Re-evulate the privileges of the eldery???...

vc1111 · 07-25-2003, 10:59 AM

..for driving that is...

Doesn' t it make sense to have a national requirement that all drivers beyond a certain age MUST be re-tested and physically re-evaluated to maintain a license?

(The news has several stories about elderly folks causing severe harm and property damage)

It has been my experience that the families of the elderly are reluctant or incapable of taking their loved ones off the road when they are no longer capable of maintaining prudent driving behaviors and skills.

driftrider · 07-25-2003, 11:39 AM

This is a good question. Part of me says that more frequent testing and re-licensure is a good thing, but the libertarian in me feels like such a requirement would be like punishing the elderly for getting old.

I guess I would be for a yearly eyesight, nightvision and reflex test for anyone over a certain age. The problem lies in deciding what age that ought to be. I' ve known elderly people who are more than capable of driving well into their late 70' s, and others that should have hung up the keys at 65. The problem I have is that, unless you live in a large city with a good mass transit system, the ability to drive represents a great deal of freedom. Taking away a persons drivers license is as good as putting them on house arrest. Fine for a criminal, but not really for those who' ve committed no crime.

Mike

logs · 07-25-2003, 01:12 PM

WI has laws on the books for retesting drivers who have not been stopped by the Police but have been observed by a citizen driving poorly. Officers can also request retesting under the same conditions or observations. We also have eye examines every so many years.
This type of law seems realistic to me and I' ve seen it used to remove drivers from the road. It does not lend itself to any age discrimination arguement and only effects those who have demonstrated poor habits, inability to preform or failure to operate in a safe manner regardless of age.
All one has to do is notify the MVD of the identity of the driver and state the reason or incident that cause you to believe they are a risk to others or themselves while operating a motorvehicle. If the reason stated appears legitimate and a danger, the person in question is called in for retesting.
In an example where grandma is getting confused at home and can' t remember the hot from cold water tap or her eye sight has turned bad or she can no longer move fast enough to switch her right foot from the gas to the brake, you just fill out the form, state your observations and send it of to Madison (State Capital and small communist country) and they will send someone out to talk to her and then maybe retest her.
It can also be the guy nexts door who you see knock over his trash cans every day or hit the tree infront of the house whatever. Or the guy driving down the road at 25 mph in a 55mph zone in his lane braking for sparrows and swinging out for rual mailboxes. Jot down the plate number, make and model of the vehicle and a breif description of the driver and incident and bingo, retesting proceedures starts.

I like this system rather than a blanket test everyone at VC' s age. It is cost effective and only targets individuals who are a problem. If you test everyone at VC' s age for a starter, when do you test them the second or third time. Elderly can deteriorate faster at different times. A guy you test in 2003 would be due for elderly retesting when, 2007? How bad could they be in the inbetween years?
The guy in what was it CA that killed 9 or 10 people had a history of poor driving. Under the WI system he would have been retested 10 years ago.

fng · 07-25-2003, 01:18 PM

Quote:

WI has laws on the books for retesting drivers who have not been stopped by the Police but have been observed by a citizen driving poorly.

Yup, my wife got rear ended about 4 years ago by an elderly woman and she had to be retested. Didn' t know those laws were there until that happened.

I agree with you 100% logs. These types of laws are very reasonable and don' t impinge upon the good elderly drivers. Plus could you imagine the cost to the drivers/taxpayers if everyone over say 60 was tested annually... gawd, the dot is out of control already, that would be INSANE.

CalHunter · 07-25-2003, 02:04 PM

Although I agree with some type of provision state by state, I' m not sure I would want such a national law passed since it would be another federal attempt at overriding the states' rights.

California has a priority retest law that is triggered by any law enforcement officer requesting a priority exam. Once we give the person the paperwork, they have 5 days to contact our Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to schedule a priority Driver Reexamination or their license is automatically suspended.

All California drivers must get their license renewed every 4 years. The license renewal process consisted of taking another written test only and no physical driving test. For a while, our DMV was even offering automatic extensions without any testing for 1 or 2 extensions (8-12 years). I think a reasonable improvement to the system would eliminate the automatic extensions without any written testing and would mandate a physical driving test for anybody who is VC' s age or older.

I also like the idea of a citizen being able to report a person being unable to drive safely as long as the system has safeguards to prevent its' being abused or used for some type of retaliation.

I recently pulled over a friend' s mom for weaving very badly. I didn' t recognize the car and didn' t know it was her until I got up to her window. She had my buddy' s daughter and niece in the back seat. She was just tired and I gave her a warning. I followed her home and spoke to my buddy about it the next day as she had seemed really out of it. My buddy is a retired cop and he said a lot of cop friends had advised him of similar behavior and his mother was refusing to admit she had a problem even with minor single car accidents. He asked me to give his mom a priority reexamination notice as a favor for him and for his mom' s and daughter' s safety. Even his daughter told me she was scared when riding with grandma. I gave her a priority reexamination notice based on my observations and the additional information I learned. My buddy explained it to his mother so she wouldn' t get mad about it and told her he would drive her everywhere she wanted to go.

A few days later, she had a heart attack and passed away. After talking with her doctor, my buddy said he figured she would have likely killed somebody if she had been driving when she had the heart attack and possibly could have had his daughter in the car with her. Although I really dislike taking away an elderly person' s driving freedom, I had to agree with him on that.

Although I don' t like taking away an elderly person' s freedom either, I think there needs to be some reasonable system in place to help prevent elderly people from continuing to drive when they are medically incapable of doing so safely. Good topic VC. By the way, how old are you??????

Dave590 · 07-25-2003, 04:36 PM

This is a very difficult question indeed.

My Dads last year was one that fit this scenario very well. He was just too old to be messing around behind " the wheel" . I could never have brought myself to try and " take" his liscense away, but we had a mutual unspoken thing between us that I would just drive him anywhere he wanted to go.

It' s easy to condemn old folks to a life in their own homes, it' s even easyer to make fun of them because they are such a good target...Old folks in Fla. are good for a lot of laughs...But in reality, as feeble and agrivating as they are, THEY are the ones that made this such a great place to stay (America)

There SHOULD be some sort of standards set to keep old folks from doing something stupid like killing a bunch of innocent folks on a sidewalk...But convincing a person to give op their freedom of mobility is a whole ' nother animal indeed.

svltech · 07-28-2003, 09:14 AM

I think everyone should be tested randomly like smog testing at every five year period and then mandatory over the age of 55 every five years. My grandmother drives great but we took the keys from Grandpa with brain problems at age 57. He wouldn' t of passed the test at 55 so he would have been pulled off the road early. He didn' t cause any wrecks but the risk was very high till we took the keys.

Tazman · 07-28-2003, 09:53 AM

Well in Va. I think they have an age criteria that requires you to have your vision checked yearly and I beleive they make you take a retest at a certain age, I think.

I like the Wisconsin deal Logs, it makes a lot of sense.

Deleted User · 07-28-2003, 10:16 AM

[Deleted by Admins]

vc1111 · 07-28-2003, 10:58 AM

My age (31) would be fine for the starting age.

Seriously though, the human body breaks down over time. Reflexes, eyesight, dexterity, all deteriorate over time. It makes sense to me that at the least a medical examination would be appropriate to catch those with severly diminished capacities.

Yes, we could haggle over the timing (age) of the exams, but we could have the same debate forever over when people should be allowed to begin driving. We solved that one, so it seems to me that eventually we could choose the proper age to begin whatever testing is appropriate for older people...older being anyone much, much older than me....like logs for instance.

There comes a time for all of us when culling from the herd is appropriate.

Don' t worry logs, I' ll still drive you to your stand this fall.

Maybe we should start talking about getting hand rails installed on your climber.[

]