Prev
Next

Doddery old drivers should not be a protected species

David Penberthy

by David Penberthy

04 Dec 05:50am

Must Reads

If sports movies have taught us anything, NSW will win - this is a caption

If sports movies have taught us anything, NSW will win

51

Schapelle has done her time - this is a caption

Schapelle has done her time

182

Do women need to know when to walk away? - this is a caption

Do women need to know when to walk away?

74

Filed under: Cars, Driving, Elderly, Safety

111 comments

Last week I was standing at a pedestrian crossing at the Adelaide Airport with my two kids, aged five and eight. There was a car coming towards us, moving fairly slowly and appearing to slow down. In one of those split-second moments which people without kids will pontificate about, but which parents understand, we started to step onto the crossing.

Queensland MP Peter Lawlor with a photo of his children, with daughter Ali at left. Photo: Adam Head

The driver didn’t stop. He went straight through, missing us by inches. I shouted at him, as did a bystander, but he kept meandering along the road for about another 30m. He stopped his car smack-bang in the middle of the road, right on the white line between two lanes, where a security guard approached him to inquire as to what the hell he was doing.

The driver was so old that he possibly didn’t even know he was in a car at all.  He looked like he was 90 in the shade. At least.

He was wearing thick glasses, had his neck stuck forward and was squinting through the windscreen.

He shouldn’t have been on the road at all. If not for the fact that the three of us had our wits about us and were still watching when we stepped out, the kids would have been cleaned up.

It isn’t the first time I’ve had this experience. Last year in Sydney, while taking my daughter to the corner shop, we were standing at a pedestrian crossing on Tranmere St, Drummoyne, when another old man, face pressed up against the glass again, happily coasted through doing about 30km/h as we stood there waiting.

Near-misses such as last week’s are the kind of thing you think about when you are trying to go to sleep. I hold no anger towards the driver. He looked upset and confused. I am also not indifferent to the fact that for many elderly people, the loss of their licence signals the beginning of the end, a loss of mobility which could leave them so depressed, or housebound, that it hastens their demise.

The counterpoint is that plenty of older drivers hasten their own demise by not being able to drive properly anymore, and having accidents which a younger and healthier person could survive. And in some cases, they hasten the demise of the people they hit, by several decades.

After last week’s incident I started googling different research on crash statistics for elderly drivers and looking at the differences between the states in licensing and testing. It makes for interesting reading. And it is a strange inconsistency that we will (quite rightly) launch massive, expensive campaigns targeting the over-represented younger drivers in the crash statistics, but have no uniform or serious plan for the over-represented older drivers.

Part of the reason is that the seniors lobby is not only quite powerful, it is also in denial about the reality that older people are over-represented in the crash statistics, and that the problem is only going to get worse as our population ages.

One substantial study on the issue was done in 2007 by the NSW Parliamentary Library. The impetus for the research was the terrible double tragedy involving little Sophie Delezio in Sydney. In December 2003 Sophie Delezio was almost killed when a 68-year-old man had a seizure and ploughed his out-of-control car into her childcare centre. The car caught fire and six other children were injured. In May 2006, an 80-year-old man ran over Sophie Delezio at a pedestrian crossing in Seaforth, almost killing her a second time.

The initial response of the NSW Government was to review pedestrian crossings but at the behest of the Delezio family, with strong public support, it also reviewed the licensing arrangements so that drivers have annual tests at the age of 75 rather than 80.

The report noted that there was no consistency between the states, with only NSW, Tasmania and Western Australia mandating age-based licence testing. In Queensland the issue made headlines for the worst reasons this July when a State MP’s 38-year-old daughter lost her leg after an elderly driver, aged 88, lost control of his car in a shopping centre, almost hitting her four-year-old son and pinning her to her vehicle. If not for the application of a makeshift tourniquet by a stranger the woman would have bled to death from her injuries. Doctors could not save her leg and amputated above the knee.

The MP, Peter Lawlor, is a compassionate man. He is simply questioning whether the current Queensland system, where there are no annual licence tests, but drivers aged over 75 must carry a certificate from their doctor, is enough to safeguard the community. He says neither he nor his daughter Ali hold any ill-will towards the driver, but adds: “The independence of an individual shouldn’t outweigh the safety of the community.”

In one news report on Mr Lawlor’s tragic case there was a horribly flippant comment from a woman called Val French, spokeswoman for a group called Older People Speak Out.

“I am fed up to the teeth with this idea that older people are different from the rest of the community,” she said when asked about the Lawlor case.

Val should look up from her knitting and read this paragraph from the NSW study:

“When account is taken of the proportion of older persons in the total NSW population, those who are 70 years or more are consistently overrepresented in the figures for car driver fatalities. This over-representation is more marked still when account is taken of the proportion of older people who are licensed to drive in this State. Note, too, that not all drivers with a licence will actually drive and the number in this category is likely to increase with age. These figures confirm findings from other jurisdictions suggesting that older drivers are over-represented among those drivers who are killed or seriously injured.”

The report quotes ABS projections showing the number of Australians aged 85 or over will rise from 216,100 in 1997 to between 440,500 and 442,500 in 2021, and between 1.1 and 1.2 million in 2051.

As a proportion of the population, that’s an increase from 1.2 per cent in 1997 to about 4.6 per cent in 2051. That’s a lot of near-misses. Hopefully.

Most commented

427Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
375There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
304Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
262Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

111 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Mahhrat says:

      05:57am | 04/12/11

      @Penbo, understanding though that someone nearly cleaned up your child, I think your piece is still too accusatory.

      We need to approach this subject very delicately.  As you mentioned, we’re talking about denial of freedom.  To the aged, it must be the most cruel betrayal of everything they worked their whole lives for.  I don’t care what the reasons are, this has to be done incredibly gently.

      My 91-year old Grandfather still drives.  He survived WW2 as a Polish Air Force Sergeant, raised his family, worked, played and is one of the most singularly capable people you’d ever meet.

      He still has a fully unrestricted license, but he’s aware that his skills as a driver are fading.  He can make the 40 minute drive to my place, but he generally chooses not to, limiting himself to quick trips to the shops up the road to take my nan shopping.

      He advocates an interesting idea: have an Elderly license, where you are registered to operate a vehicle on certain, well-known and quiet roads.

      He doesn’t WANT to drive anywhere else any more.  He just doesn’t want to give up taking his wife to the shops, because he is a proud man that, even after 63 years (!!!), wants nothing more than to provide for his family.

      I think it’s something worth exploring.  Also worth exploring is a system of travel vouchers where licenses are denied.  Tasmania has the Tas Access Scheme, which provides 50% discounts to taxi trips up to $50, but that doesn’t help my grandfather.  He only lives 20 minutes out of Hobart, but try getting a taxi out to him, for what is only a trip to the shops and back.

      No, if we’re going to remove licenses from these most proud and contributing members of society in their old age, then we need a system that allows them to maximise their mobility.

      Reply

    • gobsmack says:

      07:29am | 04/12/11

      Something not mentioned is the availability and accessibility of public transport.
      I’m sure if there was public transport available and the older folks felt safe using it, then most would use it.

    • Mahhrat says:

      07:47am | 04/12/11

      @gobsmack, that’s what the Tas Access Scheme is supposed to address, but you’re dealing with cab drivers who want to deal in cash, not vouchers.

      You are right, though.  They don’t have regular buses where nan and pop are, but they live in a suburb just 20 minutes from Hobart.  It’s ridiculous.

      I recognise that things like home deliveries and such are availalble - I used to provide some of those services to other elderly who lived in the “city” - but that’s not my point, it’s about letting people retain what freedoms they can safely have.

      My pop is a very safe driver, and quite capable around streets he knows.  He neither needs nor wants to drive anywhere else, but he doesn’t want anyone bringing him his food, either.

    • Notvelty says:

      07:57am | 04/12/11

      Agree with the rest, but I’m interested if you’d also advocate a “drinkers” licence that lets you drive the “well-known, quiet roads” home from the pub?

    • Condor says:

      08:58am | 04/12/11

      What should be done across the board is a more comprehensive licencing system.

      In Germany it costs roughly 2,000 euros to get a licence and that includes a l;ot of professional driver training.

      We should do something similar here because there are so many bad drivers on the road it is ridiculous. If you can’t drive according to the conditions and find yourself not able to keep up with traffic then it’s time to realise you shouldn’t be driving.

      Another thing is compulsory retesting every 5 years so that you have to pass another driver test. The tests should be a lot more rigourous too.

      This would not only reduce our accident rates but also improve our traffic conditions as we no longer have to make exceptions for the clueless.

    • mick says:

      09:00am | 04/12/11

      You need to write a bit about how young hoons clean up people all the time and how younger driver generally speed.  These guys are hormone fuelled and many do not care until after they kill somebody.

      I almost got cleaned up by an old dear in a shopping centre carpark yesterday.  I was crossing a pedestrian walkway and the old lady with tunnel vision did not see me as she brushed by in her car.  The reality is that it is pedestrian beware but the reality is that the greater danger is younger drivers.  Statistics show this clearly.

      What does one do with very old drivers?  Check them to ensure that they know where they are and ensure a minimum level of competence to protect us all, but don’t take away their licences based on isolated incidents which bear little resemblance to reality for the group unless you are also prepared to cancel the licences of the under 25s…....which you clearly would not advocate.

      No easy answer.  Just choices.

    • Joan says:

      11:35am | 04/12/11

      Mick,  Yep your more likely to get wiped off the planet by a hoon or squished to death by 4WD   than being pipped off by an oldtimer doing 40.  Message be careful of things on wheels.

    • Dogbolter says:

      10:32pm | 04/12/11

      Typical do-gooder flippant remark by someone out of touch. You’re the people responsible for the decline in our society. The needs of the individual to be independent should NEVER outweigh the needs of the community to be safe. Just because someone can, doesn’t mean they should. There is a certain time when people should not drive any more and mass transportation becomes their option. And if that saves me, myself, my family, or anyone else from having a leg amputated because some demented old fool decided he could drive to the store and missed the brake for the accelerator (a remarkably common occurrence with old drivers and one that causes a huge amount of damage due to speeds involved), then it’s worth it. And stop using the emotional blackmail of him having served in world wars. That does not give him the right to be a killer driving a 2 tonne weapon.

    • Safe drivers at any age says:

      11:45am | 05/12/11

      “Denial of freedom”? But we do this every day with teenagers when we restrict them to long (and frequently expensive) periods on L-plates, P-plates, make them sit tests etc. Society needs to recognise that the other end of the spectrum deserves the same attention we pay to younger drivers—not only for the unfortunate pedestrians the oldies may come across in their travels but also, as the statistics show, for their own safety as well.

    • Unionist says:

      06:33am | 04/12/11

      The problem is some older folk don’t see a problem as far as they are concern the problem is us younger ones. While i feel for their situation regarding having a license equals independence, I don’t want kids, family or friends and even enemies fall victim to an elderly driver… except maybe Mr rAbbott and ATM. But seriously it is concerning where an elderly driver who is obviously past the ability of quick reflexes or can’t drive faster than half the recommended speed limit is still able to drive.  I’m with you Penbo something needs to be done.

      Reply

    • Against the Man says:

      02:11pm | 04/12/11

      Nice zing Unionist, but coming from a vulgar child care worker? No competition there smile

      And I wouldn’t you any harm from an elderly driver, not my style.

    • Rhubarb says:

      05:58am | 05/12/11

      Its not that they can’t drive faster, more like they are aware of slower reflexes and are driving accordingly.
      I was a total rev head as a teenager and in my 20’s, at 56 I have slowed down a tad as I know what speeding can do if an accident occurs, less chance of surviving.
      When it comes to the stage of me sitting at a crossing not remembering where I am or going, I’ll hand my license in myself. We don’t have buses, trains or taxis here, but we do have HACC’s.

    • acotrel says:

      06:38am | 04/12/11

      Regardless of what the religous might maintain about intelligent creation, species improve by adapting to their environment with all of its dangers !  It is what is known as survival of the fittest.  If you walk onto a pedestrian crossing believing that every oncoming vehicle will always stop because that’s the law, you are deluded and a candidate to be fitted with a wooden overcoat.  Would species be improved by its members being allowed to survive, who have no risk consciousness ?

      Reply

    • Unionist says:

      07:11am | 04/12/11

      ‘survival of the fittest’ are you for real?? so when these old farts charge off the road into pedestrians, buildings or whatever. And then it comes out that they should never have been on the road in the first place it’s ‘survival of the fittest’ what a dickhead.

    • marley says:

      07:35am | 04/12/11

      @acotrel - why don’t you try explaining your theory to Sophie Delezio’s parents?  I’m sure they’re happy to accept your view that she should have been more aware that some random driver would smash through the wall of her day care center.

    • acotrel says:

      07:50am | 04/12/11

      @Unionist
      It usually takes two make a crash, should you be there ?  Are YOU competent ? Simply believing you are, might not be enough, and you could find out the reality the hard way.

    • acotrel says:

      07:55am | 04/12/11

      @marley
      Please don’t try to get all emotional about death with me.  I’ve been involved in motorcycle road racing for most of my adult life.  It’s time that some of us faced reality about death.  It happens to all of us sooner or later.  All we can do is manage the risk, and minimise the likelihood, but shit happens !

    • Nilbog says:

      07:58am | 04/12/11

      Remeber acotrel is 70, so is one of these questionable old farts we’re talking about.

      His comments on this can hardly be objective.

    • Notvelty says:

      07:58am | 04/12/11

      @marley - lay off, man.  Any comment that one makes without inserting something political should be encouraged.

    • marley says:

      08:09am | 04/12/11

      @acotrel - well now, my parents stopped their car at a red light, and were rear-ended by a guy in a van transporting vegetables to market.  Was it incompetent of them to stop at that light and not anticipate some idiot ploughing into them? 

      Or how about the day I went to my local bottle shop, and found a car halfway through the front window, with a very startled elderly driver trying to brush the glass off his car.  I’m sure the shop could have moved if it had been more alert. 

      A lot of accidents are one-car accidents, and a lot more have one driver clearly at fault.  Don’t go blaming the victim.

    • marley says:

      08:18am | 04/12/11

      @acotrel - who’s getting emotional about death? I don’t believe I mentioned it.  I just found your comment about survival of the fittest ignorant and insensitive.  How the hell was Sophie Delezio supposed to have risk consciousness in that situation?  And when, as you say, “shit happens,” it isn’t always the fit who survive.

    • acotrel says:

      08:31am | 04/12/11

      @marley
      I regularly drive from Benalla to Melbourne down the Hume Highway.  It’s as safe as houses .  You would never expect a car or truck to cross the wide median strip into the oncoming.  It happened recently when a woman went to sleep dr iving a 4WD, and killed her whole family.  You have to be prepared for that when you are driving, a nd be ready to do anything to miss the other vehicle if it comes your way.  You cannot simply throw up your hands because what the other vehicle is doing is illegal.  The rear enders are something you cannot do much about.  A mate of mine was r iding his motorcycle and was pulling up be hind stopped traffic.  He heard a dog barking, and for some reason he changed lane.  A ute driven by a drunk with a dog in the back crashed into the rear of the car beside him.  You takes your chances ! - Keep your eyes open.

    • acotrel says:

      08:35am | 04/12/11

      @marley
      ‘And when, as you say, “shit happens,” it isn’t always the fit who survive. ‘

      We all have a duty of care, and you can minimise the risk.  When ‘shit happens’ your time has come. All you can ever do is try to delay the inevitable.

    • Alf says:

      08:57am | 04/12/11

      acotrel - the ‘sef-appointed’ spokesman old farts.

    • Condor says:

      10:45am | 04/12/11

      acotrel

      Nex time one of you useless old farts expect me to sit patiently behind you while you act as a (barely) moving roadblock doing 10, 20, 30 even 40 km/h below the speed limit I’ll just ram you off the road.

      After all, why should you assume that I’m patient. I’m not.

      Survival of the fittest!

    • B says:

      07:37pm | 04/12/11

      @acotrel

      I will remember that next time when I have an accident.  Blame the victim!!  Its what the oldies have show us to do!!  Lead by example huh?

    • Brett says:

      10:33am | 05/12/11

      Once again South Park covered this in an episode about old people driving around killing people. It was hilarious as usual.

    • maybe says:

      01:39pm | 05/12/11

      Also, in addition to the day care incindent, poor Sophie Delezio also got hit on a pedestrian crossing in her weelchair in 2006 by a negligent 80-year old driver. 

      It’s got nothing to do with survivial of the fittest, but instead taking arguably a small step to mitigating a fairly high risk.  It can be based on competence testing, rather than just taking away a licence, and doesn’t even need to be only for ‘old people’. The test should be mandatory for renewals of licences for EVERYONE every 5 or 10 years or something.

    • Tim says:

      06:53am | 04/12/11

      OK first of all, people shouldn’t think pedestrian crossings are fitted with a force field to stop you getting run over. Pay attention and make sure the cars stop before crossing.
      Secondly, older drivers are a menace. There should be five yearly eyesight and reaction tests for anyone over fifty and a yearly full drivers test for anyone over 65.
      As well as this all drivers over 65 should be forced to display G for geriatric plates. If its good enough for P platers its good enough for oldies.

      Some oldies simply can’t accept that their skills and mental proficiency are not what they used to be.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:16am | 04/12/11

      @Tim
      I’ve just turned 70 years of age.  I have an 850cc Seeley Norton Commando racing motorcycle with a six speed gearbox, which runs on methanol, in my back shed.  I’ll be available anytime you like if you can front up to Winton Motor raceway with an equivalent machine, and want to have ago ! - Test your reflexes and mental proficiency ? I suggest you really have no idea !

    • gobsmack says:

      08:08am | 04/12/11

      @acotrel
      No-one is suggesting a blanket ban on older drivers.
      What is being suggested is regular testing after a certain age.
      By your own estimation, it sounds like you still have sufficient mental and physical faculties to keep driving.  However, there are others whose physical or mental condition has deteriorated to the point where they shouldn’t be driving.  Mandatory testing needs to be introduced starting at an age when a significant proportion (not all) of the age group starts experiencing those problems.
      There is no need to take these suggestions personally.

    • acotrel says:

      08:39am | 04/12/11

      @gobsmack
      Your doctor should be the only person to stop you from driving, if you haven’t commited a crime.  Anyone who’s had a stroke is automatically stopped for about a month afterwards.  Unfortunately the early stages of dementia are not easy to detect.

    • Tim says:

      08:49am | 04/12/11

      Acotrel,
      I’ve got a ZX10R ninja and I wouldn’t want to be responsible for you hurting yourself when you crash.
      And nor would I need to get in a pissing contest with someone over reflexes and skills.
      I’m sure there would be thousands of people who’s reflexes and skills are better than the both of us.

      But attitudes like yours are the problem. There are thousands of young teenagers who would be quite capable of driving at a young age but we don’t let them because their skills and experience may not be quite up to it.

      Why do you think old people should be treated differently?

      Why would you be against having your skills tested annually if you think you’re still capable? Worried that you might be found wanting?

    • gobsmack says:

      09:08am | 04/12/11

      @acotrel
      Rubbish, people who haven’t committed a crime are routinely prevented from driving because they are unable to pass the licence test.
      The early stages of dementia may not be easy to detect but driving ability can be assessed.
      I somehow doubt that the question of being able to drive is routinely raised when an older person consults with a doctor.
      If you are that confident of your own driving abilities than you have nothing to fear from having those abilities re-assessed.

    • B says:

      07:39pm | 04/12/11

      @Acotrel

      Seems someone has hit a nerve.  Throwing tantrums about it doesnt help your position.

    • Andrew says:

      05:01pm | 05/12/11

      Gee gobsmack thats a prietty big assumption to make about acotrel still having sufficient mental capabilities, especially after listening to some of the BS he talks on here, especially like his bit above about survival of the fittest. Im just surprised he didnt suggest we sack the police force, arm everyone with guns and knifes and let everyone no matter there age a car, then it really be survival of the fittest.

    • Dr.Bob says:

      06:56am | 04/12/11

      Yes, of course bad drivers should be kept off the road, or re-educated, regardless of age. I’m a fully competent 83 year old driver and my recent hazards have included: Being put in intensive care for a week after a phone-using ute driver catapulted me off my Vespa from behind on a roundabout; ploughing into a small car driven by a 40-ish woman on a mobile phone, when she stopped, then rocked into me through a Give-Way sign; watching in horror as a ute did a burnout outside my home, spinning one and a half times before stopping on the footpath a foot from a concrete wall; twice having to fall off my bicycle, when aggressive or drunken drivers threatened to hit me. All of this within the last 3 years!
      Age is only one of many factors in road safety and I’ll bet there are just as many drunks or testosterone freaks on mobile phones as there are doddery old drivers. Their problem is that they are impaired - not just old.

      Reply

    • Nick says:

      04:08pm | 04/12/11

      hold on ‘Dr’, it doesn’t matter whether the woman was on her phone or not. You hit her from behind, and thus it is irrevocably 100% your fault.

    • acotrel says:

      07:09am | 04/12/11

      Are older drivers with slow reflexes more of a risk than young drivers who have been smoking dope ? Regardless of any law, the reality is that both are on our roads.  When we go on the road it’s part of the deal. The easiest way t o reduce the road toll would be to ensure that all drivers are competent when they receive their licences.  That doesn’t simply mean being able to drive around the block, and park, and recite a few road rules.  It also means being able to handle the situation involving slides and where your car swaps ends at high speeds.  I suggest that many of the older drivers people complain about have NEVER been competent drivers !  So let’s cut out the bullshit ?: Go and have a look sometime at a car club holding a sprint meeting on a motor race circuit.

      Reply

    • Unionist says:

      07:50am | 04/12/11

      lol, there goes that ‘just because’ argument again. Just because young drivers drive around smoking pot I as an old fart with slower reflexes should be allowed to drive too. Hell if they are allowed to smoke it I should be allowed to grow it. Where would this ‘just because’ argument stop. You might as well let those poor souls who cant drive due to medical reason drive ‘just because’!!!!. It is a stupid analogy.

    • Tator says:

      08:53am | 04/12/11

      Alcotrel,
      there is also the fact that many of those elderly people driving are of the age where when they applied to get their drivers licence, it was just a case of turning up with a written application and there was no testing of drivers skill or road law knowledge.  This is mainly in those aged over 66 years of age here in SA. 
      Then there is the case when major changes to road laws are made like in 2000 when the Australian Road Rules were codified and many rules changed to a national standard yet drivers with existing licences were not educated and retested on the new laws.

    • Andrew says:

      05:03pm | 05/12/11

      What about old drivers who smoke dope.

    • Andrew says:

      05:06pm | 05/12/11

      Yeah good articles Trev, so driving stoned is safer then driving drunk, well guess what, driving sober and without drugs is safer then both driving drunk and stoned.

    • Freeman says:

      07:16am | 04/12/11

      I’m on board, penbo

      Just yesterday, I was doing 90kmh on a highway while an elderly, large straw hat wearing man pulled out in front of me when I was about 150 meters away. he looked my way before pulling out so i guess he saw me, I was able to slow down in time but it could’ve been bad had I been going a little bit faster. Once on the highway the man sped up to about 30 kmh before applying his brakes and turning to look on or under the passenger seat for something while his car wandered off the road.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:43am | 04/12/11

      We have a few oldies who drive about in our town. To any experienced driver, it is patently obvious when one is near you on the road.  All we have to do is cut them some slack.  It’s not rocket science to simply allow for them. It could be worse, you could be doing 240 kph on the front straight at Phillip Island and come across a wobbler ?

    • acotrel says:

      07:46am | 04/12/11

      @Freeman
      Could you also handle the situation if a kangaroo jumped in front of your car while you were doing 90kph ?

    • gobsmack says:

      08:12am | 04/12/11

      I had an uncle with a degenerative spinal condition which made any sideways movement of the head impossible.
      He would only go out driving if my aunt was in the front passenger seat so that she could tell him if a crossing was clear.

    • Freeman says:

      08:17am | 04/12/11

      Acotrel,

      i do a lot of bush driving. I’m always on the lookout for Roos. if there is a roo or anything in front of me I come to a controlled stop without swerving

    • Nick says:

      10:29am | 04/12/11

      Dude why the attack on straw hats? Uncalled for. Apologise. Not very PC.

    • Lexi says:

      07:33am | 04/12/11

      I’m with you Penbo - on Friday I was employing my defensive driving technique when I noticed a car inching out from a give way sign into a busy intersection. I deployed the brake - thankfully, because the elderly driver did not even glance in my direction when she pulled out in front of me. With her grandchild in the front seat beside her. She didn’t notice my long horn blast - but finally pulled over after another toot from me. I figured she needed to know she was not driving safely.  Just one example from a long, long list.

      My parents are in their early 60s. They have planned their retirement - they’re living in a new home with little yard to mow and less maintenance, few steps and most importantly, a bus stop around the corner so that when they, we or a doctor deems it necessary that they hang up their licences, they are still able to go places and do stuff.  Time for older Australians to plan for old age, rather than complain when it catches up with them.

      Reply

    • marley says:

      08:46am | 04/12/11

      @Lexi - I like that last sentence of yours, and I agree entirely.  While we’re still mobile (and driving) and hopefully will remain so for some time to come, my spouse and I are looking at moving to a bigger town than we now live in sometime in the next five years.  There is going to come a time when driving 60 km to the dentist or 35 km to the doctor is simply not going to be practicable.

    • Fiona says:

      10:40pm | 04/12/11

      I also agree with you lexie. My grandmother lived across the road from a shopping centre as long as I could remember and was able to safely walk to and from the shops etc. we live nowhere near any public transport and as such will be moving when we get older. It’s damned inconvenient to not be able to drive where we live, as I found out last year (for medical reasons).
      Coincidentally, I talked with my parents a out this today because they live locally to the lawlors and they’re not happy, but public transport is quite handy near them.

    • acotrel says:

      07:35am | 04/12/11

      I suggest the only legal restrictions which should be placed on old drivers should be about disabilities such as strokes,  blindness, dementia, and the usual physical ones.

      Reply

    • maybe says:

      01:55pm | 05/12/11

      ...And the ability to pass a driving test equivalent to what a 17 year old does to get their licence, regardless of how long they’ve had their licence or how old they are.

      Physical/health reasons are not the only ones that make people liabilities on the road.  Not being able to drive properly, or show enough awareness of other road users is unacceptable.  To use your argument of ‘cutting them some slack’ is utter bullshit.

    • marley says:

      07:40am | 04/12/11

      I’m not in favour of banning old folks from driving. I am in favour of regular testing, though, and shorter-term licence renewals Other restrictions could apply.  Kind of a “P” plate in reverse.  Call it an “S” for seniors plate.

      Reply

    • Debbie says:

      08:32am | 04/12/11

      Thats a great idea. We are struggling with this with my Dad back in the UK. Despite the fact he has to be tested every 5 years and pass a medical he still keeps getting his licence renewed. Having been an awesome driver all his life, he is now a nightmare on the roads, and I won;t let him drive when my kids are in the car anymore. In the last few years he has crashed into the side of a building - foot slipped off the brake, driven through red lights, got completely lost for hours on end and generally been a danger to himself and others.
      We have really struggled with this as a family as you are right, it is his last freedom to drive, but even after hitting a house, they still didn;t take his license away or refuse him car insurance. We have tried suggesting he gets rid of the car, but he won;t do it, and even though he is now 90, he still drives regularly, frightening the life out of us all. NOt sure how much longer it will go for, but its very hard for us to take that away from him

    • MotherR says:

      07:02am | 05/12/11

      Debbie, can you tell us your father’s regular routes? We might try to avoid them.

      Also, I agree with those who say you must look before you step into a pedestrian crossing. The ‘green man’ should only be used as a guide. I find it silly and frightening when people teach their small children, ‘Look, there’s the green man, now let’s go,’ without so much as a sideways glance.

    • Tator says:

      07:43am | 04/12/11

      I am currently working at SAPOL’s Escort Group which is responsible for providing police escorts to the overdimensional load transport industry.
      One of the worst roads we find to do escorts on is the Copper Coast Highway between Port Wakefield and Kadina.  This is not because of the actual road which has good sightlines and ample shoulders for drivers to pull over on but because of the higher percentage of elderly drivers due to the area being a haven for retirees. 
      Why is this a problem???  First a quick outline on how an eight metre wide oversized convoy is set up here in SA (most common load escorted along that road is transportable houses). 
      First vehicle at the front of the convoy is a pilot vehicle, with a big yellow sign on the roof and two flashing yellow lights, he is also in contact with oncoming heavy vehicles via uhf radio advising them what is coming and requesting that they pull over and stop.  Second vehicle is a police vehicle, with all its emergency lights activated, this police vehicle is normally straddling the centre line with the police officer using hand signals to direct oncoming traffic to pull over and most people comply.  He is around 400 metres behind the front pilot vehicle.  400 metres behind the first police vehicle is the second police vehicle(some call it the blocker car), also fully lit up, and situated completely on the wrong side of the road normally by the fog line.  His role is to ensure all traffic is far enough off of the road to ensure clear passage for the load.  Then 300 to 400 metres behind him is the load and immediately behind him is the rear pilot whose role it is to guide the load past obstacles and to advise on traffic building up behind the load.
      One of the biggest problems we have in Escort group are those drivers who basically either ignore or don’t see (how hard is it to not see a police vehicle with flashing high beams and red and blues on)  the front pilot and police escort vehicle and keep driving at normal highway speeds towards the second escort vehicle.  This means that the blocker car basically has to stop in their path and force these vehicles off of the road.  On most of the occasions when a near miss is serious enough, the load gets stopped and one of the escort vehicles goes and stops the offending vehicle and the vast majority of them are elderly drivers whose excuse was that they did not see any of the police vehicles except the last one at the last second.  My theory is that whilst driving, they are either incapable or don’t want to look too far down the road and are basically looking at the road just in front of their bonnet and not looking far enough ahead to safely deal with any oncoming road hazards.
      Our unit has been fortunate in that we have never had a serious crash during an escort involving either a police vehicle or a load hitting oncoming traffic.  Which considering the distances we cover( as a unit - around a million km a year) and the level of risk we deal with is a testament to the skill of the members in the unit and the drivers who move these oversized load.

      Reply

    • gobsmack says:

      08:14am | 04/12/11

      Not quite the same, but a few times I’ve nearly been collected by a “mobility impaired” person gunning their motorised wheelchair in a shopping centre or railway platform.

      Reply

    • Chris_D says:

      08:39am | 04/12/11

      Any person driving a motor vehicle who doesn’t have all their wits about them, for whatever reason, is just as dangerous as someone who is affected by alcohol or other drugs.  Age itself is not necessarily a factor, but it should be addressed as a contributing factor the same as alcohol and drugs.

      There can be no doubt that our ability to focus and drive safely is affected by age, but to what degree can only be measured by regular testing once people reach a certain age.  Say, every 2 years after 60,  every year after 80, as an example.  I believe everyone should have to renew their licence by way of a practical test every 5 years anyway as this would help keep people informed of changes to road rules, and also weed out all the bad habits we pick up along the way.

      Reply

    • Jean says:

      08:53am | 04/12/11

      Old, dangerous drivers usually have children who know that their parents are old, dangerous drivers. They should do the right thing and try to talk their parent out of driving. If that doesn’t work, a letter to the drivers’ licensing authorities will do the trick. The authorities won’t take away the licence right away, but they will make the oldies do a driving test, which they will inevitably fail.

      Doing this to a parent is tough, but it is an act of love. How would you feel if you fail to act and they kill themselves or a child?

      Reply

    • chris says:

      05:17am | 05/12/11

      This is the predicament that I found myself in with my father who has dementia. It is easier said than done, Jean and I hope that you never have to do this to a parent. It is pretty evident that you haven’t, because nothing “does the trick”. There is no trick involved. It is a drawn out, painful process, made worse by the indifference and sheer incompetence of many of the “licensing authorities” and members of the medical profession who shouldn’t be a protected species either.

    • acotrel says:

      09:02am | 04/12/11

      I can think of an easy way our driving can be improved.  Our federal government could legislate to have advanced driving courses certified.  If anyone gets convicted of a serious driving offence they should have to return to the court with an advanced driving licence paid for at their own expense.

      Reply

    • Daemon says:

      07:54am | 05/12/11

      Why is it that every time an issue is discussed, we look to the government to do our thinking for us? Is it so difficult for us as a nation to take personal responsibility for our actions? Surely it isn’t rocket science to make annual driving tests mandatory for a specific age. My 84 year old mother noted she has to take a driving test next year. She still drives very well though I have needed to suggest driving a little slower a couple of times. Older people need to take responsibility whilst still in charge if their senses, and start sorting out plans for mobility before they become a danger on the roads. If they are already there, then it’s up to those who know them best to provide counsel and encouragement. As a last resort only it should be given to the morons we choose to govern us.

      Regarding Val French, if it wasn’t for her most older people would have no voice at all.

    • skinny1 says:

      09:06am | 05/12/11

      acotrel   You must be joking!  Our Federal and/or State Governments would not do this because less drivers means the following 1) less petrol taxes, 2) car registration taxes decreasing, 3) less   speeding, red light & excess drinking fines thus reducing the need for police numbers meaning a reduction in public control/manipulation.

    • LaDiva says:

      09:15am | 04/12/11

      Ten years ago I was awoken by an almighty crash which shuddered the bed and rattled the window. When I looked out of the window I saw that a car had come through our gate, taken out the water meter and the carport,
      and literally pancaked my car into the wall of the house. According to witnesses the elderly lady across the road had been reversing out of her driveway when she hit the accelerator hard (probably mistaking it for the brake)
      and sent the car hurtling towards our place. When her car hit the kerb on our side of the street it literally became airborne. My car was a complete write-off. The rear windscreen was in the front seats, as was the front windshield. Had I been in the car at the time I would have been killed instantly. Had anyone been walking past our house at the time they would have been killed. The lady was not hurt and amazingly her car suffered very little damage. When neighbours helped her from the car she had no idea where she was. At that time she was in the early stages of dementia and she also suffered a medical condition known to cause blackouts. That she was still driving at the time was incredible enough, but within weeks of the accident her car was repaired and she was back on the road! To this day I don’t understand why she was allowed back behind the wheel after that incident, especially by her family who knew of her medical condition. I do understand that it can be heart-wrenching for an elderly person to give up some of ther independence, but surely the family can see that the safety of their loved one, not to mention the safety of the general public, is more important than retaining his or her sense of independence.

      Thankfully this lady didn’t cause any further accidents and I believe she gave up driving a couple of years ago as her dementia worsened.

      Reply

    • Abu The Goat Boy says:

      09:37am | 04/12/11

      Where I live the slow moving vehicle plowing through pedestrian crossings without stopping is regular feature of life. It is just as readily driven by a young person as an old one and more often by a mother with baby onboard signs prominently displayed. You really do take your life in your hands if you cross without first ensurig that the vehicle is actually going to stop.

      But crossings aside I do agree with regular testing and I would be in the two year testing group as recommended by Chris_D.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      10:09am | 04/12/11

      Yeah, get’em off the road ; they’re the ones’ voting for the Nationals at federal elections, so now they can walk, crawl or beg their way to the polling booths.

      (Next thing yer know they’ll be preening their war-medals just to get a free ride on a bus.)

      Reply

    • Andrew says:

      05:10pm | 05/12/11

      Gee Stephen Alcotrel will be a bit pissed off that you’ve labelled him a national voter.

    • Nick says:

      10:17am | 04/12/11

      I think old people are just selfish and/or arrogant. Oh sure they say we should respect them blah blah blah, but if they are so wise then they should recognise their limitations and opt for public transport. I know when I am old I will be doing this, as I’d be concerned for MY safety, relying on diminishing abilities. Hell let young people chauffeur you.

      I think it is probably a case that like young people, old people also have their share of idiots in their population. Get a cane so you don’t have falls, don’t drive so you don’t plough into an old-folks home and get the Internet to help with home-shopping, banking, entertainment etc… technology is not evil. Just the other day I saw some real oldies at the supermarket, lugging heavy groceries and letting their trolley smash some dude’s car. Homeshopping come on! Seek help people! There are alternatives.

      And another thing, if they are really concerned about loss of respect, getting out more, being poor etc THEN GET A JOB! Seriously. All the bullshit about discriminating is overrated. I will go on record as saying that for an office job if I had to choose between someone with decades of experience and an inexperienced young yahoo I will take the oldie. Or start a business! I myself am never going to proper retire. If you have purpose you live forever.

      Reply

    • mick says:

      10:19am | 04/12/11

      Just thinking about your experience again and how those in positions of responsibility often let bad issues continue to happen despite being in full knowledge of the effects on society.

      The judicial system comes to mind when I think of uncaring bureaucrats (judges in this case) with their oft times rulings defying common logic, fairness and equity.  I recall a local court judge in the Blue Mountains who had a relative killed by a drink driver.  Every time such a case got to his court there was a custodial sentence handed down, something which would not have occurred had the judge concerned not been a victim himself.

      In recent times we have had people whose homes have been sold by third parties whilst they were overseas with no possibility of compensation or return of the home.  Still nothing is done at a government level.

      For the past decade we have had thousands of Australian families living in coastal towns forced to endure scumbag neighbouring landlords who rent out their properties for all night functions like bucks, hens, parties, etc.  Despite not being a legal use local councils for the most part refuse to stop the uses and state governments ignore the issue because the real estate industry is doing well out of these types of uses.  Bugger the neighbours and their families!!

      And then we have Australian fraudsters and scammers.  We have the story of one chap by the name of Foster who was peddling fake product in Australia for years before anything happened.  After intense media pressure this fellow was eventually forced to go to the UK, where he was stopped within weeks, and then on to the US, where he was in jail within weeks.  So why did Australian justice not work?  And on a wider note why is it that criminals of all sorts seem to get slaps on the wrist time and time again and why is it that many are never brought to justice?

      What I am saying David is that your experience, as unpleasant and dangerous as it was pales into insignificance when stacked up against a perverse system of justice and delinquent government.  It is of note that until individuals in this country suffer a bad experience the law tends to remain unchanged.

      What journos should be doing is mounting attacks on politicians who refuse to address issues so that they are not re-elected.  A friend of mine has a simple philosophy…..vote for them once but if they intentionally lie or refuse to act on serious issues vote them out at the next election -  this way they do not get the chance to suck on the public purse with their self determined unfair and over generous superannuation packages deservedly evade them.

      Here’s some meat for you Pembo.  Are you up to the task or just another pen pusher?  Enjoy your weekend.

      Reply

    • OverTheHill says:

      11:26am | 04/12/11

      My car sits in the garage, never driven, I still pay for rego ect . no I am not even 60 yet but I have had some illness and the medication has made me feel not capable of driving. I don’t want to kill anyone or myself. I was not told to avoid driving while taking the meds it was my decision. Older people need to understand their capabilities, some are more capable than others. When people are honking their horns at you and pedestrians are walking faster than your driving..time to catch a cab. To younger people, if you have an older family member or neighbor it would be nice if you could offer them a lift instead of them driving

      Reply

    • Mark says:

      11:49am | 04/12/11

      The only thing more dangerous than dodging silver-hairs in the backstreets of Drummoyne is dodging silver-hairs on mobility scooters around the Bay Run. They’re like Daleks!

      Reply

    • Mirage says:

      02:04pm | 04/12/11

      It is really simple, every 4 years you should be required to undergo a skills and proficiency test. This should include an emergency stop similar to what they expect of a motorcyclist in a car with no electronic assistance (ABS or Stability Control) and some other control loss scenarios.

      Reply

    • Martin says:

      03:27pm | 04/12/11

      There’s been some pretty mean spirited posts regarding this.  In NSW people reaching 80 have to have a medical certificate from their doctor to say they are fit to drive. At 85 they must undergo a test at the RTA. As Acotrel says we should cut them some slack.

      This presumption that when you walk on to a pedestrian crossing you don’t need to watch out for cars that are not going to stop is ludicrous.

      In most cases the most troublesome drivers are young wankers in a hurry to get somewhere, blowing the horn, tailgating and generally being a nuisance.

      Just be a little more considerate on the road as well as when you are crossing it and everything will work out a little better for us all.

      Reply

    • Anjuli says:

      03:46pm | 04/12/11

      Wait till the baby boomers are at the point where they want mobility scooters it is going to be a nightmare.I am the wrong side of 75 , I would never want one . As for older drivers ,I was fully taught at a driving school in 1960 ,I would not let my husband teach me. I think there should be a system in place where all learner drivers are taught by the experts and not by their friends or relatives.This way every one would be taught the correct way .

      Reply

    • Ned says:

      05:15pm | 04/12/11

      Look on the bright side, at least they make themselves easily identifiable by always having their left indicator on.

      Reply

    • Alex McDonnel says:

      05:19pm | 04/12/11

      I am 67 and have had an accident free driving career driving bikes, cars, trucks, buses and boats and the odd plane. ALL drivers should be tested beyond 70 years of age. I believe I’m a ‘natural’ good driver but no matter how good you are, you lose that fine sense of judgement along with eyesight and reflexes. If I had a really close shave tomorrow being my fault, I would hand in my licence immediately, I don’t want to kill anybody. We must move for standardised rules, stuff the baby boomers.

      Reply

    • Fred says:

      06:21pm | 04/12/11

      This 71yo grandfather driving his grandchildren to Macca’s today, narrowly missed being cleaned up by a reverse baseball cap driver who turned right across the traffic flow. It was only my rapid reflexes and 50+ years of experience that prevented disaster. The baseball cap needs much more practical experience before being allowed out without his mum!

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      06:58pm | 04/12/11

      Personally, I think that whenever you have to get your license renewed - regardless of age - you should have to do a practical driving test.  And, frankly, everyone should have to get their medical fitness assessed by their doctor. 

      Yes, older drivers should have to have both done on a more frequent basis, but nobody should be exempt because there are people of all ages who have no business being behind the wheel.

      Reply

    • CA says:

      07:26pm | 04/12/11

      My gripe about this is people who think they have the right to a driver’s licence over other people’s safety. I know several people who drive without their required prescription glasses on, people who have been driving with 2 broken legs, people who have cheated the eye test, people with epilepsy.

      My brother and I were nearly cleaned up by a car who had gone through a red light and almost hit another car in the process. If my brother hadn’t pulled me back at the crucial moment I wouldn’t be here. Incidentally, the driver had the audacity to apologise to the other driver and not apologise to my brother or I at all.

      The reason I don’t drive is that I have partial blindness and feel that my driving would put others in danger, but too many people with far worse eyesight think that they should be entitled to a driver’s licence. Driving is a privilege, not a right.

      We should have a National hotline to report bad drivers.

      Reply

    • Glenn says:

      07:26pm | 04/12/11

      I look forward to the day when you are old enough for the younger generation to start to vent their anger on your existence. Swings and round-a-bouts and karma. It’s a full circle world out there.

      Reply

    • Tj says:

      07:51pm | 04/12/11

      Amen, old drivers are a nightmare!

      Reply

    • Vicki PS says:

      07:54pm | 04/12/11

      I couldn’t agree more with you, Penbo.  The Queensland system, requiring drivers over 75 to have an annual medical certification, is ineffective.  Medical practitioners, even if they are competent to assess an elderly person’s fitness to drive, too often resile from the task of telling their patient that are pulling the pin on their driving.  My own father is now 78, and he is no longer safe on the roads.  We, his family, have told him that he needs to stop driving, but his doctor (himself in his 70s and minimalist in his practice, to put it kindly) has yet again certified him fit to drive.  To my thinking, a combination of annual licence renewal and certification by a designated medical practitioner or other specialist is needed.  It’s not enough to blandly assume that any old medico will do the job properly.

      Reply

    • Mel says:

      09:27pm | 04/12/11

      Maybe rather than their own doctor there should be a Main Roads appointed doctor who does the medical checks specifically for driving fitness.

    • Craig of North Brisbane says:

      01:48pm | 05/12/11

      Agreed.  My grandfather is in his late 80s, has early dementia and is plainly unfit to drive, but his doctor (who is of a similar vintage), duly certifies him every year.  If there’s a saving grace, it’s that he doesn’t drive *much*, but it would be safer for himself and the community if he didn’t drive *at all*.

    • Rhonda says:

      09:12pm | 04/12/11

      I saw my Grandparents struggle with this very issue - my Nan never had a licence so my Granddad drove them everywhere, unfortunately his eyesight wasn’t brilliant and his reflexes were slower. He handed in his licence, saying it was the “right thing to do”. Yes, it was hard for them, and there was certainly a lack of independence for them, but they took taxis, public transport and the occasional lift from friends and family. It really was the right thing to do and I believe if there was mandatory testing for seniors he wouldn’t have passed.

      Reply

    • Greg says:

      11:15pm | 04/12/11

      Penbo, you should be ashamed of yourself for your ageist comments. You are clearly in desperate need of some sensitivity and empathy training.

      You ought to know by now that the only thing that is important in today’s society is minority rights, and old people are a very vulnerable minority.

      Old people are usually more physically vulnerable than women and children. They have lower incomes than the poor. They have more medical problems than the gay community. They need more taxpayer support than the boat people. Which other minority group could possibly be more deserving of public support?

      Minority rights are always more important than the rest of society. You should be ashamed of yourself for persecuting them.

      Vilifying old people and making generalisations about their driving skills just demonstrates your ignorance and bigotry.

      And don’t start quoting statistics. You know that statistics don’t matter when minority rights are at risk. Aboriginees are over-represented in criminal activities, and gay men are over-represented in AIDS infections, are you suggesting that they should have their rights restricted in order to protect the rest of society?

      Where is your compassion? What about the old Aussie fair go? Who are you to be so judgemental? Why are you so intolerant of people who are different to you? Where is your sense of social justice?

      I don’t know how you can live with all that ageist hatred within you. I think some serious therapy is called for, so that there is some hope that you can become part of civilised society at some point in the future.

      Reply

    • Rai says:

      11:30pm | 04/12/11

      As a 25 year old Stroke Survivor who (rightly) had her license cancelled last year due to the severity of my stroke I am genuinely wary at ‘going for my license again” I have to apply to the govt and need to be approved via the hospital by a medical assessor (as it should be) to make sure I’m not a risk to anyone. Due to the level of my injury I have to completely reapply for my license. Learners logbooks anyone? I pose a possible risk to the community and rightly need to be assessed (the waiting list is 9 months by the way) to make sure my reaction times and intuition is as it should be I have to be assessed by not only medical professionals; Neuro-Surgeon, Cardiologist, Stroke specialist but also an Occupational Therapist to make sure I can handle the responsibility. I’m told there will be likely yearly assessments afterwards.  I recognise and accept this. If GP’s and primary care specialists aren’t making the possibilities known to their patients years in advance that assessment, skill checks and possible loss of driving privileged is a possibility they’re doing everyone a great disservice. We all age and lose our edge (some of us faster than others) and it’s extremely arrogant to presume my or your independence is worth it at the risk of others.

      Reply

    • steven says:

      11:39pm | 04/12/11

      At what stage will our society stop trying to minimise, mitigate or eliminate all forms of possible risk. The world in which we live has and always will have risks regardless of how many goodwill crusades politicians and concerned members of the public undertake. Instead we should each develop a sense of personal responsibility for our actions and accept that a little bit of risk in our lives makes life worth living!

      Reply

    • marley says:

      06:27am | 05/12/11

      Driving is a privilege, not a right.  If you’re not competent to drive, you shouldn’t be on the road. Period.  This has nothing to do with goodwill crusades, but rather a lot to do with common sense.

    • oracle says:

      05:16am | 05/12/11

      My 86 year old grandmother has no; spatial awareness, fast reflexes, fine motor skills or knowledge of modern road rules. Doctors have given her the ok to drive (QLD). No family members drive with her. If we suggest that she can’t drive any more she becomes vindictive and vicious, completely unreasonable with wild conspiracy theories and paranoid delusions. There is no way on earth that she could come close to passing a driving test. Her car regularly has new scrapes on it from not being able to park a car (that has front and rear parking sensors). Nothing is ever her fault (even though when she scrapes other cars her insurance pays for the damage), she is mind numbingly irrational.

      Reply

    • Erika F says:

      06:46am | 05/12/11

      Come to Toukley, NSW for a day and you will see just how bad elderly drivers can be. Most elderly drivers will argue that they have never been in an accident, but they are the cause for many.

      Reply

    • James Carthew says:

      06:55am | 05/12/11

      I love how many people in here are bringing up “young hoon drivers” rah rah rah. That’s not the topic. We all know about young hoon drivers, and the government already has laws, money, and policies in place to stop them. The issue of old drivers who can’t drive but are licensed to is a serious and major problem and it deserves more attention than it’s getting. Essentially a bunch of you people are advocating letting murderers go because you want to whack the drug dealers. How about stopping both of the bad groups. Old dangerous drivers ARE a problem. so are young hoon drivers. Fedup with people bringing up unrelated rubbish because they want to hate on one group of people in an article about another group’s bad behaviour.

      Reply

    • Neal says:

      07:02am | 05/12/11

      By not putting these drivers off the road you are discriminating against drink drivers aged below 50 with a blood alcohol reading of 0.10

      Reply

    • Josh says:

      07:35am | 05/12/11

      I can’t believe how many people oppose testing in older people for licensing. Young people are shown statistics showing why they are in a high risk area, and have to pass tests be on highly restricted licenses, insurance companies metaphorically molest young male drivers. I an now out of that age group, but I owned a 6 cylinder import, and then got an even faster car, insurance costs alone nearly got me to stop my hobby and sell something I was so proud to own. How many speeding tickets have I ever had? NONE. Loss of points? NONE. Yet I (this I is already capitolised, so I have not way of emphasising it) am a high risk driver.

      Make the old people face the same crap as young people.

      Reply

    • Caz says:

      07:48am | 05/12/11

      Personally I think that we need to remove the attitude of entitlement of anyone to holding a drivers licence by incorporating testing in to the relicensing process.  To renew your licence you must again pass a driving test.  Every year for the first five years of your licence, then every five years until age 65, then annually.  Medical checks must be performed by a doctor employed by the transport department, and not the persons own GP.  Police should also be given the power to suspend a drivers licence on the spot if they feel that a driver is not competent and that person would need to be retested before having their licence reinstated.  It is the only way to ensure that ALL drivers are competent on the roads, and to force people to keep themselves up to date with road laws and changing road conditions. 

      No one, of any age, has the “right” to drive a vehicle capable of causing injury and death to another person.  It is a privilege and people need to start treating it that way and taking their responsibility on the roads seriously.

      Reply

    • driving for the under 80's only says:

      08:00am | 05/12/11

      Im a nurse in QLD and I have come across many elderly patients who still drive their cars, when I look at their physical and mental condition the thought of them on the road makes me shudder.  G.Ps are not an independent umpire and don’t like having to take something as precious as a license off a patient they have known for years.  A lot refuse to do it when they should.  There are also a lot of elderly who have had there licenses revoked but refuse to stop driving.  I had a husband of a patient once who was 93 with Alzeheimers, he refused to stop driving and would use a GPS to get him to where he wanted to go (when he remembered to use it).  When the elderly try to compare themselves to all the “dangerous younger drivers” I would say to them that those younger drivers will hopefully become wiser and more experienced with age.  An 18 yr old probably dosen’t have a deteriorating mind, deteriorating reflexes, deteriorating eyesight, and a deteriorating heart.  How many times do you hear about an old driver who lost consciousness and crashed.  I personally feel that as we are all living longer, a maximum driving age needs to be set.  That way it’s not personal or insulting to have your license taken off you.  It also gives the elderly opportunity to plan for a time when they won’t have a vehicle.  I.e Move into a retirement village or somewhere close to a shopping centre that has a pharmacy, doctor and the shops close by.  Buy a scooter.  Independence should never be at the expense of safety to the community.  Not all people have the insight to know when they should stop driving.

      Reply

    • Lezza says:

      08:38am | 05/12/11

      Recently, I spent a couple of years without a license.
      Before any clown jumps to the wrong conclusions, let me point out that it was stripped off me by the NSW Officer of State Revenue because I was unable to pay a hefty fine arising out of a commercial matter.
      Nothing to do with driving competence.
      Point is that at 67, I found myself back on a bicycle for the first time in decades and what an eye opener it’s been.
      At low speed, there is more time for observations and several things – apart from an awareness of terrific vulnerability – have struck me.
      Where I live – urbanised Albury – there appeared to be very few very elderly drivers on the road, and those I have seen seem to be coping well.
      I found it interesting that this age group – plus the middle aged – respected my space.
      Younger drivers, particularly anyone in a ute or vehicle with modifications and a garish paint job, were aggressive and impatient and I got the impression they’d stepped straight out of a video game.
      I quickly learned that anyone on a mobile phone or driving a mobile speaker is to be given plenty of room.
      Manners were generally non-existent and I seriously question the situational awareness and morals of some of these people.
      I tend to agree that no aged person should be on the roads if deemed medically / intellectually unfit, but shouldn’t the same rules apply to P Platers?
      I regard myself as a reasonably competent driver with an enormous number of kilometres under my belt – I’ve done Sydney-Canberra-Melbourne hundreds of times – and my only serious accident was as a passenger when a driver went to sleep at the wheel.
      Over the years, I’ve witnessed some extraordinarily stupid driving, seen the aftermath of terrible accidents, and on one occasion helped a single, harassed ambulance officer extract a dead woman from a wreck.
      The driver of that car committed a terrible error – plunged in fog into the back of a truck that had stopped on the verge because of a slipping load – and it’s reasonable to presume he had no training for the possibility of such circumstances.
      I have often wondered how I survived.
      Well, let me tell you.
      When I was in my twenties, I was fortunate enough to undertake an advanced driving course and then be driven by, and receive tips from, the late and great Peter Brock.
      Class driving he called it.
      Smoothness, patience, thinking ahead, giving others plenty of room and treating your fellow drivers as you would expect them to regard you.
      I don’t see much evidence of that these days.
      I seriously doubt that many of the P-Platers entering the system would have the foggiest notion of what Brock was on about.
      Before I go.
      I have noticed that my peripheral vision is not as good as it was and I have adjusted my driving accordingly.
      Brock’s rules are more useful to me now that they were when I was young and silly and – like today’s learners – imbued with a sense of indestructability.
      If some patience and generosity of spirit is inserted into the mix, it’s really not a problem.

      Reply

    • Shenanigans says:

      10:23am | 05/12/11

      whats with the hating on us younger drivers?
      I’m young on my P’s and i drive a Ute, and i find you’re assumption that I’m aggressive and or impatient offensive, i would go so far as to say I’m a safer driver then old farts or even fully licensed middle aged folk. I slow down for cyclists, if i see a motorbike rider, i let them go past or sit behind me before i think about switching lanes and most of all, i don’t speed, even though in a V8 commodore i could quiet easily do so. I’m always in full control of my vehicle at all times and always have full situational awareness, and if i feel like I wont be, i don’t drive. you can’t say the same of older drivers.

      I’ve seen older drivers go flying off the road because they couldn’t see or didn’t realise they were, I’ve seen them cause traffic pile ups because they’ve stopped at a green light or gone through a red, not all elderly people are like this but most are. My grandparents drive fine and they are in their 70’s and 80’s yet they only drive short trips because they know at their age they can’t drive as well as they used too.

    • marley says:

      10:54am | 05/12/11

      @Shenanigans - everything depends on the colour of your ute.  If it’s purple or lime green, us oldies are never gonna trust you.

    • Shenanigans says:

      11:40am | 05/12/11

      its black with red details, like a boss raspberry

    • kombiman says:

      10:16am | 05/12/11

      I just love how most of the examples people give to support not testing elderly drivers are purely anecdotal. 

      Despite a large number of perfectly responsible and hazard-aware young drivers, the fact remains that younger drivers are statistically far more likely to be involved in an accident, therefore we have graduated licensing, additional testing, and harsher restrictions on when and what they can drive.  This is how it should be.

      If older drivers are statistically more likely to be involved in an accident, then something needs to be done.  Just like the old licensing system in Queensland before they brought in P plates, the current system of a doctor’s certificate for older drivers just isn’t working.

      Reply

    • Phill says:

      11:11am | 05/12/11

      Personally I think every driver should have to undergo a driving test every 5 years from date of issue. 
      Following that I see no reason not to drop this to every 3 years after the age of 65 and annually after the age of 75.
      There are a lot of drivers out there that would not pass a driving test regardless fo age.

      Reply

    • subotic says:

      11:27am | 05/12/11

      Old people don’t need companionship. They need to be isolated and studied so that it can be determined what nutrients they have that might be extracted for our personal use ~ H.J Simpson

      Reply

    • Sara says:

      11:49am | 05/12/11

      I don’t think the test actually is 75 - my maternal grandmother has her license (NSW) and still only has to show a doctor’s certificate - she is 79. My paternal grandmother only had the first test this year (she has recently turned 85).

      I would love the tests to start earlier. My maternal grandmother is an appalling driver and has been for years, she has incredibly poor sight which doesn’t help (and her doctor doesn’t bother mentioning that - she has tricked the RTA into forgetting to give her eye test twice!). The tests weed out the ones who shouldn’t be driving while keeping on the road those who should. As a note - I’m sure otherwise people will think I’m just being ‘ageist’, my 88 year old grandfather - who is an amputee (so one leg - modified his car to cater to this) is an exceptional driver and I’m sure will continue to drive safely for years to come. He has done brilliantly in every road test he has had and I feel safe being in the car while he drives. Same with 85 year old Nan. With 79 year old grandmother… I always insist that I’ll drive her on our outings.

      Reply

    • Tim says:

      12:03pm | 05/12/11

      Old people depend on their drivers licence so they can be kept alive by the organs of the young people they run over.

      Reply

    • David Chewings says:

      09:53am | 11/12/11

      I agree with the early comment by Mahrat that you are being too accusatory and I would add a little simplistic.  We parents of the very young cannot be too careful when there is so much distraction.  I am annoyed that a search of this blog reveals not a single word on ‘Hit and Run Eugene McGee’.
      As a South Australian I am disgusted that 8 years have passed and still basic issues have been left unresolved.  We can all do a little better David in our ongoing pursuits for justice on our roads.  Merry Xmas to all.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 24 May 12 09:56PM

RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 24 May 12 09:17PM

@loupascale if the survey made you sad, probably skip the comments...

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf”

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

by Tony Burke

38

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

by Tory Shepherd

92

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

by Anthony Sharwood

71

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed