I’m sure this isn’t going to be the most popular stance I’ve ever taken, but it’s something that I feel pretty strongly about. So, don’t automatically close your browser before you hear me out. In fact, if you disagree, please leave a comment and let me know why.
Senior drivers should be periodically re-tested in order to allow them to keep their licenses. (If you read more, you’ll see I don’t just single out senior drivers).
About a week ago, GasBuddy had a poll up about this topic, which is what got me thinking about where I stood on the issue. Based on the results of the poll, I feel safe in saying that I’m not alone in where I stand.
Here’s how nearly 17,000 people responded when asked: Should drivers be re-tested to determine driving capability?
- Yes, periodically after a certain age – 32%
- Yes, periodically regardless of age – 31%
- Yes, after an accumulation of moving violations – 28%
- No, the initial test should be sufficient – 6%
- Other – 3%
I believe that if there is a minimum age at which people are allowed to legally drive then there should be an age at which people have to be re-tested to prove they are safe, capable drivers. It is a widely accepted scientific fact that our motor skills (no pun intended) diminish as we age, and our reaction time slows. None of this lends itself to being a safe driver.
When these sorts of age-specific debates come up, many senior groups cry discrimination. To some degree I can see their point. Not every senior citizen is a bad driver, and being able to get in your car and go wherever you want, whenever you want has always been a sign of independence.
I know there is no set age at which people start to lose their driving skills, but at the same time there’s no set age at which a magic switch is flipped and we all become good drivers. However, it’s still generally accepted that people are ready to drive somewhere between the ages of 16 and 18, depending on where they live.
Can’t we do the same thing for when people should start to be retested? If the average lifespan is 76 years old, knock off 16 years and begin periodic retesting of everyone over the age of 60. Seems pretty fair to me.
I also think it goes without saying, but if you rack up a ton of moving violations and demonstrate that you’re an unsafe driver at any point, you should lose your license and be subject to periodic re-testing until you can prove you’re no longer a liability on the road.
Where do you stand on this issue? Leave a comment below.
{ 33 comments… read them below or add one }
OK, I have to disagree. Hopefully, the fact that I’m 62 will not invalidate my opinion.
I’ve been driving a lot since I was 15. For me, driving is as natural as walking, and I’m very aware of what’s going on with traffic around me. I think my experience more than compensates for whatever loss of reflexes I might have. In fact, I think that my awareness of what can happen makes me a better driver than most of the younger drivers who have a lot of distractions on their mind and are not really paying attention to driving.
I drive daily now in a San Francisco area that has a lot of fast traffic. I’m very aware of what’s going on all around me, and I constantly see young drivers who have no clue about good driving procedures, or drive recklessly and potentially cause accidents due to their thoughtlessness or carelessness.
I don’t think all older drivers are better, of course, as bad habits don’t lead to good driving, nor do I think all younger drivers are bad, as many are aware of their abilities. But overall, I think the increased maturity compensates for any loss in ability. If I’m too old to drive safely, I hope I will be mature enough to stop. But if a younger person is too drunk or otherwise distracted, they are very often not mature enough to care, but instead have the youthful feeling of immortality.
So, in my opinion, everyone should be retested, especially those that have more than a normal number of accidents or tickets, regardless of age.
The only way someone could have an argument that the elderly shouldn’t be more often retested than adults and teenagers is if they completely ignored all the mental and physical degradation that all old people experience. Past a certain age, this degradation can be dangerous, if the afflicted persons are allowed to continue to drive. It would not be overly difficult to scientifically arrive at an average age after which it is possible that a person’s faculties have degraded enough to post a threat, were they in control of a vehicle.
Marty, I think it is great you are such a good/safe driver, but you must know that it can’t last, sorry to say.
So, if the seniors fail the test how are they going to get home if they drove there to take the test?
I’ll bet if you ask the insurance companies, you’d find that they’ve done a pretty detailed analysis of this problem.
One thing that might help seniors retain their independence as long as possible is to make certain streets and intersections off limits at certain times of the day. This should apply to new drivers too. For example, the crazy traffic around the plaza a few miles away would overwhelm my grandmother and my daughter, but they’re perfectly capable of driving around the corner to the convenience store.
I completely agree with this. Most of the time when I’m afraid to pass a driver because he’s clearly drunk it turns out to be a senior citizen who is struggling to maintain their vehicle.
Decreased awareness and visual ability don’t happen over night. They’re part of the aging process, most people experience it, and it’s just as dangerous to other drivers as drinking.
Of course this can happen to people of all ages, but it’s certainly more common in the elderly. Retesting should happen at 26, 36, 46, 56, 65, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, etc.
How many of you that advocate retesting for those over 60 are actually over 60? I’ll bet a dime to a dollar you won’t have the same opinion when you reach 60.
I remember when I was young and began driving. I was more of a threat then. When I’m 70 or 80, I may want to avoid many of the roads I travel now. But at 62, I’m definitely not one of the drivers someone is afraid to pass – I’m generally going as fast as most of the fastest cars, except when I come across some (usually younger) driver either eating, drinking, and talking on the phone, or trying to cut off as many people as possible.
There’s many reasons people drive badly. Singling out one group is wrong. If you want safety, advocate testing for everyone, not just one group.
Maybe retesting should be a requirement in receiving medicare. That way older people do not feel as though they are being picked on. If you have a medical need and are retired and over 65 then you need to retest to get your medicare. Just a thought.
Marty, you’re not being objective.
“Singling out one group is wrong. If you want safety, advocate testing for everyone, not just one group.”
What about the hard-of-seeing, or those with mental problems? Narcoleptics? Let me ask you a question: Do you admit that past a certain age, human beings’ mental faculties, on average, degrade sufficiently to pose a threat, were they to drive a vehicle?
If you are confident you can pass a test, what sort of issue could you have with it? It’s to keep people safe, not to persecute some demographic, as you clearly imagine this is about.
Read this before you reply: http://www.smartmotorist.com/traffic-and-safety-guideline/older-drivers-elderly-driving-seniors-at-the-wheel.html
“I’ll bet a dime to a dollar you won’t have the same opinion when you reach 60.” Well, if we do change our opinion, it won’t be because we suddenly become more logical, rational, or objective, it will be for the same reason you hold yours.
@Marty I think you are taking the comments wrong. You may be the greatest driver in the world and retesting would prove that. But people as they age loose coordination in some cases, and retesting to make the roads safer may be a necessity.
Patrick, I don’t see how making medicare contingent on retesting would alleviate the feeling of being, as you say, “picked on.” Why would MORE consequences make seniors feel better? Besides, it’s discriminatory; not everyone over 65 uses medicare as their primary insurance.
Chris,
My issues with retesting? I’m sure I can pass. I’ve always worried more about the written test than the driving test. My issue is it takes a lot of time to go take the test. At 60, it’s a waste of time. I’ll admit there’s an age where retesting makes sense, but at 60, I just don’t think so. Trying to set an age is the part that’s not fair. When I said singling out a group, I didn’t mean not singling out people who have a physical impairment; I meant arbitrarily singling out a group, such as “over 60″. Why not over 55? Or 50? How about under 30? Where will you begin to protest?
You make a point about those with vision or mental problems – well, that can happen at any age, right? So why shouldn’t retesting be required regularly? Why should you be immune from retesting?
Also, driving tests don’t test freeway driving, they test slow, city driving. So, it’s not really going to help with the older drivers who can’t react fast on the freeway. Some cities aren’t even close to a freeway.
Testing should be done for physical impairments to driving regularly for everyone, especially vision tests. That’s one of the problems with older drivers anyway.
There are lots of people, regardless of age, who shouldn’t have licenses. Not only should we have mandatory retests, but they should be difficult tests. My test consisted of driving around the block in a 25 mph zone, then doing a 3 point turn. That was it. None of that shows how you do in bad weather, when the car enters a skid, how to avoid accidents, how to merge properly, etc.
Look at the licensing tests that countries like Finland use, professional instructors, numerous tests, skidpads, controlled braking with & without ABS interaction, etc. They teach you how to *drive*, not just how to awkwardly point a car in one direction.
So here’s the easy answer: whenever you have to renew your license in your state, you have to be retested as well. That means every person, regardless of age, every x number of years depending on your state. I’m 29, it means I would have been tested twice since I got my license at age 17. Nothing wrong with that at all. If you can’t drive, regardless of age, you shouldn’t be able to do so.
this article doesn’t engage this issue in a meaningful way.
it has nothing to do with discrimination, and it has everything to do with the costs associated with retesting drivers.
the obvious point to be made is that retesting drivers, of all ages, would reduce the number of people, on the road, who are unlikely to pass such a test.
how much are we willing to pay, to ensure that our fellow man, who is a bad driver, has his license revoked, when the examination results require it.
Well I believe that people should be re-tested every 10 or so years in general, oftentimes people take breaks in driving (those from the city without cars), get older, forget the laws, lose coordination. Testing every driver on the road every ten years wouldn’t hurt right?
I think retesting should be mandatory for those over 60. Some people are in the best shape of their lives at 60 and others are dealing with debilitating conditions. The point is not to single out older driver but to make sure that those on the road are still safe to drive.
My grandfather had his license reissued when he was 87 and he was a great driver until about the age of 92. My family had to make the decision to take his car away and we had no support from the DMV or way to officially make that happen. It is wrong for a government agency to issue a license to someone at 16 and have that be a lifetime license. My grandfather’s license is valid until next year when he would have turned 97!
Driving is a privilege, not a right. It should not be left to families to make the decision to take away a drivers license. The government agency who issued the license should be responsible.
I agree with regular testing for everyone especially as myself and two neighbours were hit by an 82 year old driver in a controlled cross walk (lights flashing above us). The worst injury was only a concussion but he hit three kids directly. Most frustratingly the police SUGGESTED the driver not renew his license. Its possible the test would start with vision and reflex testing and if they fail that then they need to do a full retest. For some reason people think that driving a car is a fundamental right and not a privilege. A possible solution would be through insurance companies ie you must pass retests to renew your insurance making the driver pay for it or simply your insurance rates spike if you don’t retest regularly.
I just want to add that I totally agree and I would like to add that the test should determine not only if an older person can drive but also if they can drive without getting in the way of all the other drivers. What I would give to get all the old people who are totally oblivious to anyone else on the road to stop clogging up the passing lane. But I guess this also applies to anyone that thinks its ok to go slow in the passing lane. If you want to go only the speed limit or slower on the freeway then don’t impose that on everyone else.
Marty,
When i am 60 I’ll probably have the same opinion you have. No one wants to be part of a group that’s singled out. No one wants to admit that they might not be as good as they used to be.
But lets face facts, we DO single out groups based on age. We generally dont allow people to start driving until 16 or 18 – why? Whats wrong with letting a 15 year old drive? or 13? or 10? there are some 10 and 13 year olds that are very mature for their age. Why are they singled out? Because over-all, most 10 and 13 years olds are not that mature. So we try to balance safety with practicality and say ok, at 16 most people have gotten enough maturity to accept the responability of driving. At 18 we think most people are responsible enough to vote, join the military or get married. at 21 we think most people are responsible enough to drink.
Saying people over the age of X should start to get retested is no different. We’re saying ok, past the age of X we think there’s enough people who are starting to suffer from the natural effects of aging that it becomes a matter of safety to check that they are still a safe driver.
Perhaps what we should do is retest someone 1 or 2 years after they first get their license, and also if they get into too many accidents, and also past a certain age. Retesting everyone doesn’t make sense to me since in general, after you have been driving for a few years you are probably safe to be on the road at that point.
and taking the test doesn’t really take all that much time. I dont know about the DMV in every state, but here at least you can call and make an appointment. So we’re probably only talking about an hour or two, and that only once or twice a year (or however long the retesting interval is).
The one problem with retesting, that you touched on, is that the current driving test wouldn’t really be practical. We already know you know the basics of driving. We’d have to come up with a new test that is basically designed to test how well someone reacts in a tense situation. Maybe they could just set up a computer and let people take a simulated driving course. That should certainly speed up the testing process and make it easier for people.
Me personally, i think we should start retesting past a certain age – my rough guess would be after 65. Although i’m sure there are some geriatriains who would have a more informed opinion as to what age would be best to start retesting.
Let me ask one last question of you Marty – do you want your airline pilots to never get retested? You’d really hate being a pilot – forget being retested, you are just forced to retire past a certain age.
In addition, when you state “retest” are you meaning retaking the written exam (which is too simple), or an actual on road test? Your post does not provide enough context to tell, nor do the poll results. I would say that both are required.
Logical misstep — sure reaction times slow, but that matters more if there are other behavior, like following too closely, driving too fast, not driving predictably.
For instance, a younger driver might feel (and act) on an impulse to maintain velocity where an older driver (with more experience) might start slowing down sooner — sure reaction time is slower, but driving may not necessitate faster response time.
Not driving predictably — as a resident and frequent driver in San Francisco, looking for parking leads to less predictable driving.
@DN — people can get home by bus, taxi, bicycle, walk.
It is quite likely that 40% plus of all drivers are incompetent , unable to safely operate in most conditions . Being able to drive as fast as the fastest cars is not a measure of competence . Believing that you are capable of driving an automobile at any speed while talking , texting , using a computer , eating or conversing is total denial . In an emergency situation with full attention and both hands on the wheel you are not guaranteed a positive outcome . With about 44k people killed on the road every year , the truth is apparent . Everyone regardless of age should utilize a car simulator ,( like aircraft)with emergency simulations , pass or fail !
There is a lot of discussion of who should be tested, how should the test be conducted, and what if the test is not passed. Before we debate those topics, it is important to decide on what society wants to accomplish. I’d suggest the goal is keeping older drivers on the road and reducing the number of accidents. The implications of taking away transportation for anyone – not being able to get to jobs, visit family and friends, participate in volunteer activities, or reach basic necessities like the grocery store or the doctor’s office – are profound.
To accomplish that dual goal, we need to understand root causes of safe driving so we can assess and improve them. Brain performance – the ability to react quickly to what we see – is a great predictor of driver safety. One example of the research is a recent NHTSA study of older driver screening programs that concluded testing brain performance was the most predictive in understanding crash risk. The technology in that assessment is deliverable remotely and can be self-administered, making the cost of a broadly available screening program acceptable. You can try a simpler version online of the Crash Risk Evaluator at http://www.drivesharpnow.com
The medical and science literature is clear that brain performance generally slows as we age … and it is also clear that it can be improved at any age with the right mental exercises (just like physical fitness is for the body). I am CEO of Posit Science, the leader in clinically-proven brain fitness software. We recently introduced DriveSharp, a software program recommended by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. It helps people be safer behind the wheel by training the brain to think quicker and react faster.
I fully agree with your article.
I know the elder generation will disagree however a fine example recently near to where i live was an incident that happened on the motorway.
An elderly woman had driven on to the wrong side of the motorway by driving down an exit ramp and caused a massive crash that resulted in a few deaths.
The reason why this women did this was that she could not make out the signs as her eye sight was going. If this elderly women had re-sat a driving test she would have not been allowed to drive resulting in a few lifes being saved!
What does it mean to drive safely? The question Brian is really raising is “at what point in time does a person’s visual, cognitive and motor skills become an impairment to safe driving?”
The answer is that there is no set age. This is what causes the rub.
Each state is going to have to deal with this issue. The best way to approach this is scientifically. The studies need to be funded. The laws much match the facts.
We cannot compare the problems associated with age with the general driving population. A person who has cognitive, vision and motor skills problems at 40 should not be compared to those in their 80s. Although similar results, how to address them needs to be done separately.
We manufacture and sell driving simulators for researchers and medical professionals. The topic of elderly driving, along with distracted driving, are among the most engaging topics within the driving research community.
The topic is being addressed in many states (and countries). We should all hope the political decisions match the scientific facts; getting emotion out of the equation.
Retesting should only be required when the driver’s frequency of accidents or moving violations warrants a hearing on competence to drive.
I’ve met people in their 90s who have all their faculties, and good-enough reflexes to drive well. I’ve met druggies and drunks in their 30s who don’t. It’s not age, it’s competence which must be measured.
However, some debilitating diseases, such as Alzheimer’s or severe personality disorders, might be sufficient to warrant revocation of privileges upon a doctor’s evaluation.
Universal health care may give us big government that actually would be beneficial for once. I don’t want incompetents on the road.
I also don’t want any illegal aliens on the road. That includes the little green men.
I think you are totally right. I can’t believe some drivers are able to get 3 to 4 to 17 DWIs! It is outrageous, periodical testing makes the most sense. These guys who get into accidents all the time are the ultimate Spoilers on the road. They spoil the privilage to the extreme and I will never understand why some people never get their license taken away.
For the elders, it’s just common sense to keep testing them. Regarding illegals, get them all off the road. If we have to comply so do they. More and more accidents happen because more and more irresponsible peeople on the road. Make them pay!
I live in Florida so we probably have a higher than average population of the elderly. But my problem with taking an elderly persons license is if they have no family support nearby how do they function. The little things like grocery shopping and going to the doctors would not be possible or extremely difficult. I think that at some point you will if you live long enough probably be a safety risk on the road. Although in my area the people who appear to be the most dangerous with weaving, slowing down not paying attention are the people on cell phones and not the old people.
As with age a lot of things fail, resiting a test should happen, not just for seniors but after any motoring conviction,
Letting people loose behind the wheel after the initial test is great, but in life many circumstances change, as we get older our eyes start to fail, do our senses also start to fail ?
Where would the money come from and the staff to mann this if it were ever to happen
Paul
yyeeessssss
i really dont get this generations elderly group.
AHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I swear to god. you old people are always driving so freaking slow. Plus you can’t stay in your own freaking lane. I seriously want to run your ass over when you guys go that slow. If we are honking or tail gating, move BITCH get out the way
Good article Brian. The age for driving should be specific and also retesting should be required. This will also help people know there driving habits and are they enough to drive properly or safely. And as per age is concerned for teens or young drivers there should be certain age limit from where they should take driving seriously and should not involve themselves in accidents because many young drivers or teens don’t have a proper driving skills still and so the driving limit for young driving or teens should be increased. carinsurancetemporary.co.uk