Eyesight rules for motorists unsafe, says coroner
Discussion
I don't think anyone here will disagree. Nor, based on previous threads, will anyone be overly shocked at the lax system we have.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrv1g2yl0xo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrv1g2yl0xo
21TonyK said:
I don't think anyone here will disagree. Nor, based on previous threads, will anyone be overly shocked at the lax system we have.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrv1g2yl0xo
totally agree that we are very lax - and not just in the eyesight department in my view.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrv1g2yl0xo
I personally think that at some stage after 70, there should be another driving test to ensure competence. There must be many old people who shouldn’t be behind the wheel - quite a lot of those that I take to hospital say they only drive locally because they aren’t confident on the motorway. Looking at some of them, I would quest how competent they would be even locally!
Should be more than just eyesight that gets tested. Eyesight and then some sort of vision and reaction times together as well.
Spent the week teaching new blue light drivers. Almost to a vehicle, the ones who just didn't see us and then didn't react to us were all elderly. If they can't see fully marked vehicles with emergency lights illuminated and react (they just kept driving straight towards us), what else do they miss or not react too?
It's quite scary tbh.
Spent the week teaching new blue light drivers. Almost to a vehicle, the ones who just didn't see us and then didn't react to us were all elderly. If they can't see fully marked vehicles with emergency lights illuminated and react (they just kept driving straight towards us), what else do they miss or not react too?
It's quite scary tbh.
nordboy said:
Should be more than just eyesight that gets tested. Eyesight and then some sort of vision and reaction times together as well.
Spent the week teaching new blue light drivers. Almost to a vehicle, the ones who just didn't see us and then didn't react to us were all elderly. If they can't see fully marked vehicles with emergency lights illuminated and react (they just kept driving straight towards us), what else do they miss or not react too?
It's quite scary tbh.
Only elderly people did not react, I doubt that very much.Spent the week teaching new blue light drivers. Almost to a vehicle, the ones who just didn't see us and then didn't react to us were all elderly. If they can't see fully marked vehicles with emergency lights illuminated and react (they just kept driving straight towards us), what else do they miss or not react too?
It's quite scary tbh.
I think in an ideal world everyone should be retested regulary.
I had cataracts during covid. They were aggressive and one eye was considerably worse than the other.
At one point I made the decision not to drive. However, legally I still passed the test and could still read a numberplate at 20 metres. I was really struggling with judging distances.
I was amazed how low the bar is.
At one point I made the decision not to drive. However, legally I still passed the test and could still read a numberplate at 20 metres. I was really struggling with judging distances.
I was amazed how low the bar is.
I worry that this will be jumped upon as an opportunity to bring in new rules and fines that do nothing to improve road safety but adversely impact the rest of us. I heard this story on the news and they mentioned one of the drivers couldn't clearly see their own steering wheel. If someone is that irresponsible then there is way more going on there than vision problems.
Those that already have strong prejudices will probably be all for any measures that are suggested, regardless of the actual impact on safety. It's the same whenever restrictions on new drivers are touted. People who gripe about young drivers are all for making their lives as hard as possible. Probably a lot of the same people that would rail against anything suggested in relation to the current hot topic.
I suspect the most good would probably be achieved by trying to remove the stigma around having difficult conversations about ability with elderly parents. That's not as appealing to the people that want new fines and restrictions imposed on others though.
Those that already have strong prejudices will probably be all for any measures that are suggested, regardless of the actual impact on safety. It's the same whenever restrictions on new drivers are touted. People who gripe about young drivers are all for making their lives as hard as possible. Probably a lot of the same people that would rail against anything suggested in relation to the current hot topic.
I suspect the most good would probably be achieved by trying to remove the stigma around having difficult conversations about ability with elderly parents. That's not as appealing to the people that want new fines and restrictions imposed on others though.
Oliver Hardy said:
Only elderly people did not react, I doubt that very much.
I think in an ideal world everyone should be retested regulary.
Hmm, he didn't say it was only elderly people who didn't react.I think in an ideal world everyone should be retested regulary.
He said of the people who didn't react, they were virtually all elderly. (The difference being of course there are elderly drivers still with good visibilityand reaction times). Near me I'd say it was airport minicabs who seem to drive round oblivious of surroundings.
The problem is however cost - do we add this fee to road tax? Onto fuel? Onto vat? Plus test centres already have massive backlogs - where do the extra examiners come from?
Yes these 4 cases are tragic, but it needs to be paid for by driver's themselves.
So kier will now be stealing not only winter fuel, but adding another £100 or so tax on pensioner's "freedom" (which is how the express or telegraph will report it).
I would definitely support some simple bit effective improvements, but I am not familiar enough with the topic to suggest any.
For clarity, there's plenty of bits of uk driving that don't work: foreign or no licences, drug driving not widely tested, non UK lorries over time and overloaded, plus the usual ones like distraction, driving too close and inappropriate speed.
There just isn't enough money to do everything, and given the amount of bellyaching on here any time someone gets caught by a camera for speeding, I'm not sure pistonheads is really ready for more in depth enforcement of driving rules.
Ian Geary said:
Oliver Hardy said:
Only elderly people did not react, I doubt that very much.
I think in an ideal world everyone should be retested regulary.
Hmm, he didn't say it was only elderly people who didn't react.I think in an ideal world everyone should be retested regulary.
He said of the people who didn't react, they were virtually all elderly. (The difference being of course there are elderly drivers still with good visibilityand reaction times).
I'm normally fiercely protective of allowing the elderly to continue driving with few restrictions, it's the last bit of independence they often have before we usher them out of sight of society. But personally, I think an occasional (2-5 years?) eye test requirement is probably a good idea, people aren't always aware of the degree of their failing vision, it's relatively cheap, it can be done outside of the already restricted DVSA capacity and potentially it can be corrected.
Edited by 768 on Saturday 19th April 07:53
Everyone should have a 2yearly eye test at an opticians and the result should be sent straight to the DVLA.
However. No doubt there'd be an industry popping up to circumnavigate this, to buy your result.
There's a certain area- near a honey pot quaint tourist location that I cycle and without fail it's always the retired who pass me really close. I often think is it because they don't like cyclists but it may well be they literally are struggling to see me as an obstacle.
However. No doubt there'd be an industry popping up to circumnavigate this, to buy your result.
There's a certain area- near a honey pot quaint tourist location that I cycle and without fail it's always the retired who pass me really close. I often think is it because they don't like cyclists but it may well be they literally are struggling to see me as an obstacle.
768 said:
Saying only elderly people didn't react isn't saying all the elderly people didn't react.
I'm normally fiercely protective of allowing the elderly to continue driving with few restrictions, it's the last bit of independence they often have before we usher them out of sight of society. But personally, I think an occasional (2-5 years?) eye test requirement is probably a good idea, people aren't always aware of the degree of their failing vision, it's relatively cheap, it can be done outside of the already restricted DVSA capacity and potentially it can be corrected.
Eye tests for all when you renew your licence card at your own expense and with results submitted to the DVLA automatically wouldn’t strike me as overly punitive or problematic as a solution to this particular problem. A lot of us could benefit from seeing an optician from time to time anyway and many already do to get their prescriptions updated. That way we don’t just target the elderly we also target the vain and the lazy who don’t want to wear glasses when they should.I'm normally fiercely protective of allowing the elderly to continue driving with few restrictions, it's the last bit of independence they often have before we usher them out of sight of society. But personally, I think an occasional (2-5 years?) eye test requirement is probably a good idea, people aren't always aware of the degree of their failing vision, it's relatively cheap, it can be done outside of the already restricted DVSA capacity and potentially it can be corrected.
Edited by 768 on Saturday 19th April 07:53
As for the slower reactions that’s a bit trickier. Hazard perception tests can be done without a driving examiner present, we could probably organise something along those lines at public buildings around the country and make it reasonably cheap?
Whichever way you look at it we do have an issue with poor public transport forcing otherwise unfit drivers to keep driving past the point at which they are competent and comfortable with it. I don’t blame the individuals, I’m not going to be rushing to give up my freedoms either when I get there but old folks should accept that the ageing process does inevitably affect suitability to drive. That’s not saying that some younger drivers don’t need their licences taken away from them it’s just pointing out a fact.
Hugo Stiglitz said:
Everyone should have a 2yearly eye test at an opticians and the result should be sent straight to the DVLA.
Completely agree. The over 60's are already entitled to a free NHS eye test every two years, not so sure how many take advantage of it though.
I think eyesight is just one consideration. With age cognitive function does decline, not for all, but for many. Reaction time slows and physical dexterity diminishes.
One of the notable causes of published accidents in the elderly round my way (South Devon) is a driver hitting the accelerator instead of the brake and losing control.
Combine all of these things and its not just eyesight that needs to be assessed.
But now I'm just repeating what has been said on here countless times.
If you read the article it is apparent that all of the errant drivers described were on the road because they had long term visual impairment, well known to them, that they failed to declare to the authorities. This is the real problem here.
Plenty of elderly drivers reach this stage and are honest and responsible about it. These ones didn’t.
To legislate that all drivers must have independent eye examinations is a vast overkill in my opinion. There are plenty of situations that depend on self declaration in all sorts of legal contexts. It would be chaos to accept that all of these too should be physically checked.
The answer here is to make sure that penalties for mis-declarations are sufficiently high to properly dissuade the reluctant that it really isn’t a good idea to lie when completing licence application forms.
Plenty of elderly drivers reach this stage and are honest and responsible about it. These ones didn’t.
To legislate that all drivers must have independent eye examinations is a vast overkill in my opinion. There are plenty of situations that depend on self declaration in all sorts of legal contexts. It would be chaos to accept that all of these too should be physically checked.
The answer here is to make sure that penalties for mis-declarations are sufficiently high to properly dissuade the reluctant that it really isn’t a good idea to lie when completing licence application forms.
Roofless Toothless said:
If you read the article it is apparent that all of the errant drivers described were on the road because they had long term visual impairment, well known to them, that they failed to declare to the authorities. This is the real problem here.
Plenty of elderly drivers reach this stage and are honest and responsible about it. These ones didn’t.
To legislate that all drivers must have independent eye examinations is a vast overkill in my opinion. There are plenty of situations that depend on self declaration in all sorts of legal contexts. It would be chaos to accept that all of these too should be physically checked.
The answer here is to make sure that penalties for mis-declarations are sufficiently high to properly dissuade the reluctant that it really isn’t a good idea to lie when completing licence application forms.
Maybe the answer is to make it an obligation for opticians to report conditions which affect someone's ability to drive to DVLA? MIL is hopefully getting her licence back in the next few months after not driving due to a medical condition.Plenty of elderly drivers reach this stage and are honest and responsible about it. These ones didn’t.
To legislate that all drivers must have independent eye examinations is a vast overkill in my opinion. There are plenty of situations that depend on self declaration in all sorts of legal contexts. It would be chaos to accept that all of these too should be physically checked.
The answer here is to make sure that penalties for mis-declarations are sufficiently high to properly dissuade the reluctant that it really isn’t a good idea to lie when completing licence application forms.
Oh great the whole driving population should suffer extra rules, legislation, inconvenience, expense just because a couple of nearly blind people stupidly choose to drive. What about all the mentally insane people? Those with personality disorders? Uninsured, non licence holding, expired foreign license, people with weak limbs, dumb people, people either no anticipation skills etc
I say no
I say no
Roofless Toothless said:
If you read the article it is apparent that all of the errant drivers described were on the road because they had long term visual impairment, well known to them, that they failed to declare to the authorities. This is the real problem here.
Plenty of elderly drivers reach this stage and are honest and responsible about it. These ones didn’t.
To legislate that all drivers must have independent eye examinations is a vast overkill in my opinion. There are plenty of situations that depend on self declaration in all sorts of legal contexts. It would be chaos to accept that all of these too should be physically checked.
The answer here is to make sure that penalties for mis-declarations are sufficiently high to properly dissuade the reluctant that it really isn’t a good idea to lie when completing licence application forms.
Why is there so much self declaration? Why can’t opticians, GP’s, other medical professionals etc issue a hold on your driving licence? Who better to judge your eyesight as incompatible with driving than an optician? We need a linked system.Plenty of elderly drivers reach this stage and are honest and responsible about it. These ones didn’t.
To legislate that all drivers must have independent eye examinations is a vast overkill in my opinion. There are plenty of situations that depend on self declaration in all sorts of legal contexts. It would be chaos to accept that all of these too should be physically checked.
The answer here is to make sure that penalties for mis-declarations are sufficiently high to properly dissuade the reluctant that it really isn’t a good idea to lie when completing licence application forms.
CoolHands said:
Oh great the whole driving population should suffer extra rules, legislation, inconvenience, expense just because a couple of nearly blind people stupidly choose to drive. What about all the mentally insane people? Those with personality disorders? Uninsured, non licence holding, expired foreign license, people with weak limbs, dumb people, people either no anticipation skills etc
I say no
An eye test every ten years would hardly be onerous given that most people have them regularly anyway.I say no
21TonyK said:
Maybe the answer is to make it an obligation for opticians to report conditions which affect someone's ability to drive to DVLA? MIL is hopefully getting her licence back in the next few months after not driving due to a medical condition.
Then people won't go to the opticians in case they can't just correct it with glasses, that sounds worse.768 said:
21TonyK said:
Maybe the answer is to make it an obligation for opticians to report conditions which affect someone's ability to drive to DVLA? MIL is hopefully getting her licence back in the next few months after not driving due to a medical condition.
Then people won't go to the opticians in case they can't just correct it with glasses, that sounds worse.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff