By james art But before you think this is a diatribe against elderly car owners and their declining powers, let me add that younger people can be just as careless and incompetent. Shortly after passing my test, I headed the wrong way up a one-way street in Edinburgh’s Old Town, too busy talking to pay attention to the signs.
On more than a few occasions in my years in the city, passing strangers (always men) took it upon themselves to direct me to a parking space, working their arms like windmills in the middle of the road, bellowing “hard down left” as I grew increasingly confused. Certainly worse, a friend, rushing to the airport in France, reversed on the empty highway to take the exit he had just missed.
You could of course say that others shouldn’t be judged by a handful of bad drivers. To some extent this is true. Yet from what I regularly witness on the road – on the M8 approach to Glasgow, say, or at rush hour in any city, or when parents are picking up children from school – a huge number of us are far from perfect when it comes to question of obeying the highway code or parallel parking. Some really make art out of inventive and reckless disregard for the rules.
Given that there are careless and ignorant drivers across the age spectrum, the blame heaped on pensioners can feel deeply unfair. The worst thing most of them are guilty of is being slow: they emerge from intersections more like crabs than rabbits; turning ever so cautiously, the season changes before your eyes, etc. Although this requires patience from those who struggle behind them – a virtue few drivers possess – this in itself is not a serious problem.
Unfortunately, however, there are very serious issues related to older drivers that cannot be glossed over or ignored. The tragic case of three-year-old Xander Irvine, who was killed when 91-year-old Edith Duncan lost control of her car in Edinburgh’s Morningside and crashed into him and his mother, highlights a danger almost exclusively specific to the elderly.
It was only after this incident that Duncan, who had already died, was diagnosed with dementia. Although rare, this incident is too horrific to be dismissed as a random event of no concern to public safety. Quite the opposite. With an increasingly aging population, such incidents are likely to become more likely.
A road death resulting from someone with dementia is thankfully uncommon, but those of us who have elderly relatives or friends will be painfully aware that there are times when people who shouldn’t be behind the wheel often do. they do, despite evidence of mental decline.
Currently, drivers over 70 must reapply for their license every three years, providing details of health problems and medication. The judge at the fatal accident inquest into the death of Xander Irvine, sheriff’s director Nigel Ross, was very clear that the current system of self-certification is completely inadequate.
Read more
Rosemary Goering: Could Baby Killer Nurse Lucy Letby be Innocent?
A stunning new novel from an inspiring Scottish author: 10 books to read right now
Not only does it rely on the driver to provide accurate information, he said, but it “fails to recognize that driving ability may decline with age or that people with dementia may not be aware of their own condition.” His recommendation is that all drivers over 80 take a short cognitive test to prove their fitness to drive. If this test could be introduced at age 75, he suggested, that would be even better.
Giving up the car keys is unthinkable for some and only happens under duress, usually in the form of family pressure. Being banned from driving can feel like a drastic loss of independence, a signpost on the road to senility and the nursing home.
This is why self-certification is such an inadequate yardstick. It relies on both honesty and self-awareness. In the hope of avoiding disqualification, some will spare the truth. But even if a person is conscientiously honest by nature, one of the characteristics of dementia is the inability to think rationally. While someone might once have recognized that they were no longer fit to drive, their clarity and self-knowledge has been eroded. Unless loved ones help them complete the form, they are unlikely to inform the DVLA that they have dementia. Many, like Edith Duncan, will be unaware of their condition. Others who have received a diagnosis may not remember it.
As harsh as it sounds, the state has a duty to protect its citizens, and requiring octogenarians to undergo a cognitive test is eminently reasonable. Who in their right mind could deny that?
A few may complain that this furthers the ageist agenda, stigmatizing older drivers despite the fact that many are perfectly competent. Given the stakes, though, it’s certainly a risk worth taking. We are quick enough to condemn young drivers whose lack of experience and love of speed can be disastrous. Most of us would be happy to see restrictions placed on young license holders to protect them as well as others. So why worry about mandatory intervention in the elderly?
Since the chance of succumbing to dementia increases with age, screening for it is common sense. After all, despite the way some people behave, driving is not a right. Being in charge of a potentially lethal machine is a heavy responsibility. Regardless of their age, drivers must prove they are fit for the job.