There are plenty of transportation and infrastructure challenges that accompany a rapidly aging population (like ours). One of them is the gradual shift of a large group of people from a state of drive-readiness to, well, not. Advancing age correlates to a decline in just about every skill needed for driving — motor skills, vision, hearing, alertness, the list goes on. And as a result, older drivers are involved in a larger number of auto accidents. In fact, drivers 75 and older are more likely than drivers in all other age groups, including teenagers, to be involved in a fatal crash. In 1997 through 2006, the number of fatal accidents involving drivers over 70 21 percent decline in fatal accidents involving drivers over the age of 70 (though there’s some evidence that this statistic may be changing).[SButtonZ button="digg"]
At the Washington Post, Sandra Boodman offers some analysis of the issue:
Ginzler and other geriatrics experts predict that the issue will explode in the next decade as the leading edge of the 78 million-member baby boom generation hits its 70s. In 2008, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 78 percent of the 28 million Americans older than 70 had licenses, up from 73 percent in 1997, an upward trend that is expected to continue.
Because more Americans are living longer with progressive, disabling diseases that make driving iffy or downright dangerous — heart problems, stroke, Parkinson’s, dementia and diabetes, to name a few — families are increasingly wrestling with questions that defy easy answers. Although many seniors stop driving voluntarily or sharply limit their driving, others refuse. Some fear being marooned in their suburban homes, while others…cling tenaciously to the independence a car represents, unaware of how hazardous their driving has become. A survey by the MIT AgeLab and the Hartford insurance company found that age enhances confidence in driving ability. Drivers 75 and older were twice as likely to say they planned to drive into their 90s as did those 65 to 74.
Occasionally you’ll hear ideas tossed around to combat this problem — such as instituting yearly DMV tests for drivers over 65 (a move that would be swiftly smacked down by the uber-powerful AARP). But while the over-65 crowd holds considerable political clout, the fact remains that driving-while-elderly will become a serious safety concern in the coming decade, and that if we ignore the problem because it’s politically convenient to do so, we will be putting lives at risk.
Granted, there’s plenty of nuance in dealing with this issue — for starters, not all people are the same (for example, our driving skills are likely worse than those of many 70-year-olds — seriously, they are). The loss of independence, not to mention the potential loss of livelihood as more and more senior citizens work past the standard retirement age, are both serious obstacles to legislation restricting seniors’ driving. But the alternative — doing nothing, and leaving it to the family to deal with the problem on their own — is even less appealing.
Tags: Baby Boomers, Road Safety
Private pilots rely on peer review every two years to remain current. They have to pay a private instructor for a some ground school (essentially, an update on the laws) and for about an hour’s flight to go over certain procedures. A similar system wouldn’t hurt for drivers of all ages.
They better provide superior public transit than they have now as alternatives to driving, else we (give it time we all will be included) will be cloistered away in our isolated sprawl or driving illegally.
Another huge problem here is that over the past 70 years we have built our cities so that you can’t survive without a car. In many communities you would literally starve. Many of the suburban communities that baby-boomers live in are aging quickly and retail is moving to follow the young whipper-snappers in the new development. Further, elderly people don’t live with their kids anymore, and most can’t afford to move into incredibly costly retirement homes -nor should they as they are very functional.
This is a pretty big problem.
Just one reason why we need better public transit that runs often, reliably, and all the time.
If you want to serve old people with transit, you’d better make sure the system is 100% accessible. The legacy systems in the US are not, requiring people to climb or descend stairs to get to most rapid transit stations. In addition, old people tend to be able to walk less than younger people, which means the range of a rapid transit station is lower; this is not a problem on networks with short interstations, such as New York’s, but modern rapid transit is built with wider interstations to increase average speed, which means that to serve old people, more connecting buses are required.
Probably end up spending a lot on subsidized taxis/paratransit. Many of these people haven’t waited for a bus since they got out of high school….ain’t going to start now….
I remember when my mother gave up driving; it wasn’t as much of a hardship as it could have been, because she had friends, fellow parishioners at church, my daughter and myself living not too far away. But she knew when it was time to “hand in the keys”–before something bad happened. After recovering from a fall, her walking was impaired, so she had a “handicapped” tag to qualify for close-in parking spots. One day I drove her to the supermarket, and she said “I’m feeling pretty good today, just park there” (indicating a regular space) “Let’s leave the handicap spot for someone who really needs it.”
As an example of the other side, I can’t help thinking of the elderly man who was driving a large, heavy car in Santa Monica, lost control, and ran over several people at a “farmers’ market”, killing some of them.
If your skin looks more weathered and beat than the leather driver’s seat you are sitting on, then it’s time to pack it in.