Elderly Drivers: Grieving Family Calls for Greater Political Courage to Deal with 'Growing Deadly Problem'

teasatotalling on 20/12/2017 - 15:50
Last edited 21/12/2017 - 10:42 by 1 other user

The family of a young man killed by an elderly driver is calling for political courage to restrict older drivers before more lives are lost.

Sue Jenkins' 22-year-old son, Dann, was killed while riding a motorbike in northern NSW in October last year.

"[Older drivers] are a growing deadly problem on our roads and there is no will by governments to take any action to make it safer for the general public," Ms Jenkins told 7.30.

"We are second-class citizens because the independence of the elderly driver is more important than our right to expect other drivers on the roads to be competent."

Edwin Jessop, 87, was driving in the opposite direction and failed to see Dann coming and turned directly into his path.

A crash investigation found Mr Jessop had almost six seconds to see Dann.

Last week in the Lismore Magistrates Court, Mr Jessop was sentenced to nine months in jail and had his licence cancelled for three years after pleading guilty to negligent driving occasioning death.

But Mr Jessop's sentence was suspended due to his age and he will not serve any time behind bars.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-20/grieving-family-calls-…

Automotive

Comments

  • DiscoJango on 21/12/2017 - 12:36

    I know, lets hand out more revenue sorry infringment notices

    Along with installing more revenue sorry traffic safety cameras

    I would also at the same time like to increase my tax rate to 75c on the doller as well as limiting the amount large corporations pay

  • pformag on 21/12/2017 - 14:50
    +1

    Age is a bell curve when it comes to driving. You suck at the beginning and you suck at the end. There just needs to be checks at the end, like there is at the beginning

  • Cluster on 21/12/2017 - 15:13
    -1

    An aging relative likes to drive 80km/h to 90km/h on a 100 zone highway. When I point out he should go faster and match the flow of traffic he asks 'Why? I'm not in any hurry, why are you so nervy?' He doesn't seem to realise he's a rolling road block that forces other drivers to bear slightly more risk by overtaking him.

    • mysterytal on 21/12/2017 - 15:22
      -1

      A speed limit is not a target speed. If your ageing relative feels safer driving at 80-90km/h then that's not illegal. If people behind are getting frustrated by being slowed by just 10-20km/h then they can overtake. If they're skilled drivers they can overtake with very little additional risk.

      If he's driving significantly slower than the speed limit then that's not so good but 10-20km/h isn't much.

      I'd just be making sure that your ageing relative drives in the left hand lane. People driving slowly in the right lane preventing others from overtaking is very frustrating.

      • Euphemistic on 21/12/2017 - 15:24

        plus one. And ask them to be sure to keep checking the rear mirror and pull over when the queue gets long.

      • Cluster on 21/12/2017 - 15:26
        +3

        He'll drive 10 to 20 under the speed limit in peak hour traffic. Sure, other drivers can always overtake him but that adds extra inherent risk for the other drivers. He does keep left however, which helps, unless it's a one lane road.

        A speed limit is indeed not a target speed, but we have an obsession in this country where 103km/h is a 'killer' speed but 100km/h is safe. I would suggest someone doing 80km/h in a 100 zone is a bigger overall risk than the driver who will get fined in Victoria for doing 103 in 100.

        • mysterytal on 21/12/2017 - 15:35

          Not quite 103km/h being a killer speed. That's just one demerit point and a small on the spot fine representing the risk of driving at that speed. Speeding 41km/h or more over the speed limit justifiably leads to a suspension of a drivers licence and a very large fine as that is considered by the state as a killer speed.

        • Cluster on 21/12/2017 - 16:23

          @mysterytal: According to the QLD government: "Every K over is a killer"

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx5QhdtxE0s

        • mysterytal on 21/12/2017 - 16:49
          +1

          @Cluster:
          What a stupid advertisement. That implies that it's better just to drive slowly and carefully. That advertisement could easily scare people into driving at less than the speed limit all the time…just to be safe….

          Seeing an advertisement like that sometime in his life and your elderly relative as you say says 'Why? I'm not in any hurry, why are you so nervy?' so just drives slower to be safe, getting an image like that out of your head can sometimes be impossible.

          The accident in that advert was caused by dangerous driving. Undertaking in busy traffic without looking in the mirrors properly. Following too closely, not giving enough space to other drivers. Impatience, distracting child in front seat. The child in not in a child booster seat seated in the rear, the child doesn't look like it's wearing a seat belt. Speed was just a minor factor.

        • LFO on 21/12/2017 - 18:45
          +2

          "Speed limit" are purely for revenue collection.
          A grotesquely slow speed so there will be speedsters to fine.
          Set a speed limit of 150 or 160 instead of 100 and virtually no one will be over the limit.

          Current speed limits are too low.
          Hence the need for speed cameras, radars, motocops, vans and etc. They do exist for a rea$on.

  • tonyjzx on 21/12/2017 - 15:24

    I'm wondering why the media reports this sort of stuff more than other drivers.

    I feel that these incidents with older drivers seem to happen more than other classes or are they just being reported more?

    Or is it because they tend to be "newsworthy"… if its an elderly person thru a plate glass storefront or off a multistory car park or maybe its thru a kids bedroom or maybe a childcare centre?

    how many injured kids from the sophie delezios to this 22y.o's does it take?

    i guess its the medias' fault.

    • [Deactivated] on 21/12/2017 - 16:07
      +1

      When a 22 year old is involved in a crash, it is likely caused by factors that are within the driver's control, such as alcohol, speed, drugs, general attitude… The aftermath usually includes the young person taking responsibility (whether voluntarily or not).

      When an elderly driver gets into a crash, it is usually the fault of their age. The reasons are beyond their control hence their excuses are beyond reproach. They will blame factors to do with their age even if it isn't. Essentially, they carry around a get out of jail card for reckless driving.

      If drivers do not have to take responsibility for their actions, they shouldn't enjoy the privileges of it either.

  • mshanann on 21/12/2017 - 15:55

    I'm surprised they have not adapted an arcade racing simulator to provide some form of testing at driving centres.

    It could check reaction times, road rules, speed, indicator usage etc.

    • syousef on 21/12/2017 - 16:55

      There is a hazard perception test given at RMS in NSW. Not quite a car simulator but you have to spot the hazard in time and push the button that says you would stop.

  • [Deactivated] on 21/12/2017 - 15:57
    +1

    There was (past tense because I don't see him around anymore) an elderly driver that used to park behind my office to get to the chemist. It is a rather steep diagnoal parking area and his car would roll back 6-7 car spots before he manages to stop the car to put it into drive.

    Whenever we see a young driver, we don't stop to think if they're incompetent. We do not change our approach when moving around them.

    We are extremely cautious around elderly drivers because we know their driving ability is compromised. The statistics on elderly drivers does not take this into account.

    Young drivers being reckless is a problem but these drivers can continue to improve their ability or outgrow their reckless behaviour. There's no chance of improving an elderly driver's ability.

  • BertieBrown on 21/12/2017 - 16:10

    Yep I agree. I was rear ended by an older chap, I was pulled over with hazard lights on, who hit me at around 50-60 km/hr at a guess as I had the hand brake and my foot on the brake and he moved our car several meters IIRC. My partner would have been killed if she’d been at the back of the car, she just moved out of the way getting something out the back and was standing on the side of the car.

    When the coppa asked him why he didn’t stop he said he couldn’t see, because of glare, but kept driving anyway.

    I was ropeable but then again he was ancient and I felt bad. We just need more sensible restrictions.

  • nobarginsarehere on 21/12/2017 - 17:08

    Everyone should have to retake a test every 5-10 years, like a refresher course

    If that's too expensive, apply this to 60+

  • petry on 21/12/2017 - 17:30

    Driving near the speed limit these days inevitably produces road rage in people of all ages who expect to speed.

    That's how it is these days - people drive down the middle of the road, the wrong way don't give way etc etc .

    Bugger all to do with age. Whole thread is full of trumpist bullshit.

  • Godric on 21/12/2017 - 17:49
    -1

    Just as you have to be a minimum age to drive there should be another number where from that point you are either A) licence revoked or b) have to resit entire licence training/learning process and then practical driving sessions every year or something

  • LFO on 21/12/2017 - 18:05

    Driving skills or the lack of driving skills are the problem.

    A few weeks ago a woman, mother of several children, drove her four wheel drive (a Kruger?) into a school class, killing children.
    She wasn't an elderly woman. Was 50? something, I recall.

    Lack of driving skills cause fatalities.
    Neither age nor gender has anything to do with that fact.

    Make it harder to get and renew a driver license to achieve something.
    And yes, sorry about the revenue shortage that that government body will suffer.

    • mskeggs on 21/12/2017 - 18:27

      Lack of driving skills cause fatalities.
      I'm not sure what you base this assertion on? When I was 20 I would have passed any practical driving test streets ahead of my 50yro mother, but she would have been much less likely to cause an accident.

      She is now elderly and I would still pass a test much better than her, but now I am the safer driver, for any measure per km travelled.
      But I bet she is still much less likely to have an accident than I am because she drives so infrequently and for such short distances.

      I don't get this outspoken, repeated insistence throughout this thread that skills are what we should be judged on, not how we apply them. I think it is because we can more easily measure skills, but really, it is the application that matters.

      • LFO on 21/12/2017 - 18:53

        "Passing" a test does not imply having driving skills.
        It just shows you/us follow the "rules" dictated by someone else and, more importantly of all, do not speed. Ever.

        It doesn't indicate how well a driver is able to handle a moving vehicle.
        Like mixing accelerator with brakes, like jerking the steering wheel with violence, like slamming on the brakes in panic.
        Like not having driving skills.

        Driving skills are far more rare than passing a test, as we all did.

        • mskeggs on 21/12/2017 - 19:08

          Well, then it's like saying the way to solve crime is to boost honesty. Yes, but it isn't actually a strategy.

          Make it harder to get and renew a driver license to achieve something.

          How does this do anything? You keep pretending the issue causing accidents is under evaluated people. But the old man in this post had just recently passed a practical test.
          I gave two examples of why extra testing would not reduce fatalities, yet your insist the thing needed is more.
          Let me give another. L plate drivers are some of the safest on the road, as they are under the scrutiny of an experienced passenger, with strong incentive/penalties to drive correctly. A week after they get their licence they are among the most dangerous. How does your skills and testing strategy address the se real world issues, rather than the idea that accidents are all caused by lack of skills?

        • LFO on 22/12/2017 - 12:20

          @mskeggs:
          I insist driving skills are the issue.
          Please do not change my motto.

          It has been lack of driving skills the cause of a child death in Campsie, just yesterday.
          A "non-elderly" female driver reversed and killed the child.
          Proper driving skills will make a driver to LOOK before even thinking about moving a vehicle.

        • mskeggs on 22/12/2017 - 16:23

          @LFO:
          How do you aim to make a test for this?
          How do you devise a test that makes sure people look behind effectively every time the car is in R, not just in the test?
          I agree poor, or aggressive or inconsiderate or over confident drivers are dangerous.
          I don't see how testing addresses this.
          You might skim a few at the margins if you make the test harder, but the bulk of people are already able to pass the test, and it is the bulk of people who are involved in accidents.
          I'll say it again, I was a very skilled driver at 20 years of age - almost certainly had I been involved in an accident it would have been down to some unpredicted (legal) behaviour from another driver. My over confidence at the time was a product of my ability to test brilliantly, but my high skills didn't make me a safe driver. I went too fast, even though I usually was within the speed limit.

          It took experience and some careless other road users waking my caution to make me a more mature driver, but I am still less safe than my 77yro mum who drives 3km once a fortnight to see her doctor. I am many times more likely to be involved in a fatality because I regularly drive ten fold the distance.

          Your idea of more tests solves almost nothing, because despite your feeling there are many unskilled drivers on the road, it isn't those drivers killing people. The guy in the article had recently passed a test.

  • sleet on 21/12/2017 - 18:10

    we need driverless cars! Technology is on its way. Or maybe some teleportation device.

  • kasp on 21/12/2017 - 18:27

    To be honest self driving cars are almost here and the shitfight that will happen to legislate a solution will never pass.

    Fast track self driving car legislation providing its safe then enforce 75+ year olds use as mandatory.with some kinda of scheme. Problem solved.

  • inherentchoice on 21/12/2017 - 18:41

    But I want to drive until I am 120.

  • dangerdanger on 21/12/2017 - 20:05

    The demographic with highest motor vehicle accident rates are young men. Should we ban all young men from driving?

    Maybe ban them from pubs too?

    • mysterytal on 21/12/2017 - 20:15

      I would ban all parking spaces at pubs. Why do local planning laws require parking spaces at pubs?

      I would promote the opening of many more smaller pubs within walking distances of peoples homes so that walking home from the pub is an attractive alternative. Most people could easily walk or even stagger 10-15 minutes or so and choose not to drive then walk back the next day to get the car. I agree though too many drink drivers are still on the road and they know how to get away with it.

  • MessyG on 21/12/2017 - 20:18

    This is a tricky one. As people age their independence slowly leaves them, and often losing their licence is one of those last bastions of independence so it's often very hard. An older person with insight still will understand this and give up their keys. An older person with dementia (which is growing in prevalence every year), has no such insight, believes they are perfect drivers and continues to drive and puts people at risk. The road authority depending on state will require medical checks but may not necessarily be doing dementia screening and it's usually concerned family that bring it up. In that case the GP or other specialist will make a report to Vicroads recommending either they don't drive at all, or they have a formal driving assessment at great cost to the driver (in the vicinity of $300). If they fail the test or the recommendation is not to drive, their licence is revoked. This does not stop the person with dementia from driving - the only thing that does is physically removing their keys, and the question then becomes whose responsibility is that? Often the family want to but don't out of familial guilt. It's theft if the doctor does it. And the cops will only do it after an accident because they've got bigger fish to fry. It really shits me, frankly I think when you lose your licence for this reason you should hand in your keys.

    I have no issue with the elderly driving but there needs to be better dementia screening and a process for removing either the car or the keys if the concerns are serious enough.

  • aman00024 on 21/12/2017 - 20:59
    -1

    An old man hit my car and ran away from the scene and later tracked down by the police and that old man blamed me for not stopping at scene without realising that someone gave me the dash cam footage of that scene.

    No Charges were made against the driver for not hit and run.

    So law is weak in australia?

    • mskeggs on 21/12/2017 - 21:10
      -3

      Try breaking it yourself, let us know how you go.

      • aman00024 on 21/12/2017 - 23:00

        I am a law abiding person.
        Thanks

  • stainedteatowel on 21/12/2017 - 21:07

    Come across a few instances of "whoops I hit the wrong pedal" and they've accelerated in a carpark crashing into parked cars. Some form of testing is needed in my opinion, don't get me wrong there are plenty of older people who seem more with it / alert that I would not be concerned about. But there sure are plenty where their ability to drive is questionable.

  • [Deactivated] on 21/12/2017 - 22:42

    From my experience….
    (I do volunteer work with a 70yo sometimes I drive sometimes he does)

    Elderly drivers speed is erratic.
    My friend does 80km/h in a 110 zone because he feels its safe, but he drives 110kmh in a 100 zone.

    They don't always understand who to give way to, at unmarked intersections and merge lanes.

    A simple wrjtten test could at least clear one of these problems up.

  • eggles01 on 21/12/2017 - 22:58

    how about we ask for an official head count of who have caused the most deaths on Australian roads,just because of the ages of the driver and rider was there any proof that the rider may have been exceeding the speed limit and failed to slow down before it was too late,we will never really know what cause this accident so until anyone can produce the undeniable evidence people should watch what they do themselves,I am now 75 and have only once been booked for speeding and I was driving over the Sydney Harbor Bridge back in 1961 I was doing 33 miles per hour 3 mph over the limit,

  • [Deactivated] on 22/12/2017 - 07:57
    +3

    self driving cars will all but eliminate this, just have to wait and hope the elderly and the young don't kill us all before that happens

    • teasatotalling on 22/12/2017 - 09:05
      +2

      Or conservatives stall its introduction because “I like driving”

  • Hasbulla on 22/12/2017 - 08:05
    +2

    2 words: tail gating.
    the mother of all problems

    • Euphemistic on 22/12/2017 - 08:54

      disagree. Mobile phone technology is the mother of all current problems.

      • Hasbulla on 22/12/2017 - 22:34
        +1

        disagree to disagree. both correlated. reaction times.

  • wallet72 on 22/12/2017 - 11:06

    I think there should be a certain percentage of all drivers tested each year -a random selection that would exempt them from any chance of testing for 2 years.

    There are too many people of all ages that have developed bad driving habits and this would be a way to help minimise that.

  • LFO on 22/12/2017 - 12:13
    +1

    Fresh out of the press:

    Female driver reverses and kills a child in Campsie.
    Not an elderly driver.

    Driving skills. Call it by name not by age nor gender.

    • MessyG on 22/12/2017 - 19:24

      This.

  • Foma2 on 22/12/2017 - 15:50

    I think there should be no bias against older drivers. And it should be as simple as possible : if you killed someone you should be sent to the prison irrespectively to your ago. Right?

    • MessyG on 23/12/2017 - 19:59

      What if you have undiagnosed dementia? Dementia patients often aren't aware of their disease.

      • Foma2 on 23/12/2017 - 23:12

        What if an empty beer bottle gonna end up on the floor and a 50 ton truck would not stop because that bottle would make its way straight under the break pedal preventing a driver from breaking which resulted in two dead bodies in a car in front of it.
        Should we blame a bottle or a driver ?

        • MessyG on 24/12/2017 - 07:10

          My point is that prison is not appropriate for all circumstances where road deaths occur.

        • whooah1979 on 24/12/2017 - 09:05
          +2

          @MissG:

          It wouldn't be in anyone's interests to see this old man die in gaol. It would inhumane even if he didn't die while serving his time.

        • Foma2 on 24/12/2017 - 09:56

          My understanding is that the close relatives of that killed guy should decide if it is in their interest to send a killer to to the prison or not.
          If they say no, then I will happily accept the fact that killers are not being sent of the prison.

          Otherwise …

          Tomorrow that old guy will run over your (or someone else's) child and show his medical certificate in the court again.
          And again. And again.

          Do you think it will be very … humane ?

        • MessyG on 24/12/2017 - 15:21

          @whooah1979: I agree.

        • MessyG on 24/12/2017 - 15:50

          @Foma2: People who have dementia are not allowed to drive once their doctor has notified Vicroads (or they've voluntarily given up their keys) - unfortunately it is a diagnosis that is often made too late, and then they refuse to give up their keys because the dementia kills their insight into the severity of their condition. The issue lies with who takes the keys off them.

          Sending a person with dementia to prison is cruel. They would wake up every day and not know why they are there. They should have their keys and car removed yes, prison no.

        • Foma2 on 24/12/2017 - 19:44
          -1

          Millions of people in this world wake up every day and not know why they are in the prison.
          As per the stats up to 25% of inmates are in the prison for something they did not do.
          It is the price we have to pay for having the law and the order.
          It is bad.
          But it is reality.
          If you do not like reality, quit it.
          But it won't change reality.

          Anyway, my point is that we all talking about being humane and forgiving till we lose our child or mother / father or brother / sister or wife / husband.
          Then our opinion flips 180 degrees.
          Too late.

        • Baysew on 24/12/2017 - 20:10

          @Foma2:

          As per the stats up to 25% of inmates are in the prison for something they did not do.

          I would like to have a look at those stats, got a link?

        • Foma2 on 24/12/2017 - 23:41
          -1

          That link is called life.
          Real one.
          Not Internet.

        • MessyG on 25/12/2017 - 10:37
          +1

          @Foma2: Prison is intended as a period of rehabilitation. If you can't learn anything new, you can't be rehabilitated. Furthermore, dementia patients, either in hospital or incarcerated, require people with special training to work with them for various reasons (I suggest having a read about dementia behaviours). In Victoria there is one facility equipped to deal with this in the prison system and from memory it has a grand total of about 8 beds. The system is not set up to incarcerate every person with dementia - it is far far better, to use resources preventing this happen in this population in the first place.

          The problem with absolutes like "everyone who kills someone in a road accident should go to jail", and "it is reality" is that blanket rules rarely if ever apply across heterogenous populations. That's why everyone who is involved in a fatal road accident doesn't go to jail, under our system of law and order. I have no comment to make on those genuinely unfairly incarcerated because that's not what this discussion is about.

        • MessyG on 25/12/2017 - 10:38
          +1

          @Foma2:
          "That link is called life.
          Real one.
          Not Internet."

          Except you just posted that on the Internet. Giving numbers without a source and then saying it's 'life' on a bargain forum doesn't not make for a credible argument.

        • Baysew on 25/12/2017 - 10:53

          @Foma2: So your spurious claim is utter nonsense.

        • Foma2 on 25/12/2017 - 15:15

          That's why people (inc. children) will be dying on Australian roads.
          Every time someone loses their child they should thank you and people like you.

  • GourmetFoodie on 22/12/2017 - 22:31

    Honestly, getting on a motorcycle these days is a death wish.

    That aside, I agree there are too many oldies on the road who shouldn't be. And no, they don't all drive slowly!

    • bobbified on 24/12/2017 - 13:40

      And no, they don't all drive slowly!

      Especially when they try to hit the brakes, but get the accelerator instead!

    • eggles01 on 24/12/2017 - 16:55

      this brainless idiot should not get onto a motor cycle,simple isn't it

  • bah humbug on 23/12/2017 - 09:24
    +1

    Personally, I think everyone should be tested every 5 to 10 years(regardless of age).
    Many who have the privilege of driving are not fit to be on the road. Admit it, every day you come across people who clearly should not be on the road.

  • srhardy on 23/12/2017 - 10:13
    +1

    mum stops at intersections and red lights and askes for directions! wont or cant use a GPS, depsite me giving her two and showing her how to use her mobile leagaly.
    mum stops on the street to look in shops or signs on the side of the road of things of interest.
    mum drives with one foot on the accelerator and one on the brake and always has.
    mum has a reversing camera built in but does not use it, keeping the fenderbender in biz.
    mum never checks the car for water, oil and air unless i do it when i visit.

    the day they taker her licence life will be unbearable to us

  • JH100 on 23/12/2017 - 14:51

    I think all LNP voters need to be tested, having already presented with signs of dementia.

  • Ozpit on 26/12/2017 - 17:51

    By the time today's average Ozbargain driver is 80 years old, they won't need to be licensed. They'll just recline in their driverless vehicle (no steering wheel, no handbrake, no driver's seat) with their noses buried in iPhone MCXX.

  • Candour on 30/12/2017 - 13:22

    whats about

    https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/state/nsw/2017/12/29/nsw-fat…

    should we target these people as the highest risk to all drivers, not just any age group?

    • Ozpit on 31/12/2017 - 09:37

      That guy was a killer waiting to happen. Anyone who does jail time for a driving offence should lose their license for life, as should anyone caught driving while disqualified.

      Drivers caught driving at insane speeds, like double the speed limit, or drunk at the wheel, should lose their license for at least five years.

      Many property offences result in jail time, so how come seriously threatening the lives of other road users is so often treated lightly by the law?

  • earlsaint42 on 05/01/2018 - 07:52

    Riding motorcycles is dangerous, I live in northern NSW we had a case near where i live of a younger driver dropping a cigarette bending down to pick it up, the ute he was driving moved into the oncoming lane and hit an elderly motorcycle rider killing him, there is currently a big problem with all drivers not just the elderly, this forum should be looking at answers to that problem. not just picking out one group, I'am 76 years old still hold a HC + MC licence, I have had a medical every year since I turned 70, maybe everyone should have a medical every two years, what can we do to fix this problem?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join