Japan Moves To Ease Aging Drivers Out of Their Cars (nytimes.com)
As Japan's population ages, so do its drivers. Japan has the oldest population in the world, with nearly 28 percent of its residents above 65 years old. One in seven people are over 75. In the United States, by comparison, that figure is closer to one in 16. From a report: According to data compiled by Japan's national police agency, drivers between 16 and 24 are more likely to cause traffic accidents than any other age group. But last year, drivers over 75 caused twice as many fatal accidents per 100,000 drivers as those under that age. Among drivers over 80 years old, the rate was three times as high as for drivers under that age. The news media regularly features grisly reports of deaths caused by older drivers, some of whom are later discovered to have Alzheimer's disease.
Since 2009, all drivers 75 and older must submit to a test of their cognitive functioning when they renew their licenses [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled], typically once every three years. Under a new traffic law that took effect in March 2017, those who score poorly are sent to a doctor for examination, and if they are found to have dementia, the police can revoke their licenses. More than 33,000 drivers who took the cognitive test last year showed what the police deemed to be signs of cognitive impairment and were ordered to see a doctor. The police revoked just over 1,350 licenses after doctors diagnosed dementia.
Since 2009, all drivers 75 and older must submit to a test of their cognitive functioning when they renew their licenses [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled], typically once every three years. Under a new traffic law that took effect in March 2017, those who score poorly are sent to a doctor for examination, and if they are found to have dementia, the police can revoke their licenses. More than 33,000 drivers who took the cognitive test last year showed what the police deemed to be signs of cognitive impairment and were ordered to see a doctor. The police revoked just over 1,350 licenses after doctors diagnosed dementia.
"But last year, drivers over 75 caused twice as many fatal accidents per 100,000 drivers as those under that age. Among drivers over 80 years old, the rate was three times as high as for drivers under that age."
Yes, that does make some sense. But are we talking about 200000 drivers, 2000, or 2? And "twice as many" is how many, exactly? Also, what percentage of people in that age bracket still drive?
Telling us the rate "per 100000 drivers" without context doesn't actually explain how large or small the problem is. It just tells us that any particular older driver is more likely to cause a crash than any particular younger driver.
#DeleteChrome
Many US states have stepped up testing and medical requirements for people over 75.The older you get, the more frequently you must take a driving test.
The Japanese have just put a more specific requirement on it.
Addicts get awfully cranky whenever you try to cure them of their addiction!
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
While I do agree with you, the article specifically mentions people who live in rural parts of Japan, where there is no public transportation.
What makes it worse, as you go further out from the cities the percentage of elderly population gets higher too, with some towns over 50%.
There should be a better way than waiting for "driving in the wrong lane", for example.
There is but we're too much of a bunch of self indulgent asshats to do it. The answer is EVERYONE should have to retest routinely (say every 3-5 years) and the test should actually be challenging to pass in a sense similar to a pilot's license. (doens't have to be as hard as a pilots license but it should be a lot harder than it is and include cognitive function testing and a physical exam) Do something stupid like drive drunk and your license gets revoked on the first offense because you have clearly demonstrated you cannot handle the responsibility. If you are getting older and lose the ability to cognitively react fast enough and properly while driving, that should result in your license being suspended. I don't see why that should even be controversial. Simple fact is that you become dangerous when that happens. I expect/hope I live long enough it happens to me someday.
Unfortunately we've designed far too much of our infrastructure around a presumed ability and "right" to drive a car so the other half of this is that we would have to actually invest in decent public transit for those who are unable to pass the test. I don't actually see this as a bad thing. A good public transit system is something worthwhile. If we need to have subsidized access to taxis (or Uber/Lyft) for those unable to drive themselves then let's do that or something similar. Probably some people to assist the elderly and disabled who need a little extra help getting around. Heaven forbid we actually act to help those who need a little extra assistance.
A more moderate version would be that cars give people mobility and that is worth a lot. Therefore the threshold for allowing people to drive should be as low as possible and a modest increase in death toll should be allowed
That's frankly an idiotic suggestion. If we want mobility it doesn't have to come in the form of a car. Heaven forbid we have a public transit system that doesn't suck. Stop thinking cars are the only possibility and the answers become obvious.
EVERYONE should have to take driving tests that are harder than the current ones and there should be a cognitive function test to go with them. If you cannot physically/mentally react fast enough to safely operate a motor vehicle then you should not have a license.
It's always tempting to put the bar as high as possible because it's good for the traffic deaths, but you have to balance it.
No you really do not have to balance it. You simply have to recognize that we've designed our infrastructure too heavily on the false presumption that anyone above the age of 16 is physically and mentally capable of driving a car. This is obviously and manifestly not true and therefore is stupid policy. The answer is to build our transport system to rely less on the presumption that everyone can drive. Public transit, subsidized taxi service, housing relocation assistance, etc. If this requires people to give up their car fetish and self indulgent assumption of a "right" to drive then so much the better.
If we actually prioritized safety over practicality and freedom, then driving would be handled by professionals.
Nonsense. Stop making perfect the enemy of good. A large majority of the people can handle driving a car with reasonable safety. But doing so requires a certain standard of physical and mental ability to do it safely. One of the problems of growing older is that many people experience mental decline and slowing of reaction times. Other people for reasons beyond their control (genetics, disease, accidents, etc) never achieve this level of function. People in this category should not be driving under any circumstances because they are a hazard to themselves and those around them. Right now we have frankly set the bar too low. It's too easy to get a drivers license and we do not retest at reasonable intervals. I've seen far too many people who are able to retain their driver's license long beyond when they should.
But we don't prioritize safety over practicality and freedom, because that would be idiotic.
Idiotic is letting someone who is CLEARLY dangerous and incapable of safe operation drive. Drunk, senile, etc. If we let people who are clearly unable to operate a motor vehicle with a reasonable standard of performance then we are idiots.