Supernova wrote:

Why shouldn't tests be so frequent for everybody since nobody is excluded from having bad drivers in their age group? 16 year olds. 20 year olds. 50 year olds. They all have members who screw up on the road, sometimes in large ways, so why shouldn't they all have to pay for it like everybody wants seniors to do?

Because I don't want it to cost $300 per year to license my sedan. Nor do I want to pay a fortune to renew my license. In a perfect world, people would have to take a road test more regularly. But there comes a time we have to be realistic. All these safety measures come at a cost. Bottom line is that we all take risks on the road. If that is too unsafe for anybody's ideal, then they have the option to move to a city where they can exist, without a vehicle.

RedBedroom wrote:

...do tests more frequently when a person hits retirement age. That would be the best way to determine who still can and who can't.

I am "retirement age" and I am a very good driver. So I should be subjected to more tests just because I am 65?

The point I have been trying to make here is that some of you must be quite young and don't realize that ppl age differently and that 65 is not the same as old and senile.

Actually, one of the deliterious effects of smoking cigarettes is impaired brain function. Perhaps cigarette smokers should take extra driving tests. Obese ppl could pose a threat as well (actually could keel from a heart attack at any moment - perhaps they should be medically cleared to drive a car) In the meantime the real threats are all those brainless cell phone users and the even more clueless ppl who think they can focus their eyes and mind on a text message and still drive.

I agree that old, impaired drivers are a threat. Just last week a teen girl was badly injured when an old woman ran over her on a sidewalk. This happens all the time here in South Florida where we got these ancient women driving Lincolns & big Caddys that they can't see over the dashboard.

But let's get our definition of "old" down and don't be like my teen grandson who thinks 45 is old.

Shale wrote:

Hmm, that's just five years away for me. So far I've had a "safe driver" status for the past 47 years. Guess experience dodging speeding, distracted kids on the hi-way doesn't really matter tho.


I presume you are talking about that 20-something driver busily sending some VERY CRUCIAL TEXT.

lol m on i-95 doing 70 n ppl r honk... NO SIGNAL

Well yes, that would go for ANYBODY...but do you dispute that STATISTICALLY, a 25 year old has much quicker reflexes than an 85 year old? How likely is it that a 80-something would be as likely to react quickly to an oncoming vehicle, or not be intimidated by defensive motorists during rush hour traffic? I'm not saying that all older drivers should be remanded to public transportation, but there is no denying that once someone reaches a certain age, their motor skills and other senses essential for operating a motor vehicle can falter a bit. See nothing wrong with monitoring elderly drivers a little closer just to make sure that they physically function well enough to handle to seriousness of driving a car.

RedBedroom wrote:

Because I don't want it to cost $300 per year to license my sedan. Nor do I want to pay a fortune to renew my license.

And senior citizens living on a fixed monthly income do?

Quote :

I am "retirement age" and I am a very good driver. So I should be subjected to more tests just because I am 65?

There has to be a starting age for it, so retirement age would be a good point to begin, which is why I named that age. Do I think that 65 year olds are safe on the road? Yes. But, once regular road tests begin at 65, dangerous drivers can be taken off the road once they have reached the age that they are no longer safe and it is less of an emotional hit for those a decade or so older than 65 who have to relinquish their license due to failing the test.

At best, the 65+ crowd would be subjected to eye tests more frequently. I think a big problem with retirement age drivers is that they do not accept the need for glasses. So you add that to reaction time being lessened, and it can be a bad situation.

In a perfect world, people would go in to renew and not know in advance what they were going to be subjected to...road test, eye check, or both, or none. And that is not by age, I am talking in general. At 21, (I think it was that year, or give or take) I had an eye test and just barely passed it.

Also, when I think of retirement age beginning the road tests, I think of my dad and his friends. They are early 70's and are mostly all drinkers in a small town who have now qualms about going into town for a few and then driving home. Now, I know that is not the norm, but in rural areas, I think that they are just naturally more carefree about it. Now, if they were held to regular road tests, maybe they would hold the ability to have a license more sacred and just be more careful in general.

Maybe a better idea would be to just have anyone and everyone who has been into a moving vehicle accident at their own fault be regularly subjected to road tests, regardless of age.

RedBedroom wrote:

At best, the 65+ crowd would be subjected to eye tests more frequently. I think a big problem with retirement age drivers is that they do not accept the need for glasses.

I think it's a safe bet that most people who are ever going to need glasses are going to need them LONG before they turn 65, I've had mine since I was 8 and everybody else I know who has to wear them started before they were even 15.

Well, my dad never needed, or admitted to needing them, until he was about 60.

And why is 60 good enough to be considered old or the starting process of old? That's not even old enough to hit retirement anymore, I don't know if it ever was, I always heard it was 65. And in recent years, people in their 60s have managed to break physical ability and endurance records that were previously set by people under 40, so I don't see why you get a few years older, a few more wrinkles, and all of a sudden EVERYBODY else knows what's better for YOU than YOU do. Try doing that with a 20 year old and what happens? You're trying to control their lives and refusing to admit they're an adult but at 60 that's apparently looking out for your best interests? Like I said, it's all good and well to say that now but I doubt when anybody here is in their 60s they're going to appreciate their kids or people who they don't even know, trying to do it to them.

Statistically old drivers are road hazards. Some are either unalert and drive like they're no lane markers or too friggin scared to go past 40. At a certain age yeah, I think it is time to stop driving and let somebody else take you where you need to go. WHAT age that is exactly, I don't know. There's a difference between "senior citizen" and "elderly". A 60-70 something with a good driving record, ok. 80-90 something, not so much.

GrayWolf wrote:

Statistically old drivers are road hazards. Some are either unalert and drive like they're no lane markers or too friggin scared to go past 40. At a certain age yeah, I think it is time to stop driving and let somebody else take you where you need to go. WHAT age that is exactly, I don't know. There's a difference between "senior citizen" and "elderly". A 60-70 something with a good driving record, ok. 80-90 something, not so much.

And yet if 102 year old women can be trusted to run chainsaws and not cut themeslves up in the process, and dig ditches in the yard and not keel over from a heart attack I'd like to think there's something to be said for older people as a whole who are proving their longer lasting activeness and alertness and showing more resilience to fading out than younger people are wont to think of as being the definition of old people as being old, disabled and helpless and need everything taken away from them for their own good.

Supernova, I am 34. I am in the starting process of old. My son is 11. He is in the starting process of old. The babies born today are in the starting process of old. It is all subjective.

Tony mentioned his dad and driving. So very awesome for Tony's family that his dad is being looked after as he is. Some people who reach an age where they are no longer safe to drive do not have the luxury to have a family member to say something. So, there really should be better analysis at the DMV to keep unsafe drivers off the road.

I try to NEVER use a message board poster's age to prove a point, so just know I am saying this with a kind heart...you are pretty young. You have hopefully never had to feel the heartache of having to tell an elderly person that they can't do something. You say, "People in their 60s have managed to break physical ability and endurance records that were previously set by people under 40, so I don't see why you get a few years older, a few more wrinkles, and all of a sudden EVERYBODY else knows what's better for YOU than YOU do."

Nobody here is talking about exceptions to the rule, we are speaking generally. And generally, the average 60 year old is not breaking records. And the average 70 and 80 year old are absolutely not worthless, but they do have limitations that maybe they did not have a decade or two prior.

I brought up your age simply because when you get older, I think you will have developed a greater appreciation for age limitations and have a more realistic view of it. Be it your parents aging, or your grandparents aging, you will get to see that certain things do slip. And if not, then that is awesome. But for the masses, we do see what happens to our loved ones once we, ourselves, age.

I hope all that made sense. I am in no way dismissing your age. My step daughter is 21 and she just had to deal with her maternal grandparents having to go into a retirement complex, and she did not understand fully on why they wouldn't want to keep their home. Fact was, they had many acres, and they aged to the point it was too hard to maintain, and they were too proud to ask for help.

My mom hasn't thought my grandfather has been driving well for about 10 yrs now. He just turned 82 last April. Has had a couple near misses that he insists weren't his fault. It got to the point where I would drive when they came to visit b/c he wouldn't use his turn signal. We were almost rear-ended once b/c he went thru a yield sign on an on ramp. "I was here 1st" per granddad, "but granddad you were supposed to YIELD"...nope he was not in the wrong, per him.

My grandmother, his wife, has dementia so she cant drive. It's about maintaining independence at this point. They still take 3-4 hr trips & he refuses to get or use a cell phone. It took so long for him to go from Wisconsin to my mom's house in Minnesota (over 6 hrs & its a 3 hr trip) that my mom was ready to call the state police. He still insists he can do the long driving. Everyone's fear is they are either going to be killed on the highway, or will kill someone else. He's still competent, so nothing we can do but I know he has poor judgment, if it was only local driving I wouldn't care as much, but its got to be his way.

Am glad I don't live in Florida where there are so many retirees. Have heard it is a big problem there.

Nystyle709 wrote:

LOL. What 102 year old woman YOU know is using a chainsaw to chop wood? Driving is not a RIGHT. So it's insane to think that they're 'rights' are being taken away. Nothing is being 'taken' from them if they aren't able to continue to do it. What aren't you getting? You be coming up with the craziest analogies.

1. Nobody I know, I read that several years ago in a magazine article about people in their 90s and 100s who were still well alive and kicking, doing things you'd think were best suited for younger people.

2. Okay, so it's a privilege, I'd still like to know how they could be sure that they don't hire anybody who has an ax to grind about old people. There are a lot of people in this country who have the mentality of 'you're old, you can die now and it wouldn't matter, so why should I bother with you?' and how would you be sure somebody like that wouldn't get the specific task of testing geriatrics to see if they still deserve the privilege of having their license?

Nystyle709 wrote:

Nobody is saying take a driver's license from anybody over 60.

Well, thank you.

Now would you all get off this over 60 jag. Maybe bump it up to over 70 but I will be over 70 in five years - don't know if I will have the same faculties that I have now, but hope so.

Is there anyone else on this board "over 60" to give testimony that most of us are not feeble and mindless incompetents at this age?

Geeze y'all have no concept of what "old" is.

I read a story in the paper tonight, in California a black Mercedes sped through a red light, struck a pedestrian, and then slammed into a school bus, causing the bus to turn over. The driver and his passengers fled the scene. The driver? A 17 year old boy.

Supernova wrote:

I read a story in the paper tonight, in California a black Mercedes sped through a red light, struck a pedestrian, and then slammed into a school bus, causing the bus to turn over. The driver and his passengers fled the scene. The driver? A 17 year old boy.

LOL. You just don't get it do you? I see it's just not registering. Read this one:

EDITORIAL - Bizarre Accident Shows Danger Of Elderly Drivers

It was early evening, about 8:30 when he decided to go for a drive. He backed his 2002 Chevy Malibu out of the driveway of his St. Petersburg home where he lived alone. His wife had died in 1998. Pinellas County resident Ralph Parker, 93, was traveling about 45 mph when he struck a man crossing the street, severing the pedestrian's right leg. The elder then drove three miles, apparently unaware the body of the 52-year-old man was stuck in the windshield, the head and shoulders inside the car with him with the torso laying across the hood. When police asked him what had happened, he said that the body seemed to drop from the sky. He thought maybe the body had fallen from a pedestrian overpass into his car. He's said to be suffering from dementia and was apparently unaware he'd been involved in any accident. A witness to the accident says the pedestrian walked off the center median in front of Parker's car on the three lane highway. She said that she saw the driver of the Malibu slam on his brakes, she heard a crash and then saw a leg airborne, losing a shoe before the limb came to rest on the shoulder of the highway. But the driver continued on to a toll booth, the head of the victim inside the car on the dash. Aghast, the toll booth attendant called police. Police took Parker's license and if he wants to regain his driving privileges, he'll have to pass a test. He last renewed his license in 2003 at age 91. His license wasn't due to expire until 2010. Police said he had a clean driving record with the exception of driving with an expired license plate. Should Parker have been driving? According to published reports, Parker's son who resided in Idaho was on his way to Florida as the accident happened as he had had reports that his father had been acting strangely. When is someone too old to drive? Will we know ourselves when it's time to stop driving? When we look at our parents and grandparents, how do we decide when its time to take their license away to keep themselves and others safe. To many, giving up their license is a highly emotional decision as it means the loss of their freedom and having to rely on others. The bizarre St. Petersburg accident with an elderly driver is just one of many that we read about---the car driven by an elderly woman that plows through a group of people standing on a sidewalk and crashes into a storefront after mistaking the gas pedal for the brake--the elderly man who ran a red light because he needed his glasses changed or the elder who can't remember how to get home and is found 30 miles away from his residence after he's reported missing. Unfortunately, there's no real answer to the question. You can't set an age limit, sometimes tests don't adequately give answers. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, older people have higher rates of fatal crashes per mile driven than any other group except young people. Factors such as Alzheimer's disease, the effects of medication, mobility problems and impaired eyesight are among the factors that can erode driving skills. What teens and elderly drivers have in common is that most of their age groups don't pay as much attention as they should behind the wheel. The issue of elderly drivers was discussed at the annual meeting of the American Gerontological Society. How can we get unsafe older drivers off the road without unfairly penalizing those who drive well? If government is to take driver's licenses away at a certain age, then the argument becomes that the elderly have few options to transport themselves to the doctor's, the store and post office. There are pros and cons on both sides. And consider this. When elderly drivers learned to drive, there weren't any high performance cars or power brakes or interstate highways, cruise controls or distractions like cell phones. Last year, a state report said that Florida was facing a "critical situation with its aging population". According to published reports, last year there were nearly 270,000 people age 85 or older licensed to drive in Florida and of those, at least 20% of them are considered "dementia drivers", according to a 2004 report. The problem is nationwide, not just Florida although the state has a higher number of elders than many other states. http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/olddrive/OlderDriversBook/pages/Chapter8.html Physicians Guide to Assessing and Counseling Older Drivers When Parker renewed his license in 2003 for another six years, he didn't have to take any road or written test. He didn't even have to take a vision test. The requirement that elders age 80 and older must pass a vision test when renewing their license went into effect two months after Parker had already renewed his license. The problem of elderly drivers is nationwide and must be addressed-become a priority for such groups as the AARP and other senior citizens groups and advocates. Public hearings are needed to gain input. Many people argue that the issue is over-sensationalized while others argue that additional testing would be costly and time-consuming. It must be placed in the proper perspective of saving lives and that one can't place a price on a life. Whatever the cost of implementing new rules and new programs, including even an annual mandatory safe driving course every year for drivers over 80, we can't wait any longer to address the issue. 10-25-05 © 2005 North Country Gazette

And this one:

Why was this man allowed to drive? Judge's anger over 86-year-old who maimed woman in horror smash


By Lucy Ballinger
Last updated at 12:01 AM on 25th October 2008
Allan Skoyles accidentally hit the accelerator instead of the brake, injuring three people

A judge has called for checks on elderly drivers after an infirm 86-year-old man ploughed into three pedestrians, maiming one and contributing to the death of another.
Allan Skoyles was registered deaf, had undergone eight heart operations and had suffered a stroke which left him barely mobile, but was still allowed to drive.
He was pulling up in his Ford Focus outside a church in Gorleston, Norfolk, when he accidentally pressed the accelerator instead of the brake.
The car mounted the pavement and hit an elderly couple, Joyce and Arthur Willett, and Emma Woolnough, 24.
Miss Woolnough had a leg amputated, while Mr Willett, 78, died three months later.
His family believe the crash in February led to the deterioration in his health. His 77-year-old wife remains in hospital with serious hip injuries.
At Norwich Crown Court on Thursday, Skoyles was given a suspended eight-month jail sentence for dangerous driving.
He was fined £2,000, ordered to pay £250 costs and banned from driving for three years.
Judge Peter Jacobs said he could not believe Skoyles had been allowed on the road, and added there should be checks on all motorists from the age of 75 to ensure they were still safe to drive.
He said: 'No one says this was deliberate or malicious but you should not have been in that car.
'It has been absolutely devastating for the woman who lost part of her leg.
'You have given her a life sentence. Someone else has subsequently died and another person is still in hospital.
'The problem is people are not going to say they are no longer fit to drive. They regard cars as essential.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080239/Why-man-allowed-drive-Judges-anger-86-year-old-maimed-woman-horror-smash.html#ixzz13WER5yVB


And this one:

Driver, 93, Crashes Into Store, Injuring 6

Cause Of Crash Under Investigation


POSTED: 10:19 am EDT June 2, 2009
UPDATED: 7:07 pm EDT June 2, 2009






Embed this Video

x

• 
  
  
  
  • Email
    


• 
  
  
  
  • Facebook
    
  • Digg
    
  • Twitter
    
  • Yahoo Buzz
    
  • Reddit
    
  • Delicious
    
  
  

Link








BOSTON -- A car being driven by a 93-year-old Peabody man crashed into a Wal-Mart in Danvers on Tuesday, injuring six people, including a 1-year-old girl, police said.

Stan Forman

The driver was apparently looking for a parking spot at about 10 a.m. when he hit the gas pedal instead of the brake, crashing through the store's glass doors.Among those injured in the crash were Elena Hayes, 26, and her daughter Michaela, 1, who was taken to Massachusetts General Hospital with suffering head trauma, NewsCenter 5's Jack Harper reported.The driver was identified by his son as Louis Vespini, of a resident of the Brooksby Village retirement community in Peabody."It sounded to me like he was going 40 mph, like he was stuck accelerating. It just went woosh really fast. I ducked, and glass just smashed," witness Steve Mahan said. "At first I thought it was a bomb. I ran and I saw the car in the front," witness Madeline Christoforo said.The car, a Toyota Camry, was still inside the store about an hour after the crash.

Stan Forman

Vespini's wife was also in the car at the time at the crash. Both were reportedly at home and doing well by Tuesday afternoon.A total of six people suffered minor injuries and were taken to local hospitals as a precaution, including the 1-year-old."The baby was in a carriage. As the operator drove through the store, he struck that carriage, knocked the mother down from behind the carriage, and baby fell out of the carriage," Danvers Deputy Fire Chief Kevin Farrell said.A store employee was also taken to the hospital after suffering a heart attack."Typically, this store, as you pull up there are crowds of people exiting the store. Today seemed to be a fairly quiet day. This could have been a lot worse," Farrell said.The store will reopen on Wednesday."We are cooperating with police in Danvers as they investigate an accident involving a vehicle and the Danvers Wal-Mart," store spokeswoman Ashley Hardie said. "Our thoughts and prayers are with the injured and their loved ones. This was a tragic accident." Copyright 2009 by TheBostonChannel.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.






This one too:


Older, dangerous drivers a growing problem

Updated 5/2/2007 2:31 PM

|

Enlarge By Damian Dovarganes, AP George Russell Weller, then 86, killed 10 people and injured more than 70 when he drove his car into a crowded farmers market in Santa Monica, Calif., on July 16, 2003.

By Robert Davis and Anthony DeBarros, USA TODAY
DALLAS — As his 90-year-old neighbor struggled last May to set out on a morning drive to the store, David Prager began to worry.

Elizabeth Grimes, a widow who had lived on Meaders Lane for 50 years, had backed out of her driveway, across her lawn and off the curb. Her 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis then hit the curb across the street, Prager recalls, before Grimes mistook the gas pedal for the brake and "took off with a jackrabbit start."
INTERACTIVE: How aging affects the ability to drive
RESTRICTIONS: A state-by-state look at the laws
WARNING SIGNS: When is it time to put brakes on elderly?

Six blocks away, Grimes drove through a red light. The car slammed into Katie Bolka, a 17-year-old high school junior who was driving to school to take an algebra test. Five days later, Bolka died.
The crash was emblematic of what health and safety analysts say is likely to be an increasing problem as the elderly population booms: aging drivers, clinging to the independence that cars give them but losing their ability to operate the vehicles, causing more accidents.
Fatality rates for drivers begin to climb after age 65, according to a recent study by Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, based on data from 1999-2004. From ages 75 to 84, the rate of about three deaths per 100 million miles driven is equal to the death rate of teenage drivers. For drivers 85 and older, the fatality rate skyrockets to nearly four times higher than that for teens.
The numbers are particularly daunting at a time when the U.S. Census Bureau projects there will be 9.6 million people 85 and older by 2030, up 73% from today. Road safety analysts predict that by 2030, when all baby boomers are at least 65, they will be responsible for 25% of all fatal crashes. In 2005, 11% of fatal crashes involved drivers that old.
Debates over how to prepare for a boom in elderly drivers are resonating in statehouses across the nation — including Texas, where Bolka's death has inspired the Legislature to pass a measure that could lead to more frequent vision tests and behind-the-wheel exams for drivers 79 and older.
The only measure scientifically proven to lower the rate of fatal crashes involving elderly drivers is forcing the seniors to appear at motor vehicle departments in person to renew their licenses, says the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), citing a 1995 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
But most states do not require older drivers to renew licenses in person, and only two — Illinois and New Hampshire — require them to pass road tests, which can be crucial in identifying drivers whose physical ability or mental awareness has diminished.
States have tried a range of approaches, but for the most part they have struggled to establish precise standards for determining when seniors should be kept off the road while being fair to older drivers who remain capable.
State laws are inconsistent on the issue, according to the IIHS, which researches factors that cause crashes. Most state driver's license laws require basic eye exams but typically cannot detect a driver's diminished physical capacity and cognitive awareness.No state has an age limit on drivers.
"It's a huge problem, and we really don't have any solutions to it yet," says Barbara Harsha, executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association. "We need to keep moving on it and try to find solutions as quickly as possible."
Safety and health specialists are especially concerned about drivers 85 and older, who, federal crash statistics show, are involved in three fatal accidents a day.
"You always hear about teenage (driver) risks being so incredibly high, but to me the amazing thing is there are two clusters you really have to focus on": teens and elderly drivers, says Paul Fischbeck of the Center for the Study and Improvement of Regulation at Carnegie Mellon.
Normal aging causes medical problems that affect driving. Reflexes, flexibility, visual acuity, memory and the ability to focus all decline with age. Medicines that treat various ailments also make it more difficult to focus and make snap decisions.
Elderly drivers are less likely than other drivers to be in crashes involving high speeds or alcohol, but they are more likely to crash at intersections where they miss a stop sign or turn left in front of oncoming traffic.
"Where single-vehicle rollovers can be described as a young person's crash, side impact appears to be an old person's crash," National Highway Traffic Safety Administration researchers Rory Austin and Barbara Faigin wrote in a 2003 study of crash occupants published in the Journal of Safety Research.
Crashes shine a spotlight
Even so, a series of incidents involving elderly drivers in the past few years has fueled the debate over how to deal with the risks they can pose. Among them:
•George Russell Weller, then 86, killed 10 people and injured more than 70 when he drove his Buick Le Sabre into a crowded farmers market in Santa Monica, Calif., on July 16, 2003.
His attorneys explained that Weller had confused his car's accelerator for the brake. He was convicted of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence.
A judge ruled that Weller was too ill to be imprisoned and sentenced him to probation and $101,700 in penalties. The case fueled a nationwide debate over how elderly drivers should be screened.
•Brian Fay, 19, was making change for a customer at a Sears store in Orlando on Oct. 9 when he heard what he thought was a bomb. Fay looked toward the store entrance and saw a pane of glass shatter and fall to the floor. Then he "looked down and saw (a) car barreling" toward him.
Elizabeth Jane Baldick, 84, drove her car into the cash register counter Fay was using, knocking him over. Bleeding, he rushed to check on Baldick, whose car had come to rest against a concrete pillar. Her foot was still pressed firmly against the accelerator, the tires screeching against the tiles on the floor.
Florida revoked Baldick's driving privileges in December, citing medical reasons, says Kim Miller of the Florida Highway Patrol.
The Grimes accident in Dallas is typical of many crashes involving elderly drivers, health and safety specialists say: It involved someone who was reluctant to give up her car keys, and who drove mostly on familiar roads near her home.
Elinor Ginzler, AARP's director of livable communities, says the elderly can "suffer because they are stuck at home" after giving up their keys. So they drive for as long as they can by going only where they must as their skills diminish.
"Many elderly drivers do what we call 'self-regulate,' " says Ginzler, whose association for seniors encourages its members to assess when they should give up driving. "They only drive the places that they know, on familiar roads, at certain times of the day."
As long as a driver can navigate such trips safely, "those are very, very good decisions to be making," she says. "Making a decision (not to) drive at night anymore is terrific. It means you recognize this isn't safe anymore."
AARP offers a Driver Safety Program at sites around the country and online.
The program is an eight-hour class for drivers 50 and older that deals with the effects of aging on driving. The organization's website, aarp.org, also offers advice for seniors and their adult children on how to stay safe.
Most elderly drivers decide to stop driving themselves. More than 600,000 drivers age 70 and older decide to give up driving each year, according to a 2002 study published in the American Journal of Public Health.
That's partly why insurance rates usually are only slightly higher for drivers 75 or older — and far lower than such rates for teenage drivers. Insurance analysts say the car insurance industry does not see a big liability threat from the rising number of elderly drivers because such drivers hurt themselves more than others and tend to stop driving on their own.
"When they realize they are driving in dangerous conditions they generally stop doing it," says Carolyn Gorman, vice president of the Insurance Information Institute, based in New York City.
"The industry views them as pretty much a self-policing group. Many elderly drivers do not drive at night. Many will make three right-hand turns instead of one left-hand turn."
Grimes, who died Jan. 15 from what Dallas County medical examiner Richard Baer says were complications from a stroke and old age, had cooked her own meals, cleaned her house and mowed her lawn — which she called her therapy.
Through their attorney, her family members declined to discuss her driving. But Grimes said after the crash that she frequently had made short trips around her neighborhood.
"I'm not going at any high rate of speed because I'm here, there and yonder along the way," she said about three months after the crash in a videotaped deposition for a lawsuit filed by Bolka's family. "This is my area."
Grimes' family members say they suspect she had a mild stroke the night before the crash that fatally injured Bolka, and the stroke caused a sudden decline in Grimes' ability to drive safely.
The lawsuit filed by the Bolkas was settled on Sept. 14 for an undisclosed amount.
Harsha says no state has a good "early warning system" when it comes to identifying elderly drivers in declining health.
The burden rests on spouses, family members, doctors and police to request that a license be revoked. Appealing for a state to revoke someone's driver's license on medical grounds is a cumbersome process, and such requests are rare.
What states are doing
Twenty-three states require licensed drivers of a certain age to appear periodically at a department of motor vehicles office to renew their license. In 16 states, older drivers must prove that they can see well enough to drive. Some states have tried other ways to identify drivers who, because of age-related health problems, put themselves or others at risk.
But the IIHS says such efforts have failed to accurately predict the risk an elderly driver may pose.
Without precise measures, analysts estimate that 500 good drivers would have to be taken off the road to prevent a single crash. Among states' efforts to restrict elderly drivers:
•California tested a three-tiered pilot plan for assessing drivers of all ages that included a driving knowledge test, cognitive screening and vision tests. People who failed the first tiers had to pass a road test. The 2003 study of 152 drivers did not predict who would go on to have a crash.
•Maryland conducted a study that found drivers who performed poorly on certain cognitive tests — such as following basic commands and repeating simple movements — were about 25% more likely than others to go on to cause a crash. Results of the study of 1,910 drivers ages 55 to 96 were published in January 2006 in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.
Maryland now uses such screening on a regular basis with drivers whose actions raise concerns about their cognitive abilities.
•Florida's requirement that drivers 80 and older pass a vision test resulted in the loss of a license for about 7% of elderly drivers seeking renewal, according to a study by the IIHS.
But nearly 20% of those 80 and older who needed to renew their license told researchers they decided to give up driving because they did not think they could pass the vision test.
"We don't know for sure if any of these (efforts) will prevent fatal crashes," says Russ Rader of the IIHS.
"But having drivers go in person for renewal allows the examiner to see the person and spot impairments. That can be effective."
'I did it. I'm terribly sorry'
David Prager, Grimes' former neighbor in Dallas, says there was little he could do to keep her off the road. "There was no way Mrs. Grimes was going to stop driving," Prager says.
Grimes said in her deposition — taken in the nursing home where she went after suffering two broken ankles in the accident that killed Bolka — that she "never had a reason until now" to discuss giving up her car.
Just before the fatal crash, Grimes' car had suffered front-end damage after an accident in a parking lot at the same intersection where Grimes struck Bolka.
"I had it repaired," she said in her deposition. "Everything was happy."
Bolka's family members say they pushed the Texas Legislature to pass the bill toughening the state's laws on bad elderly drivers because they believe states should be more aggressive in keeping such drivers off the road.
Right now, "the first level of defense is the driver," says Rick Bolka, Katie's father. "The second level of defense is the (driver's) family. The third level of defense is the (driver's) physician. We would like to see the state become the first level of defense. The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens."
Texas Sen. John Corona, R-Dallas, the Bolkas' state senator, said during a recent hearing that his mother "is blind, and they just renewed her license by mail."
The bill, which is scheduled to be signed soon by Texas Gov. Rick Perry, would require drivers 79 and older to appear in person for renewals and subject them to mandatory vision tests and behind-the-wheel exams if officials have any question about their driving ability. Drivers 85 and older would be required to renew every two years.
During his deposition of Grimes, the Bolka family's attorney, Peter Malouf, asked Grimes whether she understood that she had crashed into a young girl's car and killed her.
"I'm aware of that very sad story, yes," Grimes said. "Sure I did it. I'm terribly sorry. But I did it."
Malouf asked whether there was anything she would like to say to the family.
"What is there to say to people who have been hurt?" Grimes said. "That's best left alone, I think."
Davis reported from Dallas and McLean, Va.; DeBarros reported from McLean. Contributing: Katie Holeman and Susan O'Brian.

Nystyle709 wrote:

I know what 'old' is. Why are you assuming? Over 60, over 70, over 80........so what. We are just throwing out random numbers for ages. Nobody is setting nothing in stone as being 'old'. Sounds like you're taking it personally. If a 60 yr old got Alzheimer's, do you think they should be driving? The bottom line is elderly (feel better now?) people shouldn't be driving if they aren't fit to. And a lot of them aren't fit to. Determining what's consider 'old' or 'elderly' is so not the issue.

Of course I take it personally and the "random" numbers being thrown out are "retirement age" (65) and "over 60, over 70, over 80 ...so what."

Well between 60 and 80 is a 20-year spread. A 60-year-old is not an 80-year-old, just like a 30-year-old is not a 50-year-old. Go see the thread - they have been lumped together.

And mental debilitation, while more common in elderly can hit at any age - including yours. But the thread is about elderly not about Alzheimers or dementia or other mental debilitation.

Yes, I agree there should be some more concrete way to take dangerous drivers off the road and just like drunks who don't realize the dangerous state of their condition, elderly ppl with dementia also need outside intervention or they will continue getting behind the wheel. But these are family, friends and doctors who know this condition and should do something. My own mother made her decision not to drive with my sister's coaxing. It is a hard moment and ppl are loathe to give up that independence, but it must be done.

But how to do it?

Kral wrote:

First and foremost, driving is not a right...it is a privilege. I do think that EVERYONE should be re-roadtested every 3-5 years or so. I find that many drivers make many mistakes, it drives me absolutely nuts!

Add to that vision re-testing. If you can safely operate the vehicle, age shouldn't be an issue. If you can't then you shouldn't be driving.

alan smithee wrote:

Add to that vision re-testing. If you can safely operate the vehicle, age shouldn't be an issue. If you can't then you shouldn't be driving.

Exactly. When a person's vision is so bad they are driving down a sidewalk, that person should not be driving.

Just to be fair, I do think that the procedure to being (and remaining) a licensed driver should be held to a strict standard for everyone. As for older, 70+, drivers, I say when they go in for their annual checkup, their doctor should give a general analysis if they feel said senior is physically up to the task of driving. The DMV should ask to see this, and from there proceed accordingly.