Older drivers. Should we take a test at 75?

silverlining48

Men under the age of 30 are responsible for 50% of all accidents. Four times as much as any other age group.

And that figure would be even higher if older, more sensible drivers didn’t watch out for them, take evasive action and eg make it easier for them to overtake when it’s obvious they’ve miscalculated ( something that happens all the time on the A1). My partners house is on a coast road 30mph limit but young drivers whizz past at night doing up to 60.

That’s true Maybee. We all have to do it, avoiding even more accidents.

flappergirl

I think 80 might be the better benchmark for a retest. After all, lots of people are still working well in to their 70's these days. I myself am 67 and still work full time in a highly responsible job. People are living much longer, are generally far healthier and have quite different lifestyles and expectations to previous generations. When I look back on 70 year olds in my childhood, they were archetypically "old" and a life expectancy of 75 was considered not a bad innings especially for a man. 70 year olds these days are quite different. 70 is the new 50 (or certainly 60) if you like.

The vast majority of these tragic cases seem to involve drivers in their 90's and that really is a different ball game entirely. It also has to be borne in mind that most deaths by road are caused by drunk or drugged drivers who are far from elderly.

I agree. I’m in my 70s and am still competently driving daily and I don’t understand those frightened of motorway driving because imo it’s far more straightforward than driving on other roads, urban and country, where indeed most accidents occur.

I think the main problem with older drivers is that their driving is often local on familiar routes with low annual mileage and they lose confidence and competence for longer unfamiliar journeys. There is also the fact that many older drivers may be taking medication which can affect driving, but I guess there are many more younger people driving under the influence of drugs. I do think evidence of a recent eye test should be compulsory when renewing licence.

Perhaps rather than a formal test at say 80 it should be compulsory to attend a RoadSmart assessment with a legally valid report about the drivers ability and safety to continue to hold a licence. The official driving test is far too over burdened to test everyone over the age of 70.

growstuff

How often do people over 70 have their eyes tested? I have an annual standard test and a diabetic eye test (they test different things), but I don't know how usual that is. I suppose I assumed that people did have regular eye tests and acted on any recommendations. If that's the case, it wouldn't be that difficult for people to provide evidence of a recent eye test - not that it would guarantee that people would wear their glasses if required.

You cannot protect against every eventuality. You can make sure eye tests are taken and results reported. Cognitive tests are applied. You cannot make people wear glasses.

There are laws about wearing seat belts and drink/driving, but some people will still drink drive and/or not wear seat belts. The best you can do is have the laws or regulations and prosecute those who break them. Others tempted to avoid the rules may obey because of the fear of prosecution.

No system is perfect.

I realise that you can't protect against every eventuality.

I think requiring every 70 year old to have a cognitive test would be unrealistic. I can't even begin to think how many testers would be required, what kind of test would be used and how any appeals would work.

However, requiring a certificate from an optician would be reasonable, providing that people do have regular eye tests. The reason for my post was because I was wondering if people do indeed have regular eye tests. My optician told me two years ago that I was on the threshold for needing driving glasses, so I got some - and wear them.

growstuff There is a standard cognitive test in common use. I took it twice last year. It is comprehensive and if I am modestly proud at having completed it without error twice, I have reason to be. David49 Cognitive tests are not open to interpretation, at least, not the ones I did that tested every aspect of cognition with clearly measurable and markable tests
Cognition tests are used sometimes for job suitability. These are very different tests and may be more subjective in interpretation.

It takes about 20 minutes and could be adminstered by a nurse in the surgery. The appeal would be simple. do the test again somewhere different. If you fail twice on a standard test then your licence would be withdrawn. No different to having your license withdrawn after a diagnosis of dementia. It would only be required when someone over 70 was renewing their driving licence. Recent research medicine. [[medecine.wustl.edu/news/even-very-subtle-cognitive-decline-is-linked-to-stopping-driving/ ]]has shown the importance of cognitive failure.

The eye test would be even simpler. You would have to produce evidence of a recent eye test to renew your licence. No eye test certificate, no licence renewal

A firiend died recently at the age of 76. He was diagnosed with dementia in 2022, but had been going down hill before then - and driving and as the article I quoted further up this thread, even slight cognitive impairmant can cause real problems with driving.

This afternoon I saw aa classic example of why older drivers should do cognitive tests.

I was in an underground car park getting to leave when I heard a car constantly revving a bit and then moving down th aisle very slowly and then when the momentum of each litttle rev died away and it almost came toa stop, doing another little rev, so it was travelling in slow spirts. It was a huge black executive type. saloon car, with all its lights on full despite the car park being well lit with daylight coming in around the edges.

It drifted past me, and then found a space in the row backing onto mine, to his credit the driver backed in, but only 75% of the way and stopped the car with quite a bit of it sticking out into the aisle and about six foot of empty space at the back.. He then sat there for several minutes with all the lights full on, including break lights.

I was wanting to pull out through the empty space next to his, so waited in case he moved again then as I slowly pulled out, he finally turned his light off and got out of the car.. He was a very old looking and frail man and I did wonder how safe he was on the roads, especially in a busy University town with two big universities and students and bikes everywhere and a busy hospital with emergency ambulances passing buy every few minutes.

Before my aunt's dementia was diagnosed I can remember a neighbour describing her driving to and from the local town 5 miles away at 20 miles an hour in second gear.

Yes, certainly irritating and bad parking etc but not dangerous driving; he probably should not be driving, but we shouldn’t forget that 50% of all accidents are caused by males under 30.
Four times as much as any other age group. Maybe something should be done about that.

I’ve seen shocking parking from much younger people. Some won’t even attempt parallel parking, and many do not reverse in to parking spaces when it would clearly be more sensible to do so, but I appreciate your point MOnica.

I have just come back from hospital (just a blood test) and I was crossing on the zebra to the hospital car park - when an "elderly" gent, (driving with his mouth open!) didn't see me and just drove through. I could see he wasn't aware of me at all - and quickly stepped back.
If I had been less alert (or less mobile) I would have been run over.

We see it every day.
We need to be aware of it in ourselves.

At least the new (young) drivers get better with age and experience!!

My father had three minor accidents in a year. He lived alone but used to drive to me for a main meal each day. He was very deaf and refused to wear a hearing aid, tbh I hadn't noticed any cognitive decline but became increasingly concerned about his driving so one day I found a reason to be a passenger. I was terrified! His awareness of other drivers was impaired and his reactions were very slow although he thought he was quite safe and blamed the other cars on the road. I tried to persuade him to stop driving but it just caused terrible arguments. He had vascular dementia.

I just turned 70 and had to take an eye test as I declared an eye problem. I passed easily but the number of people who suggested I should have said nothing about it has shocked me. Being carless would be difficult but I don’t want to drive if I become unsafe and would rather know!

Cambsnan
I have heard people say things like that too.
It's ridiculous.

I've enough stress in my life already but I do like MOnica's suggestion of regular compulsory eye and cognitive testing. Makes a lot of sense in my book.

We went in a car yesterday driven by a male friend we hadn't seen for a while. He is 75 +. It was like a fairground ride. Too speedy, too jerky, with him snarling at other drivers. It seemed a bit of a macho thing.

I won't agree with older drivers retaking a test still something is done about young boy racers who are far more dangerous.

But MOnica GP surgeries are stretched enough as it is without having to do goodness how many cognitive tests. I don't know how many people reach 70 every year and still want to drive. About half a million are born every year. Obviously they don't all have a driving licence, but if they are to be tested every couple of years, that's millions of tests every year.

and so are driving test centres. You do not need to wait 6 months to see your GP but waiting lists for driving tests are far more than 6 months in places and add all the over 0 retests. How often? every 3 years? and driving test lists will be into years.

If young drivers have to wait two ir three years fot tests we will then see an alarming rise in young people driving with no licence, ubtaxed and uninsured. and much more police time will need to be spent running those vans that check speed and whether you are taxed and insured.

Cognitive tests are not difficult to adminster. It would not need a GP, a nurse or medical assistant of some such could administer them.

Whatever you do whether compulsory eyye tests, cognition tests or driving tests it is going to need more staf,.more time, more training.

The solution I have suggested is what I would describe as the minimum cost, minimum time and most efficient alternative to cumbersome retesting that would be immensely disruptive, and would require a major expansion, possibly doubling or more of the driving test infrastructure and very expensive.

growstuff if this became law then there would probably be some dedicated centres which would be a good idea - with maybe an actual driving test available too.
The cognition tests probably wouldn't need a GP to run them.

It would weed out those with poorer cognition/reaction times which has to be a good thing - and some would probably give up driving voluntarily rather than do it!

The knock on effect would be cheaper insurance premiums.

A few cognitive tests wouldn't show up true behaviour behind the wheel. Yes to eyesight and reaction times. No to other issues.
As I hinted beforehand I needed to sit in the car with the old person driving to witness any deterioration.
Family members could play a part here initially.

I think a simple cognitive test would be problematic because apart from causing anxiety amongst older people, it would not necessarily be diagnostic or possibly even ethical. Additionally if not carried out by a suitable qualified health practitioner, may require further follow up and support.

growstuff

But MOnica GP surgeries are stretched enough as it is without having to do goodness how many cognitive tests. I don't know how many people reach 70 every year and still want to drive. About half a million are born every year. Obviously they don't all have a driving licence, but if they are to be tested every couple of years, that's millions of tests every year.

For those of us born between 1945-1970 ( the vast majority on GN), the birth rate was far higher than half a million a year. The full impact will be seen in the next ten to fifteen years as the year l was born, 1964 (l squeezed in in December), there were over a million of us born - the highest number of births ever in a single year. Resources across the board will be stretched to breaking point.

Well then, maybe we do need driving tests!
I was thinking along Monica's lines of making it simple and cheap.
I suppose there could be a driving test as well as vision/reactions etc!

There could be dedicated centres for the whole lot!

Farzanah, I think you are very optimistic if you think careless young drivers improve as they age! Rather, their bad habits are ingrained and they will just continue to be bad, inconsiderate drivers who think the road is theirs.

There is no problem with straightforward cognitive tests. I have done more than enough in the past year. There are several used and approved international. There is even a scoring system that measures levels of cognitive function and aligns it with capapciity to do things like drive.

If you are diagnosed with dementia these tests are part of the assesment used to decide whether your dementia is severe enough for you to need to stop driving. As with the dementia assessment, there would be an appeal system so that anyone failing it can appeal.

As for tests making people nervous. They would not make anyone more nervous than they would be when they had to retake their driving test.