The European Union wants elderly people (70+) to undergo medical tests from now on to prove that they are still capable of driving a car every five years. However, the proposal has been met with a lot of criticism.

  • Max_Power@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Very good. As a german, I’d welcome this.

    However, expect heavy pushback from the German automotive industry. They are for Germany what the NRA and weapons manufacturer lobby is to the US.

  • 雨 月@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good Idea. It’s widely accepted that cognitive capabilities can decline rapidly with old age. It simply makes no sense that a person that needs 8 tries and 10 minutes to change the station on their TV is still allowed to operate a two ton death machine without any checks in place.

    The important part here is to make it so that it ONLY “catches” declined driving capabilities and is not also biased in terms of social and financial status or maybe if you’re an immigrant or something.

  • FarFarAway@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everyone mentions cognitive abilities, which is also important, but really physical abilities should be tested as well.

    Here in america, My 89 y.o. grandmother (at the time) used canes to get around. Got her license renewed just by a written test, no one batted an eye. The fact that she “walked” in was enough and no one saw that she would physically have to pull her leg up to push the brake pedal.

    She got into quite a few fender benders after that, and 1 pretty bad accident that totalled her car. That bad accident was responsible for a huge decline in health. She cant drive any longer, but between the insurance and the burden on family to support her ailing health, it all could have been avoided if they required a doctor’s signature for renewal.

    I do realize that something like this takes away from feeling independent and maintaining autonomy, and i feel for that. It sucks that part of growing old is…well, growing old, but should those emotions outweigh personal and public safety?

    • theangryseal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      There was a man who lived on my street who drove way way way into old age. His car was literally covered from front to back in dents. You’d see him walking to his car so slowly it was painful. He’d struggle to get the door open, hop in, and take off. It seemed like he had a new dent every time he came home.

      I knew another man though, WWII vet, 98 years old. His wife was 93. He’d come to my store and buy cigars for himself and cigarettes for the wife. He had no issues getting around at all. I was legit shocked when I found out how old he was. His health deteriorated so quickly seemingly out of nowhere and he was still trying to drive, but fortunately his daughter stepped in and put an end to it.

      Now his daughter has dementia. One day she stopped in to buy cigarettes for her mom and she asked me if I knew her son. It kind of took me by surprise. I’ve known the whole family for 20 years at this point.

      Her son had a serious car accident in the mid 2000s and he’s been in a wheelchair since. He lost both of his legs, half of one of his hands, fingers burned off at the ends on the other. He barely survived.

      She was telling me about the accident like it had just recently happened. She was crying, said almost word for word what she’d said to me all those years ago while he was in the hospital. Such a surreal experience.

      Next time I seen her she asked me again, “Do you know my son?”

      Then she tried to pay for her fuel 3 times back to back.

      She’s still driving. Everyone knows that she’s experiencing these problems including the local police, but she’s still out there driving around.

    • JesusChrist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like this makes for a good argument for adequate public transit in the United States. If elderly people had access to public transit, then they might not feel like they are losing their independence if they can’t drive.

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There’s a pretty serious concern here about the mobility and independence of the elderly… but that can’t be put over and above public safety. I see either very anxious and hesitant, or completely off with the fairies and uncaring elderly drivers on a frequent basis.

    They wouldn’t get anywhere near a licence if they had to demonstrate their competence even once more, let alone semi-regularly.

    • ChrystalBlurbs@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Mobility for the eldery IS important but IMHO there should be affordable, easy accessible options without the use of a personal vehicle. Otherwise it get’s harder and harder for the eldery to participate in social activities which are beneficiary to mental health and prevent early symptoms of Alzheimers disease.

      • cestvrai@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here in the Netherlands I see a lot of old people being bussed around point-to-point with minibuses. Likely limited to the bigger cities though where there also better normal public transit options.

      • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, indeed, nobody actively wants the elderly to be forced in to solitude and isolation. If anything, the advent of driverless vehicles would be of greatest benefit to them rather than tech bros who want a nap.

  • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Medical tests?? bleh. Driving is driving, health is health. All drivers should have a to retake basic driving tests at an increasing rate until by the age of 70 where it maxes out at once per 5 years or something.

    • LemmyLefty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree, especially since medical tests won’t show the driver slowing down as they enter a roundabout or taking a full minute to shift lanes or positioning themselves so they can’t even look in the rearview mirror.

      A ton of driving is about behaviors and tendencies. A driver that has no awareness of other drivers is a dangerous driver, regardless of how good their heart, eyes, or reaction time. Dementia obviously affects this, but you can get a clean bill of health from your doctor and then drive off home in the left lane at 5 below the speed limit because other people are just going too damn fast.

  • Phreak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is quite a brilliant idea. Although we could argue that everyone of all ages should be somewhat tested every x years. The amount of people that are over confident and forget things on the road is quite scary.

    • Pika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I kind of agree with this, I do think that an exam should be done every so many years, but I don’t think that full on driving test should need to be done. At most maybe a minimal test like make sure you can still do intersections fine and make sure you still know how to use your blinker in Etc but honestly I don’t feel like a full-on test is going to be beneficial for anything, a timed exam with common sense questions such as who has the right away in this situation, or when is it appropriate to go through a yellow, basic stuff

      In the case of the eu, this isn’t an actually a driving test; it is more so of a medical test so like vision and memory tests to verify that you still have situational awareness, which I think will do tremendously more then your standard driving test where you may not even hit a situation that requires a lot of situational awareness

      • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think that full on driving test should need to be done

        A full on driving test should be done at least once though. Where I live (Pennsylvania), the “driving test” is basically going around the block and then parallel parking one time. In no sense can it be considered as a comprehensive test of a driver’s command of a wide range of potential situations.

  • Loui@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    If they would do that we would finally get a strong lobby for decent public transport!

  • Jomn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This would be great. We should also require all drivers to pass small exams every ~10 years in order to assert that they are up to date with new laws and new types of infrastructure.

  • WHATaDEMAGE@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah this is really good. My wives grandfather is still allowed to drive, but I wouldnt go anywhere near him when hes driving.

  • FleetingTit@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, please make it happen! There was a subreddit called /r/RentnerFahrenInDinge (pensioners driving into things) that was full of new articles of elderly people being completely clueless in traffic.

  • Mininux@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly seeing how people drive ~10 years after getting their licence I think we need a kind of test every 10 years, not necessarily because of declining cognitive capacity but just generally forgetting about safety

    although it would be pretty expensive to check absolutely everyone

    • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with this except im too cynical to believe people just forget about safety. People learn to pass the test and then drive how ever the hell they like. Granted alot of people are safe but i see far too many people just completely disregarding anyone else on the road and their only goal is to get to the front of the line as fast as possible and screw everone else.

      They can retake their test, they will drive safely and carefully that one day and then go right back to being selfish idiots.

      I would maybe go as far as to say thst there is a requirement to have a black box installed in all cars that gets switched off/removed after a number of years of safe driving. And if you drive badly or unsafely then your insurance goes up every year until you prove you are safe.

      Maybe it goes up by x amount £100 or like 10% or 20% a year until you stop driving badly but remains at the price it was when you start driving safe for 3 years before dropping back down to the price it would be without the increases you incurred. That would stop people from trying to cheat the system.

      It may be extreme but if you are driving safely you have nothing to worry about.

      Of course we would have to nail down exactly what counts as unsafe driving so it wasnt overly/unjustly critical.

      I mean… maybe its a bad idea. But again. If its not you then you needn’t be worried.

      • brainrein@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here in Germany your insurance fee goes down every year you don’t cause an accident. But if you cause an accident it will go up again.

  • OnlineAccount150@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I support this. Cognitive function obviously declines as you get older. And elderly people have been lucky enough to live their lives. What if an 80 year old goes out driving, is quite infirm or easily distracted, and kills a 20 year old driver? That 20 year old has the chance to live stolen from them, while the 80 year old already got to live their life.

    • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In Germany he’ll get a few month license suspension and pay a fine of a couple hundred to a thousand euros.

      Every other month there is news of an elderly drover killing someone under gross violation of traffic laws, e.g. driving on the wrong side of the road, accessing one way lanes from the other side, speeding, crossing red lights etc. Then the court rules that granny is seriously sorry, but sze explained that she needs the car, so out and about again. Doesnt matter if she already killed people in a traggic accident that was 100% her fault.

    • DzikiMarian@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly what do you expect to affect most of the people in their twenties or thirties in 5 years, that would justify this massive expense of time and money?

    • JesusChrist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That seems expensive to enforce. It would make more sense for people to be tested every 10 years till age 68, every 5 years till age 78, then every two years after that.

    • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It shouldn’t. That’s a monumental administrative task. My gov can barley keep up with issuing passports. Imagine having to reissue drivers licenses with a check up every 2 years for everyone…