Frank Pasquale at Concurring Opinions and Scott Greenfield at Simple Justice have focused this weekend on a very important topic: What can/should be done about the safety issues created by Driving While Elderly? Can the marketplace effectively and equitably work it out through insurance rates and tort cases? Should states impose frequent testing on older drivers? Is AARP a force for improved safety or stubborn resistance?
the old man stops
at a green light —
driving toward sunset…………… by dagosan
In a Comment today at Simple Justice, I said:
Since we’re pointing at AARP, I thought I’d try to find information on their relevant policies. I found an article in the AARP Bulletin, called “When is it time to quit driving?” and a dissenting reaction to a Fox news item that knocked AARP. The AARP Bulletin article has some interesting info, as does this AARP page on driving safety.
It appears that “In fact, while the AARP does oppose legislation that would require additional driving tests based solely on age, AARP supports legislation requiring driver assessments for all.” Of course, testing everyone for things such as reaction time and cognitive impairment is not likely to happen soon (in a society that permits Driving While Phoning).
See “Who Will Insure Mr. Magoo?” (National Underwriter/P&C.com, Nov. 19, 2007), where Sam Friedman notes:
“If you thought New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer took heat for wanting to give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, just wait until he asks for everyone over 65 to prove themselves behind the wheel all over again to DMV officials!
“However, auto insurers faced with a wave of elderly drivers would be well within their rights to demand a driving test of their senior clientele. This could be done the hard way, with a sharp stick (the threat of coverage cancellation for those who refuse to be tested) or with a tasty carrot (the promise of a discount for those who pass).
“Either way, the insurer would be assured that their elderly drivers still have their wits about them and are capable of handling themselves on the road.
“On the other hand, I can already hear the wails of complaint from AARP and other senior advocacy groups—perhaps even age discrimination suits!”
Maybe my favorite RiskProf, Martin F. Grace, will grace us with more of his thoughts on this complicated topic. He touched on age as a risk factor last September. Also, noting in November 2006 that some Canadians were wary of using age in their law-making, Martin opined:
It is “unfair” that people age and lose the ability to react to certain driving situations and it is “unfair” that young drivers are inexperienced. However, if we make it easier (lower prices for all!) for younger and older drivers, we increase social losses. I suppose as a society we could say that discrimination based on age is so unjust that we must bear the costs of increased road and highway accidents. As we know, this is never how the question is framed. The frame is about justice and trying to properly reflect the diversity of life choices. It seems like though the real life choices are increased death, morbidity, and auto body work.
Families are dealing with these issues even when regulators and elected officials avoid it. The Hartford has put together an impressive brochure “We Need to Talk: Family Conversations with Older Drivers” (you can download it from their site and order a paper copy). According to the American Society on Aging:
We Need to Talk, offers families a multi-step approach to crafting candid, effectual discussions about driving safety, from positive conversation starters to advice on which family member should broach the topic. The guide also features an important warning signs checklist; strategies for alternative transportation; testing opportunities; a transportation cost worksheet to determine the annual expense to own and operate a car; and recommendations on what to do if a parent has dementia or a high-risk driver refuses to stop driving.
AARP has turned We Need to Talk into a seminar that is now available in many states.
This complex and emotional subject requires serious discussion, thought and action. I’m hoping that the organized elderly — with their power in all election districts at the polls — will not prevent our leaders from proposing and experimenting with potential solutions. [Of course, the failure to deal in a meaningful way with Driving While Phoning — covered in detail in a recent f/k/a posting — suggests that politicians have little backbone for fighting the public and vested interests on the topic of impaired cognition and skills behind the wheel.] Frankly, although I hope each elderly driver will assess his or her own driving situation and act responsibly, I have seen little evidence that they will do so without major outside pressure.
afterwords (July 17, 2008): Just saw this helpful webpage: “Checklist: When to Put the Brakes on Elderly Drivers” from the Aging Parents and Elder Care website.
rainy night drive –
squinting at glare
through dad’s eyes………. by dagosan
Though it’s sad to see an elderly person lose their eye sight, reflexes and coordination, these things greatly hinder their ability to drive. While age may be a consideration, I think everyone should be tested on a case-by-case basis. After all, not all people are created physically equal. I’ve seen 90-year-olds that can do just about anything and 50-somethings that are nearly bed-ridden due to unfortunate genetics or poor personal care.
Comment by Ted — July 21, 2008 @ 10:46 am