Should the elderly be allowed to continue to drive?

[mrsbull]

Take it easy on her, she's got time on her hands as she's recuperating at home from illness, and probably might resurrect numerous old strings.

I will do it!! I have so much time!! I have surgery next week so the "posts" I might bring up will not be because I feel like it it will be cause I feel GRRREAT!! or miserable... Either way ill have fun.

I GIVE UP!!! You win!!!! A 5 year resurrection...you are the Queen of saves!!!! :)

What you have already forgotten this??? Cmon you are smarter than that!!

[DwayneEMTP]

I'm not only going to post in this thread to poke the Yeti, (No worries, most won't get it.)(And no, that's not a euphemism.) But because I feel pretty strongly about this topic so I'm glad that it's come back...

I was just bitching to my partner David about this thread and he said, "How many accidents do we run on in this age group? I mean, we see plenty of these people driving, but how many do we run on?" And he and I agreed that, though it seems that with the way that they appear to drive at times that they should be killing scads of people daily, it seems to rarely happen when compared to the 50 and under crowd. And when we do they are usually single car accidents or traffic accidents with minor damage and minor to no injuries.

He also added, "Of the people that want to take these rights away, how many do you suppose actually run on them, and because of that care for their safety, as opposed to just being pissed off because they have to drive behind or around them?" You all will have to answer that.

This is my thought. Many in this age group have lived through two Great Wars, fought, bled, lost husbands/wives/kids, as well as stepped up in many, many named and unnamed 'conflicts.' They've driven the wolf from our door for most of a century. They've survived the Great Depression and rebuilt our country and economy to the point that we are now allowed to sit around getting fat while playing Nintendo between bouts of bitching about them.

Soooo, I could give a rats ass if we need to issue lights for the tops of their cars, give them little warning sirens to alert people that they're coming, issue them drivers so that they can maintain their mobility. I hope that if there is a God in heaven, or elsewhere for that matter, that he strikes me dead the day that I feel comfortable telling these folks that they no longer have the right to enjoy the freedoms that they've fought and suffered for.

Just my thoughts...

Dwayne

Edited because it appeared that I'd put a crack addict in charge of punctuation and spelling. No contextual changes made. (Or so my crack addict tells me.)

Edited March 16, 2010 by DwayneEMTP

[akflightmedic]

I was just bitching to my partner David about this thread and he said, "How many accidents do we run on in this age group? I mean, we see plenty of these people driving, but how many do we run on?" And he and I agreed that, though it seems that with the way that they appear to drive at times that they should be killing scads of people daily, it seems to rarely happen when compared to the 50 and under crowd. And when we do they are usually single car accidents or traffic accidents with minor damage and minor to no injuries.

Guess it is all where you put your pants on in the morning... cause in FLORIDA, you will run on them a lot. They wreck often and there have been more multi casualty accidents as a result of them driving as opposed to the younger driver, single vehicle rollover type.

We have elderly plowing through buildings, markets, high pedestrian areas...taking out more than just themselves. We also have plenty of them "merging" onto highways at 10 mph causing even more problems.

Did not say I disagree with your thoughts, you just do not live in a geriatric dense driving zone and really have no basis for comparison. Spend a few years here and then get back to me.

[DwayneEMTP]

Guess it is all where you put your pants on in the morning... cause in FLORIDA, you will run on them a lot. They wreck often and there have been more multi casualty accidents as a result of them driving as opposed to the younger driver, single vehicle rollover type.

We have elderly plowing through buildings, markets, high pedestrian areas...taking out more than just themselves. We also have plenty of them "merging" onto highways at 10 mph causing even more problems.

Did not say I disagree with your thoughts, you just do not live in a geriatric dense driving zone and really have no basis for comparison. Spend a few years here and then get back to me.

Well, when your entire community is practically an assisted living facility I would expect it to be much more of an issue. Though perhaps you're right, it's possible that my experience is unique to my area, though although this population is small, it has a significant geriatric population percentage wise.

Wouldn't change my argument however. I'm simply unwilling to remove the rights of those that sacrificed to secure them in the first place. This requires a better solution...

Dwayne

(And you have to admit, "poke the Yetti" has kind of a cool ring to it!)

[Just Plain Ruff]

I think that I have ran more people who got in wrecks while eating, sleeping, talking on the cell phone and what not.

Let's legislate away the eating, the sleeping(no brainer) and the no talking on the cell phone and see how many of us young whippersnappers will throw a fit.

I personally have run about 40 wrecks this year and of those I think I can count on one hand the number of elderly that have been at fault or involved. Most are people under the age of 50.

[spenac]

Though I have ran on few elderly wreck patients (based on percentages) I have ran on a number of young people that wrecked ( per them them )avoiding an old person running a stop sign, drifting over the lines, etc. So while they are not in the wreck they may have caused some more as well. It also seems though they cause when wreck more multi patient than other age groups.

I think there needs to be stricter requirements on all ages to keep licenses rather than just send us the fee to renew. Require more intensive vision exams. Require written exams every 10 years. Require a driving exam the first time you get a license and at the first renewal, then every 20 years after that until 70 then every 5 years.

I don't like the across the board take away license of any age group.

[mrsbull]

Well, when your entire community is practically an assisted living facility I would expect it to be much more of an issue. Though perhaps you're right, it's possible that my experience is unique to my area, though although this population is small, it has a significant geriatric population percentage wise.

Wouldn't change my argument however. I'm simply unwilling to remove the rights of those that sacrificed to secure them in the first place. This requires a better solution...

Dwayne

(And you have to admit, "poke the Yetti" has kind of a cool ring to it!)

Dwayne, I suppose mostly you get to worry bout is not picking up hitchhikers in Canon City huh??? .

[aussiephil]

One of the things I have found is a comparison of the elderly (defined in an arbitary number as anyone over 65) & the young (a number I choose!!) usually under 25's is technology.

When the 'elderly' learned to drive, many (as they were born prior to 1945) did not have the volume of traffic on the road, modern electronic items such as satnav's, I mean they were lucky to have a radio in their car. They were taught about concentration & its importance on the road & they too heed of what was said. Because of this, as they have gotten older, (& 65 isnt that old, just ask lone, AK or dust hehehe) they realise that they may have to concentrate a little harder for the same result, not just in driving.

By comparison, younger people tend to be a little more reckless, they have a satnav, ipod, cell phone, as well as twitter & facebook on their cell to distract them from what they are, or should be concetrating on.

We also need to consider that, when it comes to 'elderly', arbitary numbers do not work. I have seen, as many of you would have, people in their mid 50's on deaths doorstep, with people in their 80's still leading a full active & happy life.

One of the things that happens here is that once people reach the age of 75 they have to have a full medical & receive medical clearance as well as a mandatory driving test each year.

While some see this as a negative, there is an insurance company who sees the benefit, they offer discount rates to these drivers because they know their distances are shorter, they concentrate properly on what they are doing & they avoid distractions in the car.

To say no 'elderly' person should drive is like implying that no man can cook, no woman can be a mechanic.

[Aussieaid]

Ok, I'll bite too...

Although the majority of the MVCs I have been on have been related to DUI's (and there are laws regarding that ) I have been on quite a few elderly patients lately and I honestly don't know if they were at fault or not. The concern I have with the elderly driving (70+) is that not only is their hearing and vision impaired but the bigger problem is their reflexes. So even if they aren't at fault they just don't often react fast enough to avoid potential or actual hazards.

The problem with the elderly is that when they are involved in accidents even a minor trauma becomes a major trauma and they do not have the compensatory mechanisms and healing capacity of younger folks so a hospital stay can be extended and have more negative outcomes than for younger people. So addressing the issue of whether they should drive or not is for their sakes as much as the rest of the population's.

I agree with Dwayne that it isn't fair to just take all their rights away as they depend so much on the mobility they do have and we don't want to isolate them even more. Perhaps what is needed is restrictions such as already mentioned of no night time driving (young, healthy people's vision drastically deteriorates at night let alone what happens to the elderly), yearly vision, hearing AND reflex testing after a certain age (~70) and clearance by their Dr if they are on certain medications or have been diagnosed with certain conditions. In other words with conditions to driving and yearly re-evaluations.

(and I'd be careful poking the Yeti, cause he might just take your whole hand off!)

[Richard B the EMT]

Off topic, but...

I know what a Yeti is. It's "Bigfoot", "The abominable Snowman", "Harry" of "Harry and the Henderson's", and probably a few localized names I don't know off-hand. However, as the reports about the critter describe it as big, smelly, emitting a loud roar, and usually trying to get away from the human observer, why would one want to poke it?