Unfit/ unsafe drivers
- Thread starter potatolord
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 5,629
The fact that there isn't mandatory eye-testing for drivers is ludicrous. Especially when you consider many countries in Europe require it, particularly for older drivers.
- Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, and Sweden: These countries typically have visual acuity and visual field tests as part of the licensing process, with some requiring more frequent tests for older drivers or those with specific conditions.
- Denmark: Requires a visual acuity test at age 70, then every 2 years.
- Estonia: Requires a visual test every 10 years at license renewal, and more frequently for those over 65.
- Finland: Requires a visual acuity test at 45, 70, and every 5 years after that.
- Greece: Requires visual tests for drivers aged 65 and older every 3 years.
- Italy: Requires visual tests every 10 years, with more frequent testing for drivers over 50.
- Latvia: Requires visual tests every 10 years, and more frequently for drivers over 50.
- Netherlands: Requires visual acuity checks for drivers aged 70 and older, with potentially more frequent tests for those with specific eye conditions.
- Poland: Issues non-permanent licenses for certain visual conditions with assessments every 1-5 years, and requires a visual test at age 75.
- Portugal: Requires visual tests for drivers aged 60 and older.
- Slovakia: Requires visual tests for drivers aged 60 every 2 years and for those aged 70 every year.
- Slovenia: Requires visual tests every 1-5 years if a driver has an eye condition, and for those aged 80.
- Spain: Requires visual tests every 10 years, and more frequently for drivers over 65.
It's great that your partner has recognised and taken the advised of the docs.
The problem is that a great many don't. You get the ones that believe because they've not had an accident in X amount of years then their declining health isn't a problem
It's the recently common phrase I hear at times
"Old Ada, never had an accident, seen thousands in her rear view mirror"
Unfortunately this is the type of driver that is likely to be one of the ones that "gets confused" and hit the throttle not the brake pedal or end up driving the wrong way on roundabouts/dual carriageways
A few years ago my wife and I did take those steps and her grandfather was called in for assessment. He failed testing before getting out of the car park.
Staff at the assessment centre told me that it's rare that anyone comes to them and actually passes & that they've had failed drivers attempt to physically assault them over the results.
Had a front row seat to a near fatality on Weds, which involved an elderly driver in a small fiesta.
I was behind them when they had stopped in the road, indicating and waiting to turn right. There was an oncoming fastrac (big tractor) towing a silage tank going at a rate of knots, which I assumed he was waiting for....but no, after waiting long enough to let the tractor be right on top of us he slowly pulled off and turned right in front of him
The look on the tractor drivers face! He stomped on the brakes so hard it looked like he was going to go through the windscreen - there was no chance of stopping with that weight on tow. How the hell he missed him I don't know, but he would have steamrollered over that fiesta if he hadn't.
I see at least 2-3 times a week with the amount of time I spend on the road but when you report it you get met with indifference from police.
But it's YOUR responsibility to take regular breaks. In the professional driving world we have to take a break after 5.5hrs. Most decent companies will also insist on the odd 5-10 mins stoppages in between.
--------
I've posted about this in another thread before and my views come from the collision that almost cost the life of a friend. An old woman, who when tested, literally could see beyond the end of the bonnet of her Nissan Micra but had only recently turned 70 and declared she was fit and well to drive.
I do think that there needs to be changes made but I think they should be global changes, especially where eyesight is concerned.
I've quoted my previous posting about it below:
In Brazil you have to renew your driving licence every 10 years if you are under 50yo, every 5 years if you are between 50 and 70yo and every 3 years if you are over 70yo.
These are the tests you have to pass when renewing the licence: Eye test, muscle strength and motor coordination, they also check your blood pressure and general health.
Depending on your health, they can remove or suspend your licence if you have heart disease, neurological disease, epilepsy or use of some controlled medications.
If you need glasses for driving, it will show in your licence and you can get fined if they catch you driving without them.
Last edited:
Some interesting stats from 2023
Some interesting stats from 2023
If I've read that right (forgive me, I've not long since gotten up) it shows that there's a sizable increase in casualties caused by older (70+) drivers, mostly female ones, almost equalling and eventually overtaking casualty figures caused by the younger drivers that they always claim are the problem.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,279
- Location
- Woking
It's quite alarming to hear that Brazil is way ahead of us in something as day-to-day as driving.
Last edited:
Don't those figures show the casualty rates rather than the cause? It makes sense that older drivers are more likely to suffer worse injuries due to weaker bones etc.
Reading the report it reads that any injury, from minor up to fatality is counted as a casualty.
There is a bit further down that indicates the causes or 'contributing factors' of the collisions that resulted in those casualties.
My mum (83) went to the IAM this year to get them to test whether or not she was still safe to drive. Strikes me as a sensible thing for any older person to do.
It's KSI: Killed or Seriously Injured. Seriously injured is defined here, but it's mostly what you'd expect: fractures, head injuries, loss of limbs, unconsciousness, etc but not things like whiplash or bruising.
The risk of casualty goes up, considered per billion miles driver, but older people also don't drive as much as younger drivers. Also, a considerable part of the increased death rate is that older people are much more likely to die in an accident of equal severity compared to younger drivers. In terms of absolute numbers, the two factsheets show about twice as many deaths caused by younger people as caused by older people despite the fact that there are many more 70+ people in the UK than 17-24 year olds.
Limiting the ability of older people to drive has welfare considerations for many older people, who may become unable to care for themselves and/or their partners as a result. It doesn't seem to me like that the evidence of harm to others justifies this. Some eye tests, etc, sure but going further than that? Nah.
It's KSI: Killed or Seriously Injured. Seriously injured is defined here, but it's mostly what you'd expect: fractures, head injuries, loss of limbs, unconsciousness, etc but not things like whiplash or bruising.
The risk of casualty goes up, considered per billion miles driver, but older people also don't drive as much as younger drivers. Also, a considerable part of the increased death rate is that older people are much more likely to die in an accident of equal severity compared to younger drivers. In terms of absolute numbers, the two factsheets show about twice as many deaths caused by younger people as caused by older people despite the fact that there are many more 70+ people in the UK than 17-24 year olds.
Limiting the ability of older people to drive has welfare considerations for many older people, who may become unable to care for themselves and/or their partners as a result. It doesn't seem to me like that the evidence of harm to others justifies this. Some eye tests, etc, sure but going further than that? Nah.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 8,340
Sounds like potential job market potential
Last edited:
I seriously pucker up when I see a Jazz LOL, there are a few common cars like little red Corsas driven badly by older people but it is almost always the Jazz trying to go the wrong way. I've twice sadly been involved in incidents (fortunately didn't result in collisions) where the pensioner in a Jazz has had to turn in their license due to it.
(Definitely not enough direction arrows)
EDIT: Quite a sad case that one, for some reason the police got back to me with a bit of info rather than the usual "Its been dealt with", seems they dealt with him as sympathetically as they could - guy in his 90s who was dealing with quite a lot of stuff and overwhelmed rather than deficient eyesight or mental ability as such.
Last edited: