Mandatory driving tests for seniors?

**MULTIPLE CHOICE**

Never done a poll before but after a conversation with my oldest last night I got to thinking and wanted some input.

Different sons, same circumstances.......

Elderly drivers turning left totally oblivious to pedestrians in the crosswalk have struck both my sons on busy
city streets. Neither received any serious injuries thank heaven, but what if it had been someone who wasn't
paying as much attention to traffic. What if it had been school children?

Neither driver stopped to communicate with them, guess if they're still walking and talking the hit doesn't
count?

Luckily for the latest driver, that son has more self control........just a dirty look and no words exchanged.
Younger son decided seeing as his body flying off the hood of the car wasn't enough of a wake up his fist
pounding a dent into their hood might get the message across.

How do you feel about legislation compelling senior drivers to be retested on a regular basis?


**Let me add to this that my father drove into his late 60's, till the year before his death. He NEVER took a
driver's test, just sent his money in the mail and got his license. He was an accident waiting to happen......
and was the cause of many minor ones, as well as sending many walkers back-peddling for the sidewalk.

Wait,if you are going to do mandatory tests on seniors(who by the way where I live are tested every 5 years) because your sons got hit?

Let me give you yet another scenerio,17 year old,hits child on bike while texting,leaves child in the middle of the street and drives away.Should all
17 year olds have mandatory driving tests?

Drunk 35year old driver kills 3 in headon colllision,mandatory testing for all 35 year olds?

Sorry,you cannot group all senior drivers into one pile and punish all for the misdeeds of 1 or 2 people

Yorkie, believe me I do see your points and they are valid.

I haven't just looked at this because of what happened to my boys. I felt this way when my father drove, he should have been test and likely should have been on a restricted license. I feel this way about my husband's driving, he is a bad (and sometimes even dangerous) driver. I now do almost 100% of the driving. Heck, it won't be that many years when I would be one of those that would qualify if something like this became law and I know I am not as alert or reactive now, as I was when I first started driving .

I live in a rural but growing area. There is a great proportion of seniors. Every day I see incidents or near incidents involving seniors. I follow behind them driving 30 kmph to and from work and also have them tailgating me when I'm doing the speed limit. Just where I work they have put our business sign on a permanent tilt, nearly caved in our overhanging roof by constantly running in to the support posts and on two occasions have only stopped when they have hit the picnic tables that set against the front of our store, on the walkway. We've even had one drive in reverse into our garden center, not stopping till they hit a pallet of limestone........in the effort to drive 'out' of the parking lot.

I know that there are medical issues that constitute removal or limitation of drivers......of all ages. Seniors are more prone to health problems because of age and reflexes are not what they used to be.

I realize that drivers of all ages are responsible for some of the most horrific accidents but honestly feel that as a 'group' seniors have more potential to cause or be involved in them. It has nothing to do with inattention, substance abuse, excessive speed or anything else that is covered by the motor vehicle act. It's simply more a matter of age's affects on the body and mind.

I'm sorry if I made it appear that I'm targeting seniors based on my sons' experiences, those were just the triggers that got me back to thinking on a subject that has been on the back of my mind for more than 30 years and based on personal experience and accident reports from my own province.

I do respect your opinion and feelings on this and hope you understand where I'm coming from as well.

I understand Rottnmom,and I do respect your views,which is a nice way of having a debate and I love it


Let me just say that in the communities that I travel in,it is just the opposite,and I find it very disturbing to watch the young drivers in this area,that spend half their time driving drunk and the other half texting

The seniors in my area,you will rarely see on the highways,but you will follow them for 2 blocks to the post office and always be aware if they see something of interest they may very well hit the binders


It is such a diverse population in my area,and I applaud the seniors who drive,in town, only as we all know them and we all watch out for them,however I also understand that this can not happen in a more populated area

I truly believe that for every poor driver that is a senior,there are 5 drunks on the hiway that I have to be ever aware of

A wonderful (and costly) way to monitor those who are convicted of DUI (and who hopefully didn't injure anyone) is a breathalyzer installed in the vehicle. Our own delivery driver who had about an 8 hr round trip every day from our warehouse to stores spread far and wide, was convicted and lost his license for a couple of years. In order for him to continue working our head boss had one of these devices installed in the truck he drove. It would 'beep' approx. every 20 min or so and he would have to breathe into it. Any sign of alcohol and the truck shut down. Inconvenient, but effective in that case.

Too bad the cost would be prohibitive for widespread use.......I'm so sick of seeing people I know have no license due to DUI pulling out of the pub parking lot Thurs and Fri nights across the road from work and weave their way down through the village. But then again, knowing that they would likely find a way around it by borrowing another car or having a designated 'blower'

Every year, just as school is ending we lose 3-4 young people (sometimes more) out celebrating the start of summer.........and every year the message is hammered home, only to be shortly forgotten.

I agree,but it is the same for the drunk as it is for the senior,take away their license and what do we get? A bunch of uninsured drivers on top of everything else

I think all in all everyone should have to take a driving test at random,kinda like random drug testing and maybe that would slow some of the crap down,but I
seriously doubt it.

Where your boys got hit by elderly drivers,my step son was killed by a drunk driver,so I absolutely know where you are coming from

And why is no one else debating with us LOL

Yorkie, I'm so sorry! I didn't know that. More basis for your conviction. Was the driver ever charged, or better yet sentenced to anything besides a slap on the wrist?

And yes, I certainly agree about everyone being tested. Maybe a program for a yearly health/driving check for everyone.... pro active health and motor vehicle 'maintenance'. Maybe throw in a few psych exams for good measure.

Myself I know I have days where I likely shouldn't be driving, too tired to concentrate properly. THose are the days that other than the 5 min drive to work, I won't even venture to the shopping center for anything. I can survive a day without whatever it is rather than risk the slight chance of anything happening.

There was nothing done,the driver of the car that hit my stepsons head on was killed also along with 3 besides my son in our car,it was a lot of years ago and the pain has subsided,but I hate a drunk worse that anything.A senior I can deal with most days LOL

I have come to realize I do not see as well at night as I would like,so I resolved the problem by never driving at night for any reason,made an arrangement with the neighbor that I would drive my kids and hers in the daylight and she would pick them up at night and so far it is working out really well

The driving test should be about 2 hours long. The short little tests they make people take now, you can fake being a good driver. If the test was longer some people would "forget" it was a test and fall back into their normal way of driving. Imagine being a text and drive type and your phone goes off 30x during your test, it'll be a huge distraction because you can't answer it and you will drive erratically (like you normally would) because you spend half your time worrying about who texted you.

Another good point fleas. Between the technical distractions and all the modern gadgets (gosh that really does make me sound old) on vehicles today, eliminating the need to pay as much attention to the actual act of driving......I really wonder just how much of an advantage new technology is.

If you think about it, you push a button to open you doors/trunk, another to open you gas cap, your headlights turn on automatically, built in gps and cell capability (you don't have to have a phone in your hand to be distracted by a call, just check out some of those having a conversation with thin air).........hell, now they're making cars that will parallel park FOR YOU! Kids are becoming immune to human conditions and can blast bodies left and right without a second thought after years of video games. How are all the 'done for you' perks on our vehicles affecting our attention and concentration to what is going on outside of the steel box?

While I still have a vehicle that needs it's headlights turned on during daytime (MV regulations) one click of a button and my door is unlocked, my side and rear view mirrors are set to 'me mode', my seat moves itself to 'my' position and the bloody radio goes to 'my' 10 preset stations.......sometimes I wonder when we'll just point and touch a screen and our wheels will take us where we want to go without any human interaction at all. Heaven help pedestrians and other drivers then.

How many parents are responsible for this stuff going on?

How many of you have bought your kids cell phones,video gaming systems,allow them to watch TV whenever they want and watch what they want?
How many are guilty of in fact encouraging some of it?

I will answer my own questions first

No cell phones for my teens or preteen

No unlimited TV here

No unlimited Playstation or what ever the newest craze is here


Does that make me a mean mom in their eyes HELL YES and I am glad

yorkiemom wrote:

How many parents are responsible for this stuff going on?

How many of you have bought your kids cell phones,video gaming systems,allow them to watch TV whenever they want and watch what they want?
How many are guilty of in fact encouraging some of it?

I will answer my own questions first

No cell phones for my teens or preteen

No unlimited TV here

No unlimited Playstation or what ever the newest craze is here


Does that make me a mean mom in their eyes HELL YES and I am glad

I don't have a tv, cell phone, or a video game system. I hate me for it too, although I really don't care about a cell phone.

As for the van, it has power locks and windows, that's it. I like it that way, a lot less crap that can go wrong.

well now that we have gone way off topic here LOL as any good debate should I am still not so certain that seniors should be picked out of the crowd of idiots on our highways to be required to take mandatory testing,I do however believe if a Doctor or the police say they need to park it then that should happen,just remember it is not going to stop them from driving,they will now just do it illegaly because some have no other option to get where they need to go

It really is something that is hard to make a blanket statement on ......that's why I wanted to see other input. I personally know an elderly lady, who due to strokes and a couple of accidents, is restricted to only driving on 100 series highways.....meaning she cannot drive city streets. Because of where she is located she can access a hwy within two blocks and travel to the restaurant where I used to work. We used to hear comments from other customers who had travelled behind her or met her as they both entered the parking lot.....none could understand why she was allowed to drive at all. As she had ready transportation from several sources, neither could we.

What I don't understand about this restriction is that if they felt she is a ( for lack of a better word) threat.....how much less of a threat is she on the hwy as opposed to city streets? Granted there are more pedestrians, but the likelihood of a much more catastrophic accident would occur at higher speeds......or am I way off here?

I also know seniors who are, from what I can judge, excellent drivers. I guess I've just seen too much of the 'one side' to be totally unbiased.

It's great to get feedback and opinions.....while it may make for more questions it also points out that there often are no real easy answers

I guess my concerns about seniors mandatory driving is based on living in a rural area
as we all know families have moved farther and farther away,no public transportation out here,7 miles to the nearest grocery store,no meals on wheels,no drs. that have a clinic in a town of under 200. what would we do to better their lives if we take that from them?

I realize there are many that need to give it up,but when I look around me I think,how the hell do they get to town to do what needs to be done

You know that sparked an interesting (or weird) idea of 'zones'. With rural zones being the most accessible and highly populated, heavily trafficked areas being the most restricted? Similar in a sense to graduated licensing, but relative to the amount of car and pedestrian traffic one is liable to encounter.

In this sense, those in rural areas with less or non existent means of travel would be able to get around while those in high traffic areas, who have access to alternative transportation, would be required to make use of the options.

OMG, I think I'm starting to ramble here.......this would be one of those times I shouldn't be driving, too many hamsters on the wheel.

You might be on to something there rottn,but on the other hand (playing the devils advocate) why would they in the rural area have any more right to driving than those in the higher populated areas? How do you carry home your months worth of groceries on a bus? I am sure most seniors cannot afford a taxi

I guess I'm basing it on the services available to seniors in Halifax, Dartmouth and surrounding areas, with their Access-A-Bus as well as the volunteer organizations. Seniors can book a seat with either, to be picked up, taken to appointments, shopping or whatever, then returned to their home ........ all free of charge.

Sadly I'm sure services like that are not widely available. (but sure as hell should be, everywhere)

I voted "Upon recommendation (doctors, police, insurance)". I was watching a segment on 20\20 one time. I know one of my favourite tv shows. Anyhoo, they had a segment about people who lived to be in their hundreds. There was one lady who was around 105 years old and was still driving. She actually was a good driver, though she didn't drive in high traffic areas or big cities. She did fine driving around in the little, laid back town she lived in.

On the other hand my great uncle, who is battling heart issues was driving a few months ago, when I was telling my mom that his driver's license should have been revoked. My uncle stubborn as a mule or his wife (who doesn't drive due to being blind), didn't get it through their thick skulls. What if he had a heart attack while driving, got into an accident an injured or killed someone. His heart now is only working at 8%, and he hasn't been driving. Doctor's need to step in early and recommend that a senior's license be revoked due to whatever medical reasons they feel the person would be a danger behind the wheel.

I am going to say that I think that Seniors should be tested maybe every year or two after the age of 75 depending on their health. I know some peppered 80 year olds who have it all together and are completely competent, but then I know some younger who should not be on the roads at all. I think it is unfair at the same time to descriminate against age but I think that to me safety is the main priority and that is their personal safety as well as the general public.

I remember the last time Steve was at the Drive Smart Centre there was an elderly gentleman who had to do the eye test and the lady was trying to help him to no avail and he lost his license. He was very bummed for this man and the impact that would have on him but at the same time it is hard to justify allowing him to keep driving, to me safety comes before sympathy.

yorkiemom wrote:

How many parents are responsible for this stuff going on?

How many of you have bought your kids cell phones,video gaming systems,allow them to watch TV whenever they want and watch what they want?
How many are guilty of in fact encouraging some of it?

I will answer my own questions first

No cell phones for my teens or preteen

No unlimited TV here

No unlimited Playstation or what ever the newest craze is here


Does that make me a mean mom in their eyes HELL YES and I am glad

Guess I'll go OT again here.......

kids only had cell phones when they were working and could afford to buy them AND pay their bill

Super Nintendo made it's way into the house split between four kids, weekends only (NOT during daytime in good weather)

TV, only after schoolwork, housework, sports or other activities........in the livingroom .....our bedroom was the diningroom, so there was always family viewing

OK, back on track


Edited to add.....the only kid that had access to a vehicle was the one in university, was cheaper to buy a used car then pay rent in town.......lasted one year through winter driving on the highway and a scholarship that allowed him more flexibility.......car sold

Made for pissy teenagers when the only way to a party and back was Mom or Dad

I am going to go back and restate what I already said,seniors are the least of our worries,I have a whole lot more concern for the drunks and druggies that are behind I believe statisics say 1 in every 7 vehicles you see on the highway

This spring in Dartmouth NS.............how do you stop someone like this? (not being sarcastic, honestly sickened and horrified)

"Naugle has 68 previous convictions, 22 for impaired driving, since 1974."



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2010/02/12/ns-naugle-sentencing-judge.html#ixzz0y3IXTzGp

That is my point rottn,a few seniors galloping down the hiway at 40 mile an hour is the least of my worries with all the other stuff we have going on with drunks

there is no way to stop them or the seniors in reality,take their privileges away and they will drive anyway

Very interesting conversation

We as a family took away my grandparents licence. Well papa lives in the middle of nowhere... But we make sure he has everything.. and he drives his quad around the farm..

they just didn't have the reaction time that they needed.

Yorkie... as for the drunks. I understand and agree with you 100 percent. They will just drive anyways.. Too bad you can't put like an electric bracelet on them.. that locks all cars or stering wheel if they have been convicted