Tangled Metal wrote: ... There was a entertainment programme on TV where they got experienced driving test examiners / instructors to go out with elderly drivers to assess them for fitness to drive. A rare few took the opinion of the expert and stopped driving. A few argued and came up with excuses for why it wasn't a fair test, the test was rigged against them, etc. ....
And in the interests of balance I think it's fair to say that some passed the test, sometimes with additional advice on continuing to drive safely such as considering getting an automatic car. But as you say, it was an entertainment programme.
The utility cyclist wrote:about time but why isn't this countrywide or indeed every licence holder written to with a formal check either at an opticians or other centre (on a yearly basis at their cost), no need to waste police time! http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018 ... oor-vision
+1................Mmmmmmmmmmm did I just sat that Add retesting driving test every 5 years!
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
atlas_shrugged wrote:Be careful what you wish for. If your driving licence is revoked because you have failed a vision test then does that not also mean that you are a dangerous cyclist?
And dangerous cyclist kill...........in thousands..............not! You may well be a danger to yourself on a bike but speed and ability to react in time is on a different planet, self harm on the road yes.
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
Tangled Metal wrote: ... There was a entertainment programme on TV where they got experienced driving test examiners / instructors to go out with elderly drivers to assess them for fitness to drive. A rare few took the opinion of the expert and stopped driving. A few argued and came up with excuses for why it wasn't a fair test, the test was rigged against them, etc. ....
And in the interests of balance I think it's fair to say that some passed the test, sometimes with additional advice on continuing to drive safely such as considering getting an automatic car. But as you say, it was an entertainment programme.
Sorry! I didn't mean to present it in that way. I'll edit it to try and make it clearer that I was only referring to the fewer number who failed.
My point would be that there are obviously some older people who continue to drive when they should no longer do so. I don't know the extent of the problem but I think it's often sensationalised in a way which implies that all the problems on our roads are down to gibbering idiots. I remember when I was in my twenties thinking that anybody in their thirties was well and truly past it. Amongst our circle of friends we know plenty of safe drivers in their eighties. Without exception, all those who were getting frail have stopped driving. I don't know anybody about whom I think that somebody should take them off the road. OTOH, if I see somebody driving at what I consider a silly speed or taking chances, it's invariably somebody much younger. Also, I see plenty of reports of younger people, often a car full of younger people, occasionally more people in a car than there are seats, doing something like colliding with a tree at speed, killing all or most of the occupants.
I'm not suggesting one group is better or worse than the others: if there's a crash it's a crash, no matter how it's caused.
I have my eyes tested every year (been doing that for last 20 years) and every time opticians comments "your eyes are well within driving requirements".
So I'd suspect most people are in effect having their eyesight tested for driving fairly frequently (i.e. with every eye test).
Psamathe wrote:I have my eyes tested every year (been doing that for last 20 years) and every time opticians comments "your eyes are well within driving requirements".
So I'd suspect most people are in effect having their eyesight tested for driving fairly frequently (i.e. with every eye test).
Ian
I know people who have never had their eyes tested.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.” ― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Psamathe wrote:I have my eyes tested every year (been doing that for last 20 years) and every time opticians comments "your eyes are well within driving requirements".
So I'd suspect most people are in effect having their eyesight tested for driving fairly frequently (i.e. with every eye test).
Ian
I know people who have never had their eyes tested.
I said "most" NOT "all". And I suspect that many with poor eye sight will have their eyes tested.
Sight deterioration is interesting. Turns out your brain fills in the gaps and most people don't realise they've gone from perfect vision to having trouble seeing a bus.
Fundamentally that's why signing yourself off as fit to drive doesn't work.
I got a lift to an event a few months ago by a friend of mine. I'd been in his car before and he was ok but that was 5 maybe 6 years ago.
This time I was terrified (and it takes a lot to terrify me), his ability to drive safely had completely gone, he drove way faster than his abilities and took risks not because he took a calculated risk but because he obviously no longer was able to see them! I was deeply saddened by this but tbh there's no way anyone who drives the way he did should be allowed on the road. I think we're long overdue for licence retakes and some way of verifying competence.
It would be interesting to know how many/how serious accidents are caused by inadequate eye sight compared to other causes (e.g. mobile phone use) and they to look at how very limited Police enforcement resources are best used.
I suspect that the eye sight issue could be largely dealt with by requiring mandatory re-test every <n> years. And that need not cost the taxpayer anything as the test centres just charge for the test (it would a trivial cost for the driver given the costs of running a car). You could also add-in a Highway Code test, reaction time test, hazard recognition test, etc.
Whereas stopping mobile phone use cannot easily be dealt with by similar methods.
kwackers wrote:... This time I was terrified (and it takes a lot to terrify me), his ability to drive safely had completely gone, he drove way faster than his abilities and took risks not because he took a calculated risk but because he obviously no longer was able to see them! I was deeply saddened by this but tbh there's no way anyone who drives the way he did should be allowed on the road. .....
The challenge is to have some mechanism whereby such people can be stopped before they cause a serious accident. Who would such below standard abilities be reported to? and for many, reporting a friend would be enough to stop them reporting. Anonymous reporting is not always anonymous (as it can be very obvious who reported the individual).
There seems no mechanism (that I'm aware of) to act on situations you become aware of and thus no method to prevent the serious accidnet(s) before it happens.
Hi all, In February I was advised by my medical team to stop driving, this came after I had suffered a minor stroke. that stroke only affected my speech, but safety first! Since then I have undergone 2 scans and two separate full eye checks, one by St Paul's Eye Hospital, the other by my own optician. Both checked out every area of visual , including peripheral & night vision. Fine with both, having had no further issues my GP has removed the restriction, I fully support such caution, even though it did limit my attending many of my cycling functions. which coming after major surgery was a bummer for my cycling. Time was also an element as I reach 70 in January, so if I couldn't renew I would face a full retest for both my car & motorcycle groups!!! But I fully support the process of removing the self-assessment element of Licencing, as I know of an individual who continues to drive with severe Parkinson's Disease, with seriously affects his use of his arms? So a full medical after such diagnosis. I also wish that an immediate driving ban be applied to those idiots who continue to use mobile phones whilst driving! But at the same time I wish that our railway system was fit for purpose, then I wouldn't need to drive. IGICB MM
On the matter of cost, not every driver by any means has the affluence implied by being a private motorist. There are plenty of people who drive who are by no means well off.
When I first learnt to drive, I was an avid reader of the "quality" driving mags such as Autocar and Motor. In those days they were aimed at people who saw themselves as motorists and as such a cut above the rest of society. The stereotype would be the bowler-hatted cartoon character Major Thompson who was the inspiration for a lot of Tom Simpson's publicity stunts.
Anyway, I remember a letter to the editor from one such worthy suggesting that expert drivers - of which I'm sure he considered himself a paramount example - should be provided with a supply of post-paid postcards on which they would note the transgressions of the lesser type of driver and so alert the authorities to people who might be best kept off the road. Remember, that was in the days when a lot more effort went into traffic policing, but for the type of expert driver I'm talking about, the traffic police were beyond the pale, the type of riff-raff who might hunt foxes with pump-action shotguns.
I know someone who was still driving despite being diagnosed as having had a stroke. Trouble is his gp didn't heel him the diagnosis or that he shouldn't drive and it wasn't a stroke in the end but a brain tumor the size of a grapefruit. The A&E found it after he'd driven into a solid brick wall having not even made any turning motion on a bend.
How many other people are still driving when their doctor knows they've got a health condition that makes them unsafe to drive?
There's a whole series of inadequacies in the current system, it's not just the eye test issue.
Psamathe wrote:I have my eyes tested every year (been doing that for last 20 years) and every time opticians comments "your eyes are well within driving requirements".
So I'd suspect most people are in effect having their eyesight tested for driving fairly frequently (i.e. with every eye test).
Ian
I know people who have never had their eyes tested.
I said "most" NOT "all". And I suspect that many with poor eye sight will have their eyes tested.
Ian
RNIB commissioned survey in 2016 found 27% of adults hadn't had an eye test in the previous 2 years (link PDF).
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
