Cassie's Law epetition

agrinnall

If you watched BBC Breakfast this morning you may have seen an item about an epetition to allow the police the power to temporarily suspend a driver's licence if they believe the driver is medically unfit to drive, pending an assessment and permanent decision by the DVLA.

The petition was started following the death of 16 year old Cassie McCord, who was killed on the pavement by an elderly driver who had 2 days previously failed a sight test administered by the police but refused to stop driving.

Please don't be put off by the linked story on the epetition being from the Daily Mail or by the grossly ageist comments of that paper's readers, the petition is not aimed at older people but at anyone who is medically unfit to drive.

Cassie's Law epetition

neilmcl

Are non-medically trained people able to assess whether a person is medically unfit to drive, I think this should be left to the professionals, not the police.

Lum

Agree, far too much potential for abuse here.

oldagetraveller

neilmcl wrote: »

Are non-medically trained people able to assess whether a person is medically unfit to drive, I think this should be left to the professionals, not the police.

They are able to determine whether their eyesight meets the correct standard to pass a driving test though. In the case of this young girl's death, that was the problem.
Maybe not medically fit as such but there can surely be some form of roadside test to determine their ability, reaction time etc..

working

I think op you'll get a netter response if you post this it DT?

maninthestreet

The police will simply abuse this power if they are given it.

agrinnall

working wrote: »

I think op you'll get a netter response if you post this it DT?

I'm assuming you're suggesting an alternative board would be better but it's not clear from your post which one you think that would be?

agrinnall

neilmcl wrote: »

Are non-medically trained people able to assess whether a person is medically unfit to drive, I think this should be left to the professionals, not the police.

It was left to the professionals, and as a result a blameless pedestrian died. Had you seen the CCTV of the driver driving on and off the pavement it would have been clear to anyone that there was some sort of problem. Protection against abuse of powers would be down to our elected represntatives to draft the law in such a way that appropriate limits are placed on the police.

Lum

agrinnall wrote: »

Protection against abuse of powers would be down to our elected represntatives to draft the law in such a way that appropriate limits are placed on the police.

Yes, but in the real world, that never happens.

Look at some of the existing laws, such as the power to seize cars for having no insurance. They use a database which was never designed for that purpose, refuse to accept the paper certificate as proof of insurance and you're left with a bill to get your car back and no way to recover that money.

Then there's the whole Section 55 thing that gives the police the power to seize your car based on heresy from someone who dislikes you, again there is no due process or burden of proof here, just a bill to get it back and no way to recover the money.

And now you're talking about removing someone's ability to drive any car for six months, that's about how long a DVLA assessment takes, just because they feel like it. Far too easy to get at someone if you can threaten them with making a report like that.

And that's not even touching on people with fluctuating chronic illnesses, who generally know when they are or aren't safe to drive, or people with certain disabilities who may appear to be weak and infirm but are still perfectly capable of driving once they actually get sat down.

I'm no fan of drivers, elderly or otherwise, who are not medically fit to be behind the wheel but giving this power to the police is not the right answer. The right answer is either to sort out the reasons that GPs do not report this often enough, or to require regular medical tests such as those given to HGV drivers.

I'm concerned that if this goes ahead, it will be yet another piece of badly written knee-jerk legislation in response to a single high-profile tragedy.

toffee'n'tom

I saw breakfast tv this morning and whether or not it's the Police or some other body I agree that something does need to be done. I don't want to be ageist but I think that a 3 yearly self declaration that you're fit to drive once you pass a certain age isn't enough. My mother is nearly 85. Up until November 2011 she has been healthy apart from arthritis in her knee and drove daily. She then became ill and was diagnosed with heart failure. Although this is now under control she has decided to hang up her keys as she realises that her reaction times, especially with her arthritis, are not what they used to be. She doesn't want to be involved in an accident or cause many. As with many elderly people we (as a family) have noticed that she is more forgetful and tires easily. It's going to happen to us all. It's a hard decision to make as you lose some independence but it is so important. That guy might as well have gone out with a weapon to kill someone.

Notmyrealname

If it is eysight then thats OK as that is very easy to check at the side of the road using nothing more than a tape measure and a static vehicle with a clean numberplate.

As a HGV driver this self declaration outrages me. I have to have a medical at age 45 then every 5 years and after 65 its annually in order to keep my HGV licence. There should be a mandatory eyesight test at age 65 for all car drivers and then a full medical at 70.