The Public Relations Officer of the National Association of Driving Schools (NADS) has said a compulsory driving test for seniors is unnecessary.
Kingson Jean believes the test burdens the elderly who are pensioners.
At the same time, Jean observed that their responsibilities do not decrease while their buying power is less due to inflation.
And he indicated that it would be a strain for seniors to pay for a medical certificate and also pay for a practical exam.
“What really is the issue with the elderly is their mobility, reaction time and vision when it comes to driving,” the NADS official observed.
“We believe those persons, when they reach a certain age, probably about seventy-five, can go to a doctor and have their physical checkup and a report submitted to the Ministry of Transport regarding specific issues about mobility, reaction time, and vision,” Jean explained.
Citing personal responsibility, he pointed to the example of his 69-year-old mother, who drives a pickup but has decided not to do so at night.
As a result, she has entrusted nighttime driving to her grandchildren.
“Drivers in that age range would be safer drivers because they recognise their responsibility,” Jean, a former NADS President, told St Lucia Times.
He asserted that they usually would stop driving when they realise they can no longer do so safely.
“I do not see the need for a practical exam,” Jean said.
The NADS official’s comments follow a recent amendment to the Motor Vehicle and Road Traffic Act that came before parliament.
The amendment seeks to raise the age for compulsory driving examinations for Senior Citizens from 70 to 75.
what he says makes alot of sense cause its not like the people forget how to drive they can drive but its just that they are to slow on the road and are a risk to themselves and others cause of their slow reaction time and possible poor visability issues especially at night
The big question is, how many of these accidents are because of persons 65 and over?
My comment is aimed at NADS: common sense prevails!! At least the NADS P.R.O. has his head square on his shoulders regarding this “issue”.
As I stated earlier … the drivers who REALLY NEED a driving test, and a DEFENSIVE DRIVING TEST are the young hot-heads terrorising our roads, including bus drivers!! These people are the menaces and dangers on the roads.
One does not have to look far, to know of fatal accidents and unnecessary deaths due to dangerous driving methods by those young fools who THINK they are invincible to “death by driving”. These are the ones who fail to realise that a vehicle (any vehicle) is a “Legal Lethal Weapon”.
Poor vision is the problem with the old folks.
I agree to have the old folks tested..
So if poor vision is the problem what is the point of getting them to do a whole driving test over again? If they cant see they just cant see. So when they take the eye exam and this shows how low their visibility is that alone should be a NO No to say you should not be driving, whats the point of not being able to see but you going and do a practical and maybe a theory exam all over to renew your license as an elderly person
It makes no sense. It’s called ageism. Discrimination based on no rational or scientific basis.
Do those persons make up the bulk of those involved in road accidents?
Is it a further attempt at sidelining older persons who have given and continue to contribute to society .
Tell us the rationale, or I would be the first on a protest against this.
I agree that the test is unnecessary, because during our youth we hardly recognize the importance of life & safety, so we brake the law, then worry about life after the accident. But during your older ages life becomes very important likewise safety, so we exercise more precautions and make sensible decisions for life preservation, hence the reason that 98% of accidents are caused by young people, therefore, instead of wasting our time and money with test increase the presence of traffic police on our roads and
you will see a major reduction of accident.