I've made a similar observation in the past. As far as I'm aware previous studies have not shown that people under the current alcohol limit represent any significant increase in risk on the road. Drink driving idiots tend to go well over the existing legal limit and reducing that limit isn't going to stop them.
New planned driving rules announced
- Thread starter SexyGreyFox
- Start date
I've made a similar observation in the past. As far as I'm aware previous studies have not shown that people under the current alcohol limit represent any significant increase in risk on the road. Drink driving idiots tend to go well over the existing legal limit and reducing that limit isn't going to stop them.
Actually they can and do, especially if the patient refuses to. Duty to public safety overrides doctor/patient.
I was going to say, doctors have to report all kinds of stuff to 3rd parties which involves public safety and safeguarding.
That includes specific mandatory obligations which could see them struck off if they don’t or even prosecuted.
It’s not just reporting risk, there is an also positive reporting the profit has to do. For example, GP’s have to declare people as medically fit to drive a taxi for instance.
It’s not unique to their profession either and I don’t really see a good reason why there shouldn’t be a mandatory protocol for opticians to report to the DVLA. It’s ultimately the DVLAs responsibility to act and withdraw a license.
That includes specific mandatory obligations which could see them struck off if they don’t or even prosecuted.
It’s not just reporting risk, there is an also positive reporting the profit has to do. For example, GP’s have to declare people as medically fit to drive a taxi for instance.
It’s not unique to their profession either and I don’t really see a good reason why there shouldn’t be a mandatory protocol for opticians to report to the DVLA. It’s ultimately the DVLAs responsibility to act and withdraw a license.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,867
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
FINALLY FOUND IT
I've sent reports to this amazing man in the past but this is the special that he did on elderly drivers, it's quite eye opening (no pun intended).
www.channel5.com
olderdriversforum.com
I've sent reports to this amazing man in the past but this is the special that he did on elderly drivers, it's quite eye opening (no pun intended).
5
Channel 5 Documentary – ‘Cause of Death – Licence to Kill’
We would urge everyone to watch this this documentary on Channel 5 called ‘Cause of Death – Licence to Kill’ which highlights the death of 4 pedestrians due to drivers with defect…
olderdriversforum.com
Last edited:
doctors should report, but, report discussed earlier - they don't know what they should be doing, other than standing at picket line - all herald the AI overlords ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,122
- Location
- Shepley
I agree with this. It's pretty ridiculous that you could go 24 hours without sleep, be involved in an accident and walk away without a criminal conviction but potentially end up losing your licence or worse if you'd had a pint beforehand.
Because it's a massive imposition and transfer of risk to Opticians, and the state needs a bloody good reason to choose to place such burdens on people -- one that is so clearly lacking in this case when there's a perfectly good alternative way of doing: place the burden on the people who are renewing their license to present a valid eye test and an obligation to wear corrective lenses if required. Also, you're drawing comparisons to Doctors but Doctors are much better trained and better trained than opticians: Opticians need three years of training in the UK, these aren't really comparable professions.
How is it a massive imposition and transfer of risk?
Eye tests are pretty objective, you can either see to a good enough standard or you can’t (after corrective lenses are applied e.g. glasses). It’s that simple.
What you are proposing is almost identical, the only difference is who sends the eye test to the DVLA.
Eye tests are pretty objective, you can either see to a good enough standard or you can’t (after corrective lenses are applied e.g. glasses). It’s that simple.
What you are proposing is almost identical, the only difference is who sends the eye test to the DVLA.
Last edited:
How exactly are you planning on make it an obligation to report without (1) imposing the time to understand the rules and administer the transfer of information to the DVLA and (2) penalties for failing to correctly follow those rules? All for free, of course.
The optician's job is to assess and provide those lenses, as well as look for certain eye conditions; not to enforce whether or not people wear them. They don't even normally do testing with corrective lenses. They test without, tell you what lenses you need, and hope to provide those lenses if you need them. Now you want to make them file a mandatory report to the DVLA which will say, what, exactly? An optician's test would tell you that I can't see well enough to drive without lenses, but it can't tell you what lenses I wear. So what information is going to be usefully transferred by this, given the sizeable proportion of the population in the same situation. Make it the duty of the individual, on the other hand, and you can easily also apply a duty to wear lenses if prescribed. All whilst putting the burden onto the person who wants to drive instead of lumping risks and costs onto uninvolved businesses.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,531
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Was thinking about this and the obvious way to do this is to require a drive through eye test.
Waivable if you can upload a valid opticians test.
I mean the test we apply is simple, being able to read a plate from a distance.
Require it on 5 years but as a minimum check that someone has one on renewing their photocard.
They can setup these at various places at certain times and allow the test to be free.
You drive in, pull up to a certain point and are asked to provide your photo card, they scan that, flick up the test and you read the "registration" they then hit pass or fail, tell you the result and you head off on your way
If you arrive looking for your glasses they can fast track your fail
Waivable if you can upload a valid opticians test.
I mean the test we apply is simple, being able to read a plate from a distance.
Require it on 5 years but as a minimum check that someone has one on renewing their photocard.
They can setup these at various places at certain times and allow the test to be free.
You drive in, pull up to a certain point and are asked to provide your photo card, they scan that, flick up the test and you read the "registration" they then hit pass or fail, tell you the result and you head off on your way
If you arrive looking for your glasses they can fast track your fail
By applying the same logic to your proposal of making people submit a satisfactory eye test on licence renewal would be equally as pointless.
In your scenario where someone has to present a valid eye test on licence renewal, you would need some mechanism of validating the test is actually real (e.g. not forged) and you are not getting that from the applicant, it would need to come from the optician. At which point they might as well just report direct.
I’m not exactly sure why you think #1 and #2 are particularly difficult or risky for an optician. It’s 2026, it would be entirely computerised.
Requiring opticians to report means licences can be revoked in a more timely manner at the end of the day.
Ultimately they will only report those whose vision still isn’t good enough after applying corrective lenses.
It’s already a condition of your licence that you wear the correct corrective lenses when driving. I’m not suggesting opticians are there to enforce that.
Again to reiterate, I don’t see how this is different to a wide range of professions who are required to report by statute (or risk being prosecuted) a wide range of things from money laundering to child abuse.
Was thinking about this and the obvious way to do this is to require a drive through eye test.
Waivable if you can upload a valid opticians test.
I mean the test we apply is simple, being able to read a plate from a distance.
Require it on 5 years but as a minimum check that someone has one on renewing their photocard.
They can setup these at various places at certain times and allow the test to be free.
You drive in, pull up to a certain point and are asked to provide your photo card, they scan that, flick up the test and you read the "registration" they then hit pass or fail, tell you the result and you head off on your way
If you arrive looking for your glasses they can fast track your fail
A lot of the issues with older folk isn’t just eyesight and they can probably pass a canned eyesight test despite being unfit to drive.
It’s a combination poorer eyesight, poor hearing combined with lower cognitive function and poor mobility. Age gets you eventually.
If you’ve ever seen a frail elderly person trying to park in a parking space and how much they struggle to process their surroundings and struggle to use the same controls a 20 year old could operate with their little finger, it’s pretty scary.
Then you realise they can also be doing 60mph down the motorway where the hazard has already passed them before they can even react to it.
Last edited: