• Feb 9, 2006
The U.K. Times reports that the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) is submitting a proposal that all motorists 75 years and older be required to pass a written exam and an eyesight test to obtain their license. The tests are then repeated every five years.
The DVLA is basing its proposal on the increased number of 70 plus year old drivers on the road due to higher life expectancy and the elderly's desire to maintain an active lifestyle. The proportion of people 70 years and older still driving increased from 15 in 2004. The Institute of Advanced Motorists points to studies that show elderly drivers have a greater chance to be involved in injurious or fatal accidents with causes ranging from slowed reaction time, to confusion over traffic rules and complex road configurations.

While there are current laws in the U.K. requiring elderly drivers to declare medical conditions that might affect their driving, DVLA’s research shows only 10% of affected drivers admit their condition.

Remarkably, the article reports this interesting factoid: as of November 2005, there were 34 licensed drivers in the U.K. aged 101 plus.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 15 Comments
      • 8 Years Ago
      Driving is not a right. And I agree with others, I've seen as many poor younger drivers as older drivers.

      I think we should have a required driving and written test everytime we renew. At least it would refresh our memories.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Driving is not a right.
      There is a huge need for this sort of testing here in the states. Too bad the AARP lobbies and sues against this sort of thing.
      One reason for these troubles in the states are likely because of crazy people who think driving is a right.
      • 8 Years Ago
      And, #3, mavkato, why do you think they tell you that? When somebody tells you something is not a right, you should question their motives. The more people who believe the lie, the easier it is to take the right away for unrelated reasons. Why don't you think driving is a right? Why do you believe them?

      • 8 Years Ago
      Ummm...yea we definately need this stateside. Countless times have I almost become roadkill or been tboned by some senior who can't see. But it is a privilege not a right, I just took drivers ed. They told me that too. No where in the constitution does it say that people have a right to drive.
      • 8 Years Ago
      OK, so Mr. Law School is the third person or so to say driving is not a right, without offering any explanation. Why are breathing, eating, and marriage rights when driving isn't? what is so funamentally different about it? In a free society, who has the right to tell you it's not a right? Sorry Mr. Lawyer, but you too have been fooled into giving up your rights.

      Jim
      • 8 Years Ago
      It is not the senior citizens that I see more of nearly clipping the parking lights off of cars they pass, and give no signal when they wheel across two or three lanes, exceeding the speed limit by 20-30 miles per hour. However, I am in total agreement that ALL drivers of ALL ages be tested every five years or so, vision, written, and driving, regardless of age, 16-130. Does that suit the people who drive on the roads as if they were on race tracks, who, for one reason or another, cannot drive on a track? I promise those youthful barrels of wisdom that as they (youngsters) grow older, their seniors will have learned a lot. Use turn signals . . . obey speed laws . . . practice courteousy . . . and live long, happy lives.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Sorry, typo, should have had Gort do a word check for me. I meant to say "rolling" through (stop signs) at 20 while nearly on two WHEELS.
      • 8 Years Ago
      It's not in the Constitution because it's not a federal law. It's a State law and that's why you have to pass a state driving exam to get your state-issued drivers license.
      There are laws against operating a vehicle w/o a license. The state government decides who gets a license and who doesn't. If you don't like those laws, feel free to write your governor (not senator, pls) a letter.
      There are no laws against breathing, sleeping, or eating.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Hooray! Now if only they'd do it in the US, and add a DRIVING test!

      Driving is a right, but it's fair to make sure people will do it safely so they don't trample other people's rights by running them over.

      .
      • 8 Years Ago
      Driving is a right. Driving on public roads is a privilege. We can get into a big argument about the government's role in transportation and whether they should be there or not, but as it stands right now... the government owns the public roads. Driving on them is a privilege.
      • 8 Years Ago
      On my first day of driver's ed about 10 years ago, the first thing they told us is that driving is a privelege, not a right.
      • 8 Years Ago
      The sad fact is, the reason we don't have general testing of the population with proper, periodic, real driving tests (as tough as European or British tests) is because our economy would collapse when 90% of the drivers of all ages, failed to pass them and had to stay HOME!

      Just look at the idiotic moves you see out there - some of them you might even see in your own "vanity mirror" on your own vehicle's sunvisor.

      People talking on cell phones (this makes them as dangerous as drunks - it's been proven). Chronic tailgating (do we need more roads, or perhaps should we think about commuting solo in something just a tad smaller than the F-150/monster SUV/"mini"van of 4800 pounds?) (what about just plain decent courtesy and consideration of others? Sorely, sorely lacking).

      Chronic speeding WAY above the posted limit (how about we actually lift all speed limits by 10 mph then actually enforce the rules, instead?) Zig zagging. Passing on the right. People parked at or below the speed limit in the fast lane ("by golly, you aren't going past me").

      People driving through red lights. People who don't understand the concept of what a STOP sign means and "rolling" through at 20 while nearly on two weeks - while pulling right in front of 55 mph traffic, causing them to brake - hard.

      Yeah, one thing though, 90% less traffic would make my daily commute a lot less stressful. (I've passed one of the most stringient worldwide driving tests - in which over 55% fail the first time and over 70% of re-testers fail their next test, and next, and next).
    • Load More Comments