Forum menu
"But around 1 in every 13 people with Alzheimer’s disease are under the age of 65"
So 12 in 13 are above...
As for people saying "just take away your parents' keys", the child has no right to do this. It's basically theft, you're relying on the parent being unable or unwilling to do anything about it. Luckily, in our case FiL's car terminally failed its MOT at a convenient time, we refused to help him get a replacement and he wasn't capable of arranging that himself.
And as for "we must have a perfect public transport system before you take away the licence of any incompetent person", that's just nonsense. People get their licences taken away for a number of reasons, no-one has a right to drive if they can't do so safely and competently. If they choose to live somewhere that this is inconvenient, that's their problem.
Element of choice??? Retiring to the country? There are loads of people that have spent their whole lives living in one place in the country. Are you seriously suggesting someone who’s lived in a village for the past 75 years, has all their friends there, all their life… they should just give all that up and move to somewhere with better connections? It’s not going to happen. Rural areas need better public transport if we want the elderly to give up their cars.
are you seriously suggesting the someone who’s not fit to drive should be allowed to do so because the live in a location poorly served by public transport? I’m very much in support of better public transport, but it’s absolutely not an excuse for letting people who shouldn’t keep driving. What next - well I know the Judge disqualified you for being drunk, but fair enough you live in the middle of nowhere so you can’t be expected to actually not drive because there are no busses OR I see you’ve been diagnosed with a benign brain tumour and the docs want to see how that works out for 12 months before you are allowed to drive but looking at your address there is only one bus a day so I think we should make your convenience a higher priority than theoretical risks to others safety.
someone who’s lived in a village for the past 75 years, has all their friends there,
Well either their friends can give them lifts or they can move or they can struggle to continue living there, just as if they went blind or got banned for speeding or whatever.
"I'm incompetent and dangerous but you can't take away my inalienable right to drive because it would be a bit awkward" isn't really much of an argument.
"Taxis? You think taxis are available whenever you want them in rural areas?"
Absolutely this - and also even in small towns a relatively small taxi fleet means that being able to book one first thing in morning or mid afternoon to get to a GP/Hospital appt is impossible as what taxis there are are actually booked out by the education authority to take kids to and from school.
This is an argument for better rural transport in general though - there are plenty of people who currently live in rural areas poorly served by public transport who have never had access to a car. Maybe* having an uptick of "relatively" wealthier people with higher levels of social capital becoming reliant on buses in rural areas as a consequence of relinquishing their car licences will mean more effective advocacy for public transport as well as increasing the potential user numbers.
*I said maybe..more in hope than conviction
some very weird points of view on this thread. If people aren't safe to drive their license should be taken away. There should be regular tests for everyone to keep the standards of driving up and improve road safety
My ex BiL had epilepsy and was allowed to drive if he took his medication - thing was he kept not taking it, and had some big smashes. As far as I know he hasn't killed anyone and is still driving, but thats an example of someone whose license should be taken away.... its not just elderly
Whether you live in a village or not, tough shit, you shouldn't be on the road.
I also think there should mandatory bans for those in accidents that cause serious injury or death, even if accidental. Kill someone because the sun was in your eyes? You are not driving for 5 years. Non negotiable.
are you seriously suggesting the someone who’s not fit to drive should be allowed to do so because the live in a location poorly served by public transport?
Point out where I ever said people should be allowed to drive despite being incompetent, just because they live in a village? I clearly said we need better public transport.
Airline pilots and train drivers don’t down a motorway texting
I have no idea what that was supposed to say. But I’m pretty sure you won’t pass the medical (even for a PPL) if you have significant cognitive decline. Not many “airline pilot” or “train drivers” in their 80’s… must be more discrimination against the aging.
if you believe no pilot or train driver has ever used their phone inappropriately or that has never contributed to an incident I am fairly sure you will be wrong. Prosecutions for being over the alcohol limit are not unheard of in both those sectors.
@mogrim - here “ Rural areas need better public transport if we want the elderly to give up their cars.”
that clearly suggests you think if there’s no public transport we can’t demand elderly people don’t drive.
76 to80 bar on that graph looks similar to 30 to 35 bar.
I don't intend to be driving whe I am 80.
that clearly suggests you think if there’s no public transport we can’t demand elderly people don’t drive.
Perhaps I should have written "if we expect the elderly to give up their cars". Same meaning though - people are people, they need to get around, and if we want more people to voluntarily give up their main means of transport they need alternatives.
Element of choice???
@mogrim - exactly why I used the word "element" rather than plain choice. I also acknowledge that things change, somewhere I planned to move to had a good bus service between two large towns which would have been great in my later years but bus co has now cancelled that service ?
I don’t intend to be driving whe I am 80
Me neither & am actively planning my next move (just turned 60) to accommodate that.
Prosecutions for being over the alcohol limit are not unheard of in both those sectors.
And have consequences based on the risk to public safety, which is what this thread is about.
My parents gave up driving a couple of years ago. Our village has 1 bus an hour, so we are fortunate. It's two connecting buses to the supermarket, then they get a taxi back. Even doing that weekly, they aren't spending the petrol, insurance and servicing costs of their car.
I’d start with insisting on an eye test every 5 years with The results formally submitted to the DVLA. If you need glasses it could be logged against your licence.
if you need glasses and tell dvla (as the law says you should) then it is added as a condition on your license. It is surprising that when an optician tests your eyes and says you need to wear these to drive - the dvla rely on the person, not the optician, telling them. I think it’s mostly the same with serious medical conditions.
Would also pick up peopke who shouldn’t be driving due to other eye issues. Get caught driving without glasses on would invalidate your insurance on the spot.
people get a bit obsessed with invalidating insurance - that’s not a good thing, insurance protects everyone else on the road. However, under the current system if you have the flag on your licence that you need glasses and aren’t wearing them when the police stop you, you will be prosecuted for driving “otherwise in accordance with your license” (same as driving a class of vehicle you don’t haven’t got on the back of your license). Of course that does mean the cops need to stop you to check - which usually means you’ve done something else wrong first.
Since I seem to have stirred up a bit of a hornets nest with my comment about rural living, I should clarify that I accept there will come a time when driving isn't an option for me (assuming I live that long). I wasn't suggesting that I had some inalienable right to carry on forever. Balancing up when that will be would, of course, be much easier if there were other options.
Interesting point made by @intheborders though.. 10 deaths on the roads vs. 5000 for all reasons, but the figures also show that the elderly are only involved in a small proportion of those 10. We're looking at tiny numbers. I wonder if there are other lower-hanging plums that should be prioritised (like the 400bhp vehicles mentioned earlier?) or is this just seen as a cheap/easy win?
lower-hanging plums
I may be getting on, but my plums aren't hanging low, thank you very much. I did recently go for a "aorta aneurism scan", which is apparently routine at a certain age. The nurse asked if I was sure I wanted to do it, as if it was positive I'd have to stop driving until it was fixed. I went ahead, but with some trepidation as I'd have been royally screwed to be unable to drive. I could imagine some unprincipled folk avoiding medical tests if they risked losing their licence.
I wonder if there are other lower-hanging plums that should be prioritised (like the 400bhp vehicles mentioned earlier?) or is this just seen as a cheap/easy win?
I don't think *anything* in driving is a "cheap/easy win".
As soon as you mention or even imply the slightest restrictions on driving, there are howls of outrage around restrictions of freedom, what about the elderly, what about the carers, what about the rural dwellers, what about the kids...?
No one ever really seems to ask "what about the hundreds of people killed and seriously injured every year?" or "what about the costs to society of clearing up this carnage?"
All manner of qualifications require regular retesting, one I have to take is actually retaken at the driving theory test centres, so no reason why similar shouldn't occur for driving licences too.
@DrJ I just had the AAA scan done too. Completely out of the blue as I'd never heard of it. Good point about health testing and its implications though. I mean, I'd rather be healthy and NOT drive than the alternative!
As soon as you mention or even imply the slightest restrictions on driving, there are howls of outrage around restrictions of freedom, what about the elderly, what about the carers, what about the rural dwellers, what about the kids…?
What do you expect when folk have little choice though? I mean, I'm someone who would happily see speed restrictors fitted to all vehicles and much tougher penalties and totting-up rules (including the removal of any reason at all to be over the maximum points) just as a start but instead we're here focusing on a tiny percentage of the overall problem.
It is surprising that when an optician tests your eyes and says you need to wear these to drive – the dvla rely on the person, not the optician, telling them. I think it’s mostly the same with serious medical conditions.
Because ultimately it's the driver's responsibility to inform DVLA, and it's a criminal offense not to tell them about any serious conditions, and the GP details are on the form anyway, and they do occasionally follow up. If I'm honest, I'd much prefer that a different body did them, as they take up quite a bit of our time - Taxi drivers, HGV and bus drivers etc etc, they're just an additional burden that takes GPs away from what they should be doing
I know you shouldn’t laugh about these things, but….
A mates mum was in her 80’s and suffering from dementia. She was a feisty old bird (a former foreign office diplomat) and absolutely point blank refused to stop driving. Her car was the archetypal old biddy-mobile… a Rover 25.
Every time he went round to see her the car would have yet another ding or scrape where she’d hit somebody else in the car park at Tesco’s and just driven off. ‘Well, everyone does that!’ Was her reply to that.
He’d repeatedly pleaded with her to give up driving to no avail and was worried that the next prang would be a person, not a car.
So one day he had a moment of clarity. He went round to her house, rummaged through the drawers until he found the reg docs, got the keys and just drove it round to his house. He then set her up an account with a local taxi firm
The next time he went round she was demanding to know where her car was. He replied “you sold it about 6 months ago mum. Do you not remember? You get taxi’s now when you need to go to the shops. Look, the number is here by the phone”
Job jobbed as she couldn’t remember what happened last week, never mind 6 months ago
Like I said, you shouldn’t laugh, but sometimes the solution is staring you in the face 😀
if we want more people to voluntarily give up their main means of transport
I don't want it to be voluntary if they are incompetent.
What do you expect when folk have little choice though?
Almost all of them do have choices though, they have made choices all their lives to increase their car-dependency. They don't want to exercise the (simple and obvious) choices to do the contrary. Which in truly rural places means living somewhere more sensible, though this is only a small minority of such cases anyway.
Once you're old enough, you are not going to be able to drive. Sticking your head in the sand about this doesn't stop it from happening.
No one ever really seems to ask “what about the hundreds of people killed and seriously injured every year?” or “what about the costs to society of clearing up this carnage?”
Change "hundreds" to a percentage and it's the square root of FA though, and the costs likewise.
Remove all risk is both impossible and not the right approach, whether it's financial, road or any other area - you're not going to be able to remove 'all risk' and the closer you get to it the 100x more expensive it becomes (money as well as socially).
I’m actually surprised it requires new primary legislation, I would have thought the Secretary of State set medical rules for driving and determined the forms and processed for demonstrating that
I'm pleased that a right to personal freedom (irony much) is not subject to the whim of an individual elected politician with an eye on the headlines but requires the scrutiny of Parliament to change. At the same time as they are doing this could they please legislate to permanently remove licences from those that kill others by driving and the exceptional hardship defence (if your ability to drive affects your ability to provide for dependents maybe take a bit more care of your drving standard).
Interesting point made by @intheborders though.. 10 deaths on the roads vs. 5000 for all reasons, but the figures also show that the elderly are only involved in a small proportion of those 10. We’re looking at tiny numbers. I wonder if there are other lower-hanging plums that should be prioritised (like the 400bhp vehicles mentioned earlier?) or is this just seen as a cheap/easy win?
That's not how FAI/Inquests work though - they are allowed to make recommendations to prevent the same set of circumstance occurring, they can't go off down routes like that. Now if there is an FAI/Inquest into other incidents then they can make recommendations about those specific incidents.
Here's the full determination:
I suppose the Sheriff must have in his mind that if he makes recommendations which are hugely onerous to implement they will be far less likely to happen than any which are achievable.
I think 10 deaths on the roads v 5000 is a slightly odd way of saying our roads are very safe though. I think that is per month in Scotland alone? Official figure is 155 for 2023 so its more like 13/month (and 2023 was down from 171 in 2022). But all of those are "premature" deaths, ie. they were sudden, unexpected and largely avoidable. The vast majority of the 63,454 deaths in Scotland in 2023 (5,288/month) will have been through a natural process: 82% of those people were over 65, and across all ages 74% of deaths were attributed to cancer, respiratory disease (inc covid), dementia/altzeimers or circulatory disease. There's still a large number of deaths where covid is a factor - pre-covid the deaths figure was consistently 56-58K five years in a row. If you were to translate the deaths into "lost years" that might be a more revealing indicator - if someone in their 80's kills themselves through their own bad driving you could well look at it that its not really worse than dying in a care home a few years later, but if someone in their teens is killed that's perhaps 70+ years of "valuable" life lost. It would need way too much effort for a STW thread even if the data exists. And of course we are only talking about fatalities in these numbers - 1,930 people were seriously injured and 3,703 people were slightly injured in Scotland in 2023.
It's just another grumble about driving for me, along with phones/banned drivers/etc, around here you know the old folk who shouldn't be behind the wheel, i guess that's the same for everyone on here, you see them all the time, they have no situational awareness, no spacial awareness, battle scars around the cars and so on, thankfully they don't tend to go fast, or far, but you do wonder how many near misses they have in a week, as they're the ones who you notice because they've pulled out of a side road making you brake, or have veered over the road.
Again, meh, it's just driving these days, aging drivers is just one small part of the nightmare, i don't think i've enjoyed driving in a long time now.
Almost all of them do have choices though, they have made choices all their lives to increase their car-dependency. They don’t want to exercise the (simple and obvious) choices to do the contrary. Which in truly rural places means living somewhere more sensible, though this is only a small minority of such cases anyway.
Once you’re old enough, you are not going to be able to drive. Sticking your head in the sand about this doesn’t stop it from happening.
I am in agreement with the Captain here - currently having both sets of parents (in their 70s) living in areas which are just about served by public transport but not well enough to be convenient but also both having all their bedrooms and toilets upstairs - neither seems to be thinking ahead that ground floor living would be more sensible, yet I recall both scoffing at their own parents and in-laws for not wanting to move once their mobility started to go...
I don’t want it to be voluntary if they are incompetent.
Exactly - even mentioning choice and public transport implies these should be considerations. Inevitably the current regime of self-declaration must involve some sub-conscious element of that even if your ability to reason has not been impaired.
What do you expect when folk have little choice though?
Theres a weird irony that part of the reason our local bus services are constantly under threat is lack of use! Perhaps if all those who shouldn't be driving, even once a week, were using these facilities they would be there for more people?
Because ultimately it’s the driver’s responsibility to inform DVLA, and it’s a criminal offense not to tell them about any serious conditions, and the GP details are on the form anyway, and they do occasionally follow up. If I’m honest, I’d much prefer that a different body did them, as they take up quite a bit of our time – Taxi drivers, HGV and bus drivers etc etc, they’re just an additional burden that takes GPs away from what they should be doing
But the whole point of the FAI recommendation is you can't expect people who are not really making sound judgements any more to tell the DVLA there is a problem (especially when the form will inevitably be easier to fill in with "all good" than tell the truth). Now there is a whole separate debate about who should do such assessments. I am probably of the opinion that family doctors practices are actually well placed to understand the overall medical condition of the patient, but certainly no need for this to be a free NHS service. The FAI notes that these sort of cognitive tests don't need to be performed by doctors. I wonder though if they might actually help identify people who need more NHS (and/or SW) support, if you had to see every 80+ yr old who wanted to continue to drive might that actually result in long term benefits not just to safety on roads but to the patient and the overall system? Everyone knows that when faculties start to go it can be quite hard to get patients to go and see the GP, but I assume the earlier the better?
The problem with public transport around here is that it's underfunded, and councils are trying to get bus companies to run services at a loss, which is never going to happen, it's another big bunfight with the council cuts just now.
I doubt we'll have any sort of fix any time soon, the good news is i think technology will assist in the next generation, as will reductions in journeys due to online and networking, but that's yet another jam tomorrow response to a current problem i guess.
My work colleague got a call from the police informing him that they'd stopped his dad at the roadside as he was driving erratically at 2am and didn't know where he was going when questioned. His dad still refused to give up driving. Quite sad really but thankfully no one was hurt.
I think a lot of the collisions that the elderly are involved in are low speed ones, hitting things like street furniture and parked cars, and are not reported (and in some cases not even noticed by the driver).
This time of year, as it's dark in the morning and early evening, you'll see cars driving very slowly about. IME, this is often older folk who are struggling to see where they're going.
I nearly got knocked off my bike one time by a granny in a Yaris, who cut the corner on the junction I was waiting at. She was slowly shuffling the steering wheel trying to avoid me, all the time I was rooted to the spot not knowing which way she was going. Thankfully she managed to miss me by a few inches, but drove off before I could speak with her. It was quite a surreal and scary experience as it happened in what felt like slow motion.
So I'm all for have mandatory medicals every year, including eye tests in order to keep your license. This should be for everyone though.
At 66 next month, that day could be 10 years away, maybe more, maybe less. I’ll not miss driving as a past-time – I’ve always viewed cars as a utility – but rural transport is shit and I’d hate to be forced into moving somewhere busier.
We need better rural transport but moving somewhere busier would ensure that there's a shorter wait when the inevitable ambulance request is made. A rural lifestyle choice is not usually compatible with good emergency medical outcomes.
Only in Britain do we have a mandatory roadworthiness test for vehicles that are over three years old, yet not one for the actual driver, even if they're 80.
Theres a weird irony that part of the reason our local bus services are constantly under threat is lack of use! Perhaps if all those who shouldn’t be driving, even once a week, were using these facilities they would be there for more people?
Chicken and egg time.
See also: getting everything from Amazon or supermarket delivery rurally but upset the high street is dying...
However, under the current system if you have the flag on your licence that you need glasses and aren’t wearing them when the police stop you, you will be prosecuted for driving “otherwise in accordance with your license” (same as driving a class of vehicle you don’t haven’t got on the back of your license).
And if I have my contacts in. . . ? I can see the requirements for traffic policing requiring certifying on opthalmic equipment to be competent at the their jobs (or a lot of trips in police cars back to an eye-testing station. (To be clear I am not against a requirment for corrective vision aids to be stated on the licence but the detail will be difficult for the underfunded/manned enforcement authority).
We need better rural transport but moving somewhere busier would ensure that there’s a shorter wait when the inevitable ambulance request is made. A rural lifestyle choice is not usually compatible with good emergency medical outcomes
Doesn't mean I have to like it though ?
(FWIW I'm currently just a few hundred metres from our local hospital, though I was here before it was).
BruceFull Member
76 to80 bar on that graph looks similar to 30 to 35 bar.
Whataboutery?
The reasons for both ends of the graph are totally different. Having assessments of driving ability at both ends of the curve may well save lives. Imagine how bad the <25 bars would be if <25's weren't assessed either? There's plenty of suggestions on the table of how the left hand side could be improved that target the reasons why it's so bad (restrictions on cars, occupancy driving hours etc to manage risk and black boxes to manage behavior), why are you specifically adverse to suggestions to target a scheme at the other end of the curve that targets teh likely causes of those issues?
I don’t intend to be driving whe I am 80.
So why argue so viscerally that people who do should be assessed to see whether they are still competent and capable?
I think a lot of the collisions that the elderly are involved in are low speed ones, hitting things like street furniture and parked cars, and are not reported (and in some cases not even noticed by the driver).
I'm sure this is true - way back up the thread I mentioned all the damage to my mother's car before we disabled it. A few months back when I was out on the bike I saw some old guy who barely get into his car pull round in the road and scraps the car opposite. Clearly completely unaware he'd done it.
It's not just deaths that are relevant.
My work colleague got a call from the police informing him that they’d stopped his dad at the roadside as he was driving erratically at 2am and didn’t know where he was going when questioned. His dad still refused to give up driving.
No police action to stop him. mad.
As for people saying “just take away your parents’ keys”, the child has no right to do this. It’s basically theft, you’re relying on the parent being unable or unwilling to do anything about it.
@thecaptain I think theres a point where you have a moral obligation to do this though. We tried getting the doctor to do it, but they're highly resistant as they don't want to lose the trust of the patient. Look at all the caveats in the GMC advice - very easy for them to avoid the difficult conversation.
https://www.olderdrivers.org.uk/families/how-doctors-can-help/
I can't believe the arguments here. You clearly cannot rely on self regulation nor on a requiring a specific referral. If everyone has the same test theres no stigma or resistance (a doctor referring for a test they're pretty certain the subject is going to fail is really no different to them notifying DVLA and has the same issues of patient avoiding diagnosis)
We need better rural transport but moving somewhere busier would ensure that there’s a shorter wait when the inevitable ambulance request is made. A rural lifestyle choice is not usually compatible with good emergency medical outcomes
Doesn't mean I have to like it though ?
(FWIW I'm currently just a few hundred metres from our local hospital, though I was here before it was).
currently having both sets of parents (in their 70s) living in areas which are just about served by public transport but not well enough to be convenient but also both having all their bedrooms and toilets upstairs – neither seems to be thinking ahead that ground floor living would be more sensible, yet I recall both scoffing at their own parents and in-laws for not wanting to move once their mobility started to go…
I think you've described most peoples' parents here, certainly mine. In their 80s, m dad has Alzheimers and my mum basically took away the car keys when he started going out in the car and forgetting where he was. At that point he seemed to be able to drive competently but became disoriented. Now they are in a house with upstairs bathroom and bedrooms. My mum says she is willing to move but has imposed such a list of criteria that essentially it will be impossible to find somewhere. I hope that when the time comes I will be more pragmatic, but i'm not betting on it.
As for people saying “just take away your parents’ keys”, the child has no right to do this. It’s basically theft, you’re relying on the parent being unable or unwilling to do anything about it.
I was involved in doing this with my grandfather. He drove me to Manchester airport to drop off my parents as they moved abroad. I was shocked how bad his driving was, as was my mum. While my mum and uncles all hatched a plan on the phone I drove him home. The next morning he was at GP who was a family friend and as a professional my grandpa (a nurse) had respect for. The GP basically took his keys off him there and then, I took the car directly from GP that afternoon and met my uncle at a second hand car place and sold it.
You just have to do what you have to do.
I am arguing that a significant minority of all drivers are dangerous due to recklessness , speeding and impatience.
Target these and you would save many more lives.
Last time I drove on the no overtaking section of the A515 no overtaking section at the speed limit I got over taken by a Range Rover. They could not tell if the road was clear.
Anecdotes prove nothing.
Is there an FAI for every fatal motor crash and, if not, what are the qualifying criteria?