) old people should be taken off the road, then surely he'd have to agree that (all) young people should have a curfew and a mileage limit. As year after year the most deaths are recorded in the 16-25 and the 66+ age groups.

Oh yeah, I completely get it.

But, on a broader note, arguments like this add to the big list of double standards which plague society in general.

Hotblack Desiato · 31-12-2016 7:55pm

Both of you are missing the point. Undeniably there are medical issues which commonly arise with age and our system doesn't seem robust enough to ensure that drivers who develop these issues are not permitted to drive while medically unfit.

This has nothing to do with young drivers, an entirely separate issue. Incidentally there are people of all ages who are banned from driving on medical grounds, but if you were never allowed a licence you haven't got one to lose. It's the people who did have one who then become medically unfit at an older age we're talking about. It's often not easy for them or their families but we can't leave it up to them to decide whether they're fit to drive. We don't leave it up to drinkers to decide when they're fit to drive or not.

patrickbrophy18 · 31-12-2016 8:17pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Both of you are missing the point. Undeniably there are medical issues which commonly arise with age and our system doesn't seem robust enough to ensure that drivers who develop these issues are not permitted to drive while medically unfit.

This has nothing to do with young drivers, an entirely separate issue. Incidentally there are people of all ages who are banned from driving on medical grounds, but if you were never allowed a licence you haven't got one to lose. It's the people who did have one who then become medically unfit at an older age we're talking about. It's often not easy for them or their families but we can't leave it up to them to decide whether they're fit to drive. We don't leave it up to drinkers to decide when they're fit to drive or not.

I completely agree with you on this standing.

So, should the title of the thread not be changed from "Elderly Drivers" to "Drivers Who Are Medically Impaired"?

By this, I mean that from a medical stand-point, if ones ability to control a car is impaired from conditions (aside from the obvious alcohol and drug related impairments), should their suitability for driving be re-examined?

Big Bag of Chips · 31-12-2016 8:20pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Our system doesn't seem robust enough to ensure that drivers who develop these issues are not permitted to drive while medically unfit.

I'll admit to being neither a medical expert nor a licensing expert, but there are conditions that develop that ban people from driving for a period of time until it can be proven they are fit to drive again. Epilepsy for instance. If a person has a fit, with no history of epilepsy, they are automatically off the road for 12 months. It happened a friend of mine (42) recently. I don't know the particulars, but I know he never had epilepsy, and he is now off the road for 12 months following 1 fit.

"Being old" isn't a diagnosis, and it's not enough of a reason to take a person off the road. I would even say a GP can't necessarily diagnose a person enough to sign them off road and that it would need a specific diagnosis from a relevant specialist. With maybe follow ups done with the GP in cooperation with the specialist at licence renewal time. But I imagine that already happens for various conditions. And if someone is unfit to drive for whatever reasons their GP is made aware of it. Epilepsy being one.

But where do you start, or stop? Someone with a heart condition? High cholesterol? Someone who suffers from migraines?

patrickbrophy18 · 31-12-2016 8:36pm

It is for this very reason that I think self-driving cars should go mainstream as soon as the kinks of the AI controlling it are ironed out. That way, anyone with driving impairments can be accommodated.

Hotblack Desiato · 31-12-2016 8:42pm

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

So, should the title of the thread not be changed from "Elderly Drivers" to "Drivers Who Are Medically Impaired"?

Probably. But things like epilepsy and type 1 diabetes are rare enough among people who've already got to driving age without having them. Lots of drivers who were otherwise reasonably healthy hit their 70s and 80s and start sufferering from failing vision, slowing reactions, cognitive issues etc. and we need a system to properly determine whether they're safe to drive on the public roads or not. These conditions are progressive and subtle and the person concerned may insist they're fine when they're not, because they stand to lose the independence they've had for decades. It's sad for them but we need to protect the wider public too.

Hotblack Desiato · 31-12-2016 8:46pm

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

It is for this very reason that I think self-driving cars should go mainstream as soon as the kinks of the AI controlling it are ironed out. That way, anyone with driving impairments can be accommodated.

That'd solve the Healy-Rae type "need to be able to drive home on the back roads after a few pints" issue too...

Del.Monte · 31-12-2016 9:33pm

BrianD3 wrote: »

Well based on stats from the RSA "review of fatal collisions - age profile"
2014: there were more road fatalities among the 66+ age group than in any other age group. 16-25 was the next worst age group.
2015: 16-25 was the worst age group followed by 66+.
2016 to July: 66+ was the worst age group followed by 26-35.

These are just the raw figures. I would say that if you were to measure fatalities per mile driven, old people would have a high rate as they would tend to drive relatively low mileage, can avail of free travel on public transport which has a very low fatality rate etc.

Old people make up a high proportion of pedestrian fatalities and also cause a high proportion of wrong way motorway collisions which are often fatal.

The medical test process that elderly people have to go through when renewing their licence is flawed, I don't know if it the test itself is too easy to pass or if GPs are bending the rules/giving people the benefit of the doubt as they are reluctant to "put them off the road".

+1

A family friend whose reactions were so slow as to be almost lethal on several occasions that I was in his car, but he routinely was given the nod by his doctor so not to put him off the road.

That said, I think all drivers should have to do some sort of test every so often just as any pilot, train driver etc. have to. as between those who never sat a test - especially the thousands who were given full licences if they had two provisional ones - there are many who just shouldn't be on the road at all.

magicbastarder · 31-12-2016 10:07pm

i keep saying this - the best way to clean up driver behaviour (apart from enforcement) is to confiscate the car, every time penalty points are earned, for a number of days equal to the tally the driver is currently on.

e.g. a driver earning three points, bringing him to six, has his car impounded for six days.
no fines - just points and the impound.

Sam Russell · 01-01-2017 1:40pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

i keep saying this - the best way to clean up driver behaviour (apart from enforcement) is to confiscate the car, every time penalty points are earned, for a number of days equal to the tally the driver is currently on.

e.g. a driver earning three points, bringing him to six, has his car impounded for six days.
no fines - just points and the impound.

- and if he is banned, just crush his car. Sounds good to me.

Seriously, eyesight tests at every licence renewal is a good start and would be simple to implement. There are already restrictions on elderly drivers (over 70 years of age) and stricter ones on even older drivers (over 80 years of age). If they are not working because doctors are not carrying out their duties that is a different matter.

They have made the driving test more stringent, but that only affects those who have yet to take the test and does nothing for those who have been driving for 20, 30, 40, or 50 years. Many major features of modern driving did not exist here 50 years ago for the rural driver - motorways, traffic lights, roundabouts. Even breathalyzers are recent in those terms.

Eyesight deteriorates significantly at between forty years and fifty years of age for most people. [Loss of accommodation causing the need for reading glasses is common]

fly_agaric · 01-01-2017 2:16pm

One of accidents in news piece linked in the first post is a single car accident that harmed no one else. The other one has 2 vehicles involved and it doesn't say which vehicle "caused" the accident [it is quite recent; also may be wrong but news articles don't generally give that information about car accidents].

RTE have made the "elderly" link themselves in their header for the article.

Can poster show us his other evidence that these "elderly" people (and their decrepitude) is the cause of a disproportionate number of road traffic accidents in Ireland, or even better, the cause of of a disproportionate number of road traffic accident deaths?

Hotblack Desiato · 01-01-2017 2:28pm

So you don't think a septugenarian doing a u-turn at a toll plaza and going back up the motorway the wrong way is anything to do with age?

Figures already provided in the thread.

fly_agaric · 01-01-2017 3:26pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So you don't think a septugenarian doing a u-turn at a toll plaza and going back up the motorway the wrong way is anything to do with age?

Figures already provided in the thread.

Fair enough I didn't read the whole thread; that extra information about the 2 vehicle accident was not contained in the opening post or the linked news article.

On a reread, I don't see actual "figures" posted so will post this link (haven't had a chance to look at it yet).

http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/pssn/rsa/Database/RSA/Road%20Safety%20Statistics/Road%20Safety%20Statistics.asp

edit: Have had a quick look. This one http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/Statire/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?maintable=roa21&ProductID=DB_RSA&PLanguage=0
gives sex and age of car drivers involved in road traffic accidents 2006-2012; 10% are <= 20 [lowest 5 age bands], almost half are 25-44 year olds [middle 2 age bands]; 16 % are 55+ [3 upper age bands (incl pensioners >= 65; 8 %] but this may just be a reflection of who is doing most driving etc, and so has more chance to be involved in a car accident??

Finally, my experience of older people who drive would be that they are usually very careful/deliberate and quite good once they stick to the areas/roads, levels of traffic etc that they know and are comfortable with...if they have to leave their "comfort zones", (driving at night if not used to that, driving routes they don't know etc) they can get into trouble. I don't think some kind of blanket policy forcing people off the road once they hit a certain age defined as "elderly" is necessary or fair.

Sam Russell · 01-01-2017 4:27pm

fly_agaric wrote: »

Fair enough I didn't read the whole thread; that extra information about the 2 vehicle accident was not contained in the opening post or the linked news article.

On a reread, I don't see actual "figures" posted so will post this link (haven't had a chance to look at it yet).

http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/pssn/rsa/Database/RSA/Road%20Safety%20Statistics/Road%20Safety%20Statistics.asp

edit: This one http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/Statire/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?maintable=roa21&ProductID=DB_RSA&PLanguage=0
gives sex and age of car drivers involved in road traffic accidents 2006-2012; 10% are <= 20 [lowest 5 age bands], almost half are 25-44 year olds [middle 2 age bands]; 16 % are 55+ [3 upper age bands (incl pensioners >= 65; 8 %] but this may just be a reflection of who is doing most driving etc, and so has more chance to be involved in a car accident??

Looking at the statistics from the RSA quoted above, 21% of drivers killed in road accidents were over 65%. No figures are given for blame as to cause of accidents, so I doubt if any conclusions can be drawn from these figures.

There are several pointers that are unfavourable to 'elderly' drivers.

1. The cohort of drivers that never passed a test is over represented in that group.

2. The proportion of people with poor eyesight might be over represented in this group.

3. Medical conditions, such as stroke, are likely to be more prevalent in this group.

This group would tend to be more cautious which would mitigate all the other factors.

Overall, I think that 'elderly' drivers are not that bad as to require special treatment regarding licences. Being convicted of drink/driving or speeding or dangerous driving would be a greater predictor of requiring special treatment.

fly_agaric · 01-01-2017 4:55pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Looking at the statistics from the RSA quoted above, 21% of drivers killed in road accidents were over 65

Just a note on this (we might not be looking at same data) but, when I sum the years for the second link (car drivers involved in traffic accidents 2006-12) I get 677 drivers of cars killed; with 113 of them 65 or older giving ~ 17 %.

As seen with the "rest" of the drivers involved in car accidents (i.e. injured, unharmed, or the overall group which I gave the statistic of ~ 8 % aged 65 or over) they are still not the "worst" age group if I can be so judgemental. That is always 25-34 year olds.

That category (drivers killed in car accidents) is actually one where they stand out somewhat, as do a group that often draw attention (21-24 year olds; 17.7 %). They make up about 7-8 % in the "injured" and "unharmed" driver groups.

cbreeze · 01-01-2017 5:18pm

The under 25s and the over 65s pay much more for their insurance reflecting the level of risk involved. People with medical conditions should be assessed by a doctor certainly, but perhaps not their own GP, for an independent view.

An accident waiting to happen: a couple of months ago I saw a young male driver on his mobile phone while he turned the corner at the junction where I was waiting to cross the road. That's not unusual as you see people of all ages doing this all the time, but what caught my astonished eyes was the fact that not only was he on the phone, he was using the steering wheel as a rest for a form he was filling in! Then he dropped the pen into the footwell of the car and the last I saw of him as he drove away was him holding the steering wheel with one hand while he rummaged around trying to retrieve the pen.

Sam Russell · 01-01-2017 5:30pm

fly_agaric wrote: »

Just a note on this (we might not be looking at same data) but, when I sum the years for the second link (car drivers involved in traffic accidents 2006-12) I get 677 drivers of cars killed; with 113 of them 65 or older giving ~ 17 %.

As seen with the "rest" of the drivers involved in car accidents (i.e. injured, unharmed, or the overall group which I gave the statistic of ~ 8 % aged 65 or over) they are still not the "worst" age group if I can be so judgemental. That is always 25-34 year olds.

That category (drivers killed in car accidents) is actually one where they stand out somewhat, as do a group that often draw attention (21-24 year olds; 17.7 %). They make up about 7-8 % in the "injured" and "unharmed" driver groups.

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?

ED E · 01-01-2017 5:36pm

As aomebody who was hospitalized(read: up and over) by an older driver who could'nt see me I'm strongly of the opinion that GPs who have a strong relationship with the apllicant should not be able to certify applications. Let the local health nurse/ANP in a hospital do it. A local shop is like dodgems weekly with visually incapable pensioners.

CR 7 · 01-01-2017 5:54pm

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

It is for this very reason that I think self-driving cars should go mainstream as soon as the kinks of the AI controlling it are ironed out. That way, anyone with driving impairments can be accommodated.

And I bet the two groups that would be most reluctant to use them would be 16-25, and 66+.:D

Three times I've had a car pass me at speed on a dual carriageway/motorway going the wrong way. All 3 times the driver was very elderly. And I can't even count how many times I've met a car on a roundabout (or exiting a roundabout) having gone the wrong direction around it. Again, all but one of these drivers have been elderly.

meeeeh · 01-01-2017 5:57pm

I think there is a reason why car hire companies don't rent cars to over 75s snd under 21s. There are often also insurance surcharges for under 25s and over 70s. (Ages vary a bit but those are common limits). Those are higher risk categories.

Unlike under 25s over 75s won't become better drivers. It doesn't mean that they shouldn't be on the road but the regular and reliable medical checks are necessary.

TheQuietFella · 01-01-2017 8:22pm

Isambard wrote: »

also to consider is that many of the people who die over 66 may well have been passengers, and are more likely to die of their injuries than a younger fitter person. Statistics need qualifying

Also, can we please stop referring to people over 66 as "old". It's not the case anymore and it's ageist to be referring to them thus.

They're old!!! If it doesn't sit comfortably with you, move on!

Another incident regarding an elderly driver!

http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0101/842132-road-death-tipperary/

Irish Steve · 02-01-2017 12:46am

I have several parents who are elderly, and I have watched their driving skills change over time as they have aged, and it's been worrying at times to see how different members of the family have responded to those changes.

One of them carried on driving for at least 2 years after his eyesight became sufficiently impaired that he presented a danger to other motorists every time he pulled out of a junction, as he either didn't see vehicles approaching, or more worryingly, had lost the ability to determine the speed at which those vehicles were approaching. Several of us tried to "persuade" him that it was time to stop driving, but we were unable to get the point across with sufficient clarity to get an acceptable response. To add to the issue, this was in the UK, where the traffic volumes are considerably higher, so it was a concern, and even speaking to the relevant GP did not provide a good result.

I've been driving long distances for many years myself, and have had to deal with the problems caused by older drivers who cannot judge speed and distances on way too many occasions. They are not the only offenders in that respect, but the percentages are certainly higher.

While it will provoke massive response from many people, I do have to wonder if the appropriate response is for all drivers over a specific age to have to take a defined eyesight test when they are renewing their licence, which will not be a simple form fill exercise that is the present situation. Ideally, some form of distance, speed perception and peripheral vision test should be part of that eyesight test, as speed is not the only issue, a lot of accidents happen in places where speeds are lower, but the issue is that one of the drivers was unable to recognise the developing or potential conflict with another vehicle.

Having said that, all too often, there is also a serious attitude problem from other drivers where their lack of willingness to "give and take" results in an incident, because they insist on "their rights", so they don't ease off when they see a potential conflict developing.

I won't make any allowances in this for the people who know they are losing some of their driving skills and then make things worse by taking drink. There's no excuse for adding to the problem voluntarily by adding drink into an already bad situation, even more so in rural areas where the roads are poorer, and not lit in most cases, the odds in that scenario are becoming very badly loaded against both the elderly driver and anyone who had the misfortune to encounter them in that situation.

The absence of good public transport and local taxi services in rural areas definitely does not help this situation, and our political system seems to be still very much loaded against rural areas, what then makes it worse is that some of those same politicians are unwilling to face up to the responsibility that is theirs, but I don't see that changing any time soon.

I'm not sure that there is a complete answer to this issue, but sooner rather than later, it will have to be faced and faced with a measure of compassion and responsibility that I'm not sure our political system is capable of.

Sam Russell · 02-01-2017 12:52am

Here are statistics from the 2011 census for those over 65.

State
Both sexes
65 years and over
Persons in Private Households (Number) 491,168

70 years and over
Persons in Private Households (Number) 323,907

75 years and over
Persons in Private Households (Number) 199,236

80 years and over
Persons in Private Households (Number) 104,697

85 years and over
Persons in Private Households (Number) 43,264

The number of fatal incidents involving people driving over 65 are few and far between - maybe a dozen in the year. Some of these maybe due to the frailty of the driver, but it is a tiny number of the drivers who are aged over 65.

The drivers over 70 have already got to get eyesight tests and a doctor to sign them as fit before they get a renewal of their licence. What more do you think is necessary - require a qualified driver to sit with them?

Maybe even give them free travel on public transport - now that is an idea. I wonder will the Government ever think of that.

Sam Russell · 02-01-2017 1:06am

Irish Steve wrote: »

While it will provoke massive response from many people, I do have to wonder if the appropriate response is for all drivers over a specific age to have to take a defined eyesight test when they are renewing their licence, which will not be a simple form fill exercise that is the present situation. Ideally, some form of distance, speed perception and peripheral vision test should be part of that eyesight test, as speed is not the only issue, a lot of accidents happen in places where speeds are lower, but the issue is that one of the drivers was unable to recognise the developing or potential conflict with another vehicle.

I had a full test of my eyesight recently by an ophthalmic surgeon that checked my peripheral vision, acuity, colour, etc. [I had no problems, scoring 100%, thank God] but I realised how pathetic the eyesight test for driving is - that is no test, except as a young driver on first application.

Eyesight is the first thing that is easy to test, cheap to test and could be included in each and every application for renewal of a licence.

I know many elderly drivers who complain about 'not being able to see properly at night' or 'being blinded by oncoming cars' and other serious problems. Now most heed these signs and do not drive at night, but it scares me.

byhookorbycrook · 02-01-2017 1:10am

Nomis21 wrote: »

Driving licences should be taken from any licensed driver who is admitted to medical care for any disability/illness which makes him permanently unfit to drive.

Other jurisdictions such as UK do this .

Those of us with such illnesses can't get more than a 3 year license. Maybe you know more than my consultant and gp and think I need to off the road.

byhookorbycrook · 02-01-2017 1:18am

ED E wrote: »

As aomebody who was hospitalized(read: up and over) by an older driver who could'nt see me I'm strongly of the opinion that GPs who have a strong relationship with the apllicant should not be able to certify applications. Let the local health nurse/ANP in a hospital do it. A local shop is like dodgems weekly with visually incapable pensioners.

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.I'm in my 40s but have a condition that I notify to both my insurance company and to the the NDLS, furnishing a letter from my consultant each year.Neither my gp or consultant would put their rep on the line.

Hotblack Desiato · 02-01-2017 2:52am

fly_agaric wrote: »

F16 % are 55+ [3 upper age bands (incl pensioners >= 65; 8 %] but this may just be a reflection of who is doing most driving etc, and so has more chance to be involved in a car accident??

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

Finally, my experience of older people who drive would be that they are usually very careful/deliberate and quite good once they stick to the areas/roads, levels of traffic etc that they know and are comfortable with...if they have to leave their "comfort zones", (driving at night if not used to that, driving routes they don't know etc) they can get into trouble. I don't think some kind of blanket policy forcing people off the road once they hit a certain age defined as "elderly" is necessary or fair.

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

We can and should take reasoned, evidence based actions to stop this but instead we have a clueless minister for transport going on about judges and a zero alcohol limit.

Elderly Drivers.

Comments