Cognitive Testing of Older Drivers

This is a very complex subject, on a topic that's of interest to many.

While I agree that over the age of 80 this should happen, I don't agree with the fact that they have to pay for it! Most people in their retirement don't have a lot of extra at the end of the day and now they have to shell out $80-$200 for a test, just to keep their drivers license?

C'mon! The system is broken! Let them have the test for free.! They still have to pay to have their license renewed anyways!!!

It's just Sad!!!

An interesting concept-

Testing short term memory for an ability in a long term memory skill-questionable at best, somewhat like asking your doctor for help with a mechanical problem with your car-ha!

Second point--how the ability to talk fast is related to your ability to drive? Most of the con men I have met were very fast talkers--Makes them better drivers????

Third point--how removing lightly productive members of society and putting them in the position of being fully dependent --gains society in what way?? The members are belittled - the net cost to society goes up exponentially--the gain???????????? I feel that it is discrimination at its' very worst and few raise the eyebrows-let alone their voices.

Just a humble opinion

Third point--how removing lightly productive members of society and putting them in the position of being fully dependent --gains society in what way?? The members are belittled - the net cost to society goes up exponentially--the gain???????????? I feel that it is discrimination at its' very worst and few raise the eyebrows-let alone their voices.

I suspect that you're not understanding the issue, here.  Same goes for many. But there isn't any desire on the part of the licensing authorities (ICBC, in this jurisdiction, but this issue is almost universal in the developed world) to remove the driving privilege from old folks.  There is, however, a responsibility to ascertain whether drivers are entitled to their license - and this can change with the passage of time; if it were otherwise, then 5 year old children could apply for one.

As I would see it, the 'problem' is this: at some point in time, one of two things is going to happen to every driver:

• They will die.
• They will become incapable of operating a motor vehicle safely.

This applies to you, me, our site host, everybody reading this, it is universal.

Accepting that the death thing pretty much makes this discussion redundant, then it's going to be either a physical or pyschological ailment that renders a driver incapable or incompetent.

At one time in human history, and probably not that long ago, physical ailments would have been sufficiently predominant amongst older folks in general as to render this problem moot.  But these days, in our society at least, people live longer.  And longer.  There is much greater potential, due to the mental issues with cognitive awareness, for a person to be able to get behind the wheel of their automobile and drive it, even though their brain is no longer able to govern and process this mental task load.

I'm not saying that the cognitive testing that's being used (as an alternative to a regularly structured Class 5 Road Test by an ICBC Driver Examiner) is perfect; but then, neither is the fundamental Class 7 N test that's required for a first time driver.

But the criteria, the rationale, for these tests are entirely different.  And if a senior has reached the point (unbeknownst to them) where they're no longer capable of processing the task of driving, then much better they be removed from being behind the wheel than make some cognitive error that results in death or injury; to themselves, to you, to me, or maybe to our children.

That's what this is about; that's what the net gain to society may be.

I would like to add my two bits worth on this topic, as I am approaching 80.

Regarding the test:

Language:  Does the test have to be in English? Can it be in any language of choice? If not, why not? Are we required to be fluent in English in order to drive a car in our old age?  (Does the charter of rights apply here?)

I have a number of elderly friends who have never mastered English, and they are likely to stumble on the test for this reason.

Memory test on 10 words: I have always had a problem remembering words, particularly names. Sometimes to embarrasment. However, I have a propensity for remembering numbers with considerable ease, such as telephone numbers. Accordingly, I could potentially fail this part of the test. This condition has not prevented me from working successfully for 50 yrs, or driving my car without accidents. So, why not allow a choice of say words or numbers?  What is so definitive about words? What is wrong with using 10 numbers?

Listing 30 items purchasable from a super market, and under 1 minute:  let's take the case of my brother, approaching 80. He has never shopped for groceries in his life, let alone done any cooking at home. This doesn't suggest that he doesn't know what a tomato is, or a potato, but my guess is that, confronted with a 1 minute time factor, he would probably get as far as bread, eggs and bacon, and butter..sugar, tea and milk (which kind of summarizes his meals). So, what is so unique about this part of the test, or perhaps is this simply a very unfair test. My brother has worked all his life and driven without accidents.

I think the Simard test is palpably wrong. It emmanated from a university husband and wife team, as a nice side line business, and the university backdrop is taken by the provinces as being gospel, or perhaps it removes the onus from their shoulders when it comes to dealing with elderly drivers.  But don't get me wrong. Yes, as we get older, driving a car has significant liabilities for us seniors. And we need to stop driving when the time is right. For me, the Simard test is not a good way to weed out seniors, as exampled above. I am keeping my fingers crossed that my doctor will find me fit and capable to continue driving when I hit 80 and thus not have to take the Simard test.

I rest my case, and look forward to any replies or comments

Driver Medical Examinations are unconstitutional. According to BC's Human Rights Code..."no person over 19 years, may be discriminated against on the basis of age, in life, work or the delivery of services." If this were not enough, ICBC's own statistics show that seniors are the safest group of drivers on the road. The report "Proportion of Fatalities by Age Group and Contributing Factors -2015/2017": in the 16-45 Age Group, speeding and/or impairment were factors in 90% of fatalities, while distracted driving was a factor in 65% of fatalities. In the 65-plus Age Group the factors were just 5% and 25% respectively.

Furthermore, there is already in place a system to identify potentially dangerous drivers...the Demerit Point System. It applies to all motorists so there is no need to additionally target seniors.

These "examinations" have been criticized by many as having little to zero credibility in determining a person's ability to drive safely. Asking someone to identify a horse, rhinoceros and a camel, or count backwards from 100 by sevens is comical, not scientific. Time to end this abuse of seniors.

There is no discrimination in requiring potential drivers (or potential gun owners, for that matter) to show that they are fit to be licensed.

Think about this, and what you're implying:

According to BC's Human Rights Code..."no person over 19 years, may be discriminated against on the basis of age, in life, work or the delivery of services."

Because according to your logic, anybody who has reached their 19th birthday can simply drive. Why would you have to get a license? That would be discriminatory! Besides, getting that license shouldn't be necessary. My dad was driving his dad's grocery truck around Carlisle back in 1935, when he was 14 years old, and he did fine ...

Except ... in modern society, we've determined that drivers should in fact be licensed, and this automatically allows for preconditions. Things like checking eyesight, or whether you are prone to blackouts, or capable of cognitive thought.

And expecting to rely on police action (i.e. demerits) to rectify problems is absurd! Did you even read this week's column on Improving Everything Except Drivers? The police aren't remotely interested in being a part of getting bad drivers off the road.

But increasingly, and in tandem with the longevity that we enjoy these days, we are finding more and more seniors behind the wheel who are no longer cognitively able to operate a motor vehicle. So they have to lose their driver's licenses, to protect the rest of us. And our kids.

I've reached the targeted age group and have no problems with testing.

Don't have any stats to provide but I have a feeling that when you consider the klicks the older generation 80+ generally drive I'm sure the accident rate is not that great for kilometers driven.

One person I know recently sold his car and quit driving aften closing the garage door and then proceeded to reverse through the door. Put it into reverse instead of drive. Always backed in which is the safest way so that he was pulling forward onto the street. His thought was if he did it once good chance he would do it again.