This Sub-topic is for discussing the article listed above, which can be read here. Please add your thoughts and reactions to the article.

I enjoyed reading this article and agree with the demand to require retesting. I would, however, suggest extending the demand.

Many controlled studies have shown that the cognitive, psychomotor and/or perceptive functions which are essential for safe driving can be reliably assessed and are excellent predictors of accident involvement. In one study I published some years ago I demonstrated a ninety percent hit rate in correctly predicting accident involvement over a three year period in a group of thirty truckers.

These cognitive, psychomotor and/or perceptive functions are, however, clearly age dependant. Drops in these abilities cannot always be compensated by years of additional experience thus causing a person, who was initially a safe and reliable driver to become a serious safety risk some years later.

For this reason I would suggest requiring drivers to undergo such evaluation before obtaining their license and at a number of stages during their driving careers and not only to rely on performing a new driving test during which many of the functional deficits will not become apparent.

Gary Magwood argues that "each of us is capable of making the decision to stop driving when we realize we've become a threat to our own self preservation."

I see a couple of problems with this theory: firstly, an instinct for self-preservation, if any, may not translate to the choice to drive. Mobility needs and stubborn determination to remain "independent" may overrule worries about personal safety. And surrounded by thousands of pounds of Oldsmobile steel, some drivers might not be very concerned about their own preservation in a low-speed collision.

Secondly, some older drivers suffer from declining abilities in not only physical, but also mental capacities, including the ability to judge risk and make safe choices about personal safety.

So we cannot rely too much on self assessment. If an official evaluation determined that a particular driver should stop driving, then their would have to be processes in place to ensure that happened--processes with teeth.

Michael mentioned his research on truckers' crashes. Can you tell us a bit more about this? What factors were predictive of future crash involvement? And I was not clear what you meant by "extending the demand" or were you just agreeing with Magwood's proposal for lifelong periodic evaluations?

Thanks

Douglas,
firstly I appologise for my clumbsy English. What I meant re "extending the demand" was to say that lifelong period evaluations in form of driving tests is not enough. I propose evaluating the cognitive, psychomotor and/or perceptive functions too.

My study was based on an Israeli adaption of the Austrian ART90 system which tests everything from reaction times, via tachistoscopic perception, concentration, split attention to functioning under stress. The tests have seperate norms for different age groups and thus treat the elderly driver fairly.

Today I use a newer version of this battery and consistently receive results which are proven by reality. If you are interested in a short description of the tests which are in ART90, please send me an e-mail to mcale@inter.net.il

Who should be re-tested and when?

Back in the 60s I sent a letter to the Minister of Transport, Manitoba. Suggesting that since both the National Safety Council in the US and Judge Silverberg, both found that on all counts the senior drivers were the safest drivers on the road. Vision changed more for teen-agers than for those over 60. Heart attacks were more likely for those in there 40s and 50s than those over 60. The list went on. They very seldom drank and drive. On long trips they stayed in motels early before night-fall. The upshot of these studies was that the worst problem for the senior driver was his or her appearance. We only saw the bad senior drivers, such as Pilar Hicks. Our instinctive and hidden bias triggered our emotions in the same way women drivers were vilified in the ‘good old days’

Booklets produced by both the American Medical Association and the Canadian Medical Association listed page after page of the many impairments that could affect driving. However, the very first statement was that a driver should not be denied a license based upon such findings. A road test by a qualified examiner should be the final method of taking away a license by the jurisdictions.

Based upon this information I suggested that if the Minister wanted to continue the newly instituted re-call and re-testing of seniors, then they should also call in the worst drivers and these were the 16 to 24 year olds.

Shortly thereafter, arbitrary re-testing was discontinued, and re-calls were based on an equal rights method based upon assessed violation and accident points and not on age alone. The demerit point system caught one and all young and old.

Professional drivers of all types, are required to take a physical at more frequent intervals than the younger pros.

Michael, if the AMA and the CMA felt that driving should be evaluated on the road by a qualified examiner, how does your test establish validity for re-training or license-lifting.

Comment: Within ten years the whole world will be innundated with Aged Drivers the sheer political will of these aging boomers may make all this moot.

It is true, that statistics from most countries show that older drivers tend to be by far safer than younger ones. I have no doubt, that younger drivers should be tested, trained and supervised as is being done initially (I do suggest functional testing before license acquisition) all over the world with multiple staged license acquisition procedures.

This does not solve the problem of elderly citizens who suffer from age related functional disabilities and let's not kid ourselves, a long list of functional abilities deteriorate with age. I doubt, anyone would argue, that a totally blind person or someone suffering from advanced stages of dementia cannot be a safe driver. I disagree with the assumption that a road test, which usually is no longer than twenty minutes and takes place in a familiar environment can reliably detect critical changes in reaction time, field of vision, split attention, capability to predict speed or direction or perception under extreme situations.

An anecdote from last month: A 56 year old professional, who learned about our tests from a newspaper article signed up to be tested because she "felt unsure". Before this, she had two driving instructors give her the thumbs up, her familiy physician evaluated her and her optician said all was fine. In test PP we saw, that her visual field, which should be 160 degrees is limited to just under 140 and that the handicap is mainly on the left side. After hearing the results, she asked me to step out of the office, where she showed me her 2000 Golf with more small bangs (especially on the left) than on a drum.

When a driver makes a serious mistake near us on the road, we don't usually remember it. But if it is a driver from a target group it's another story. What are these target groups. The very young, the very old and women. We all have an instinctive clan protection bias against those that are different. Thus instinctively, beyond logic and conscious thinking we all store our biases up.

It might be that we are 'skewing' the very young and very old with statistics. When we view the fatality statistics, we see a spike at either end of the age curve. Researchers all tell us these are the very worst drivers on the road.

Consider this; There are two groups who are unable to drive as professional drivers. There are two groups who are unable to drive as high mileage business drivers. Hey wait for it. Yep. The very young and the very old.

What would happen to the spikes at either end of the fatality age graph, if we deducted those who by accumulating points or crashes would lose not only their license? They would lose their job as well.

I am not a statistician. The figures I have found may only indicate the need for a harder look at the demographics. Using US Department of Labour Statistics of employed people, a loosely defined group of drivers was extracted. These were deducted from the mid range group of male drivers. Female drivers were included in the total, they were not deducted.

The very young and the very old make up roughly 25 percent of all drivers.

The mid range, all those in between the very young and the very old make up roughly 50 percent of all drivers.

The very young and the very old, 25%, have 30% of all the fatal crashes.

The mid range less the pros @50%, have 70% of all the crashes.

If we could increase the number of young and old drivers by 50% would we have an increase of 60% in fatalities?

If we cut back the number of midrange drivers from 50% of all drivers to only 25% of all drivers, would we have a drop of 35% of total fatalities?

Foo for thought.

We arrived in Canada November 1997.
Were both drivers since 1945 and 1956 overseas, completely accident free.

During 1998 in our 78th year we passed our Ontario Driving tests. They call it (novice).
Now after 5 years and in our 82nd year we must take this test again.
We did not take the highway test,we only drive locally,. Doctors, shopping and such like .

Surely if we were capable of passing the G2 test in our 78th year, this proves we are as capable as other 80 year olds, who took their tests 60 years ago.

Why apply the graduated testing to new immigrant seniors only, surely this is discrimination.
We should be allowed the same eye test and symposium as other seniors.
Can you imagine the outcry if they were asked to take the new full graduated license.

Regards
Dodi
(How do I obtaion an account}

Hi Dodi

To obtain an account you can click on "get started" in the right column (at the top). Then follow the procedure to set yourself a password and set up your "User Profile."

The User Profile allows you to have responses to your message automatically sent to you. You can also set your account to monitor ALL the discussions.

Re older driver testing -- your question about the G2 test and the novice driver test for seniors is a good one. We'll look for more info and post it later.

When do you cease being a novice driver.
I am 82 years of age.A car driver overseas for forty years and in Ontario for the past fve years.
This week I passed my G2 for the second time in Toronto.
I believe I am entitled to my full five years driving licence again after passing the test. My examiner said I was getting this.
I do not need to drink and drive neither do I drive on highways so do not feel the necessity to take a full G licence.
Why was I only given a licence for one year.?
Who can come up with some help suggestions.
Anne(Dodi)

The problem of elderly drivers in Florida is exacerbated by the unusual mix of driving styles in this state. Lots of teenagers, foreigners, "red necks", "normal" as well as elderly drivers are on the roads. And it's not easy to identify older drivers that have to be watched out for. (Sometimes - they can't even be seen).
It is not a secret that as one gets older, eye/hand coordination, depth perception and general awareness are diminished. Add to that the preponderance of drugs that elderly people have to take to just get through the day and it's amazing that even more people aren't getting killed. What is wrong with mandatory testing every year once someone reaches 80 or 85 or 78 or whatever is appropriate? It is clear the special interest groups are keeping mandatory testing from happening. Take away a persons license to drive and that person becomes a prisoner!!! Phooey. Take away a persons license to drive who can't pass a drivers test and you SAVE lives!!!!!

Doesnt anyone realize that not only a d.l. should be given to you at a certain age but also taken away at a certain age. I am 73 years old and agree with the majority, that elderly people should be tested for reaction times. My grandson has a video game that does just that, it is made to prepare you for a light tree at the dragstrip. My grandson is seventeen years old and he scores a .034 second time, where as I have a 1.038 second time. This is enough to mean slamming into someone who has to brake hard. I reaserched this more in details that I will not go into but the point is this: I took my own license away. Even though I am very healthy with good eyes and strong heart I just cant think and move as swiftly as I could when I was 30. Most people my age will not admit this but I know it to be true. I take the bus to bingo from now on!

Congratulations Username on checking yourself out of the system. I don't think many people would do that. Some people absolutely will NOT give up their license, no matter what goes wrong, until it is taken away from them.
I think there should be some checks after age 65 or 70, so drivers know how well they are performing.

I think that if you are over the age of 65 than you should have to retake drivers education and if you pass you can keep your drivers lisense if not than you can drive with a person in the car. I also think that the state of Michigan should lower the drivers education age requirments to the age of thirteen years and five months of age with a GPA of 2.0 if the driver taking the test and road test is very mature and resposible and they know what they are doing and pay attention.

Alicia,
Thinking is what causes problems at 13 or 13 1/2 a person is just starting changes in their bodies they do not understand what is happening or how to deal with the changes, and do not forget the emotional concerns. Now you also think a person with a 2.0 GPA which is a (D) student below average is one to be a responsible and mature child? HHHHMMMMhhmmmm OH and those over 65 should take drivers education again? Give this thinking more thought before you voice an idea! I teach drivers ed. and drivers training I have had students with learning disabilities one can not compare a students 13 or a half who is of below average going through changes with his\her body to be able to control 3,000 lbs or 10,000 lbs of weight made of steal?
And the 65 plus has already done driver ed. what they need to have is instead of a written test when renewing it should be a drive test to see what or if any changes in their driving and only then restrict driving to what is needed.
ACLOVIS

While I acknowledge that, statistically, younger drivers may present a higher risk for accidents than the elderly, I question whether this takes into account the total amount of time each group spends on the road.

Recently, my 18-year-old daughter was driving home from work, approaching a light that turned yellow after the point at which she could safely stop. An 88-year-old woman coming from the other direction turned left, directly in front of my daughter's car. Thankfully, aside from a chipped tooth and some seatbelt bruising, my daughter was unhurt. Tragically, however, the elderly woman was killed. It's sad that this woman paid such a high price for her mistake, but on top of this tragedy, my daughter will go through the rest of her life knowing that she was involved in the death of another human being.

I am not in favor of discriminating against anyone based on age or any other factor. However, legally, driving is a priviledge, not a right. Clearly, phyisical capabilities decrease with age, and it is irresponsible not to recognize and make accomodation for this through increased testing, not just in basic driving ability, but also in evaluating reflexes, reaction time and the ability to make quick decisions.