Keeping older drivers on the road is the test

Jul 18, 2013
Keeping older drivers on the road is the test
MUARCs Ozcandrive study is a significant program of research addressing the big issues in older driver safety.

In the past fortnight in Melbourne there have been four high profile traffic accidents involving older drivers. Inevitably there have been calls for mandatory testing for older drivers.

Current licensing practices for vary across Australia. Victoria is the only state or territory where there is no compulsory licence test for an older driver if he or she wants to continue driving after they reach a certain age, generally 70 year or older. According to VicRoads, this means anyone who is able to drive safely without creating dangers for themselves or other road users can hold a driver licence without the need for re-testing.

Victoria's laws should be applauded because they in fact, unlike their state and territory , take into account the evidence-based research which clearly indicates that testing older drivers not only doesn't make the roads safer, it significantly disadvantages those over 70.

Australia isn't the only place where there is a lack of uniformity regarding the licensing of older drivers. In Belgium, France, Germany and Sweden older drivers are effectively "licensed for life" while in Denmark, Italy, the UK and Portugal they must undertake regular assessment starting as early as 45 years of age in Finland.

Currently, there is no scientifically validated test which can identify with acceptable confidence the at-risk driver.

It is assumed that the general functional decline associated with getting on in years such as reduced eyesight and slower reflexes leads to unsafe driver behaviour. However what is not often considered is that many older drivers are actually aware of their own limitations – they drive a known route say to and from the shops; they don't drive at night, they drive slower, and leave longer headways (distance to the vehicle in front) etc.

Over the next four to five decades there will be a substantial increase in the absolute and proportional number of older people in most industrialised countries courtesy of the ageing of the "baby boomer" generation. In Australia the proportion of people over the age of 65 will increase from 11.1 per cent in 2001 to 24.2 per cent in 2051.The fastest growing group is women over 80 and more women in this generation are likely to be drivers compared with their mothers' generation.

It is a given that – statistically – older drivers are more likely to be involved in serious and fatal crashes. But for the most part, their over-representation in serious injury crashes per distance travelled is not because their is poor or their cognitive function diminished. Their bodies are more frail so a crash that leaves a teenager with a bruised knee can put an older person in hospital with a broken leg. Older people are also more likely to downsize to a smaller and cheaper car. What they don't realise (or their immediate families perhaps don't encourage) is that it is possible to shop around for a larger, safer car that will protect their grandparents when and if they crash. Saving a few litres of fuel a week is insignificant compared with the cost of multiple bone fractures.

If we assume that not all older drivers are poor drivers (in the same way we assume that not all young drivers are hoons), we should question the push to screen all older drivers for the sake of those few who are at-risk. Those that may in fact confuse the accelerator for the brake? The solution is a targeted approach, with valid tests for GPs to assist those difficult decisions about fitness to drive.

There is an enormous amount of research showing that mandatory testing of older drivers does not make the roads safer. One study compared the safety implications of the Finnish and Swedish licensing practices. Finland requires annual medical checks starting annually at age 70 for licence renewal, whereas Sweden has no age related controls. The Finnish program did not result in fewer crashes than in Sweden – but importantly it was found that Finland had a higher older pedestrian fatality rate, presumably the result of an increase in the number of older people relying on walking as their main transport option.

An Australian study which evaluated the effectiveness of different licensing systems by comparing the crash rates of drivers over 75 years across the country found that, despite its lack of a mandatory assessment program, Victoria had the lowest older driver crash rate per number of licences issued concluding that there were no demonstrable safety benefits for mandatory assessment programs. Another more recent Australian study found that Victorian drivers over 80 performed consistently better than drivers from other states and territories ?and in the case of serious injury crashes, the differences were statistically significant.

Put simply, mandatory testing of older drivers isn't cost effective and is discriminatory. It may seem easy to argue that are more likely to have crashes and should, therefore, get off the road. Surely then we would ban all 17 year old males from driving until they are 25?

Not only is there no evidence to support mandatory testing of older drivers there also needs to be recognition that there are real disadvantages associated with age based mandatory assessment. In 2050 almost one in four people will be over 65 and one in ten will be over 80. They will be working, going to the gym, spending money in cafes and restaurants, going to the movies and doing everything they can to stay mobile and active. Driving is key to that and we need to work out ways to help them stay on the road and to drive safely. To do anything else is simply discriminatory and uneconomical.

Explore further: Older drivers more likely to buy new vehicles

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

In defense of older drivers

Apr 02, 2012

The notion that senior drivers have higher rates of crashes because they are poorer drivers is largely a misconception, according to a commentary in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

Varied license laws for older drivers

Sep 17, 2012

(AP)—More older drivers are on the road, and an Associated Press review finds a hodgepodge of rules governing what they must do to stay behind the wheel.

Older drivers more likely to buy new vehicles

May 31, 2013

Adults under 50 have long been the ideal target group for advertisers, but when it comes to buying new vehicles, older consumers may be a marketer's best bet, says a University of Michigan researcher.

Recommended for you

Egypt archaeologists find ancient writer's tomb

16 hours ago

Egypt's minister of antiquities says a team of Spanish archaeologists has discovered two tombs in the southern part of the country, one of them belonging to a writer and containing a trove of artifacts including reed pens ...

Study finds law dramatically curbing need for speed

Apr 18, 2014

Almost seven years have passed since Ontario's street-racing legislation hit the books and, according to one Western researcher, it has succeeded in putting the brakes on the number of convictions and, more importantly, injuries ...

User comments : 8

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Moebius
1 / 5 (5) Jul 18, 2013
The answer is simple. After age 85 you can no longer own or operate any vehicle with an automatic transmission. If you can't drive a manual, you shouldn't be driving. Most of these accidents occur because some old fart can't tell the difference between the brake and the gas. If they are used to operating a manual shift with a clutch they won't make that mistake easily. If they can't handle driving a manual that proves they shouldn't be driving. And yes, both mine are manual. I'll drive my vette over a hundred when I'm over a hundred.
rwinners
not rated yet Jul 18, 2013
hah. Many drivers have NEVER driven a stick! My grandmother didn't.. and in fact, didn't start driving until she was well into her '50s.
The better answer is peer counseling. Most elderly understand that their faculties are, if not failing, at least slowing. My grandmother and my mother both drove well into their '90s, and in Los Angeles, to boot. But they limited their trips the local grocery, church, a friend's home or a family visit. They both self-limited regarding freeways.
Emergencies were dealt with by making a call.
Old people are not stupid people, though some old people do suffer from dementia. Those last are the ones to look out for.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) Jul 18, 2013
The smarter cars get, the less we will have to do to drive them. A kid could get in your car and ask it to take him to the mall.

I saw 2 separate incidents within a few weeks where elderly people (man and woman) stepped on the accelerator instead of the brake. The guy ran into the side of a car dealership. The woman jumped the island in a parking lot and knocked over a light pole and sat there spinning her wheels and burning rubber for some 15 seconds.

This should be an easy fix for smart cars.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Jul 18, 2013
I don't know about the manual/auto thing, but everyone should be able to pass a motorcycle operators test. If you can't do so, turn in your license and sell your cars. The skills required for safe biking would improve everyone's driving skills, not to mention making the roads safer for riders.
Bigbobswinden
5 / 5 (1) Jul 19, 2013
There is no form of test for old drivers in the UK. Some are a danger and give cause for concern, but the real problem is youngsters who think they racing drivers when they know next to nothing of handling a fast car.
Humpty
1 / 5 (3) Jul 21, 2013
One of my older friends - mid 80's - cataract in his left eyes - 20% vision, stone deaf in one ear, can hardly hear out the other, - every time we have gone to a regional city, he almost put us in to the path of another vehicle with right of way, at a higher speed round-about... the other people mover thing, would have centre punched us, b) He refuses to slow down in areas where there are kangaroos, one night after driving me around in such an area, well over the speed limit, 110 - 120 in a 100Kmh limited zone.. well 3 weeks later he hit a kangaroo. c) He changed lanes onto a guy on a motor bike, etc., d) Ran a red light, entered an intersection and and and and

Time after time - he has almost NO idea what is going on, he never looks left, right or over his shoulder, he never uses the mirrors nor does he indicate, at all, much less for a reasonable distance.....

If it was not for me screaming "Watch out FOR...." - I have told the police etc. to revoke his license.
Humpty
1 / 5 (3) Jul 21, 2013
I think mandatory tests of VISION, HEARING, RESPONSE times to critical incidents, general wherewith all, as well as being able to handle a car in COMPLEX situations is a MUST.

Full medical, drug testing - the lot.

I think MANDATORY testing is a MUST - every 3 to 5 years must become compulsory.

OLD people are just too dangerous.
Bob_Wallace
not rated yet Jul 21, 2013
Just accelerate the technology we are starting to install. Crash avoidance is on the road right now.

Old people are only one part of our problem.

There are texters. Those are an immense danger and most of them are young.

There are drunks. They come in all ages.

And there are stupid kids. They're kids.

More news stories

Egypt archaeologists find ancient writer's tomb

Egypt's minister of antiquities says a team of Spanish archaeologists has discovered two tombs in the southern part of the country, one of them belonging to a writer and containing a trove of artifacts including reed pens ...