The elderly driver dilemma

The auto-pedestrian accident that killed a man and his 5-year-old daughter this week is too tragic for words. Initial reports indicate the two were walking through a crosswalk that is clearly marked by warning signs alerting motorists that the crosswalk is frequented by schoolchildren. The approach to the crosswalk is long, giving drivers plenty of room to see what is ahead.

It is an accident that leaves people on all sides feeling bereaved and confused. At the moment, it is premature to assign blame. That's what police and the courts are for. However, the driver was described as an 86-year-old man, and that is likely to once again raise questions about whether the state should more closely monitor elderly drivers.

Regardless of the facts surrounding this case, the answer to that question is a definite yes. Lawmakers have relied on accident statistics to pass restrictions on the movements of new teenage drivers, and for good reason. Drivers who are 16 tend to cause a disproportionate share of accidents. But statistics also show that drivers 85 and older are more likely even than 16-year-olds to cause accidents. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety attributes this to declining vision, motor skills and perception.

A recent USA Today story cited data from Carnegie Mellon University that shows drivers 85 and older have a mile-for-mile fatality rate about three times higher on weekdays than teenagers have on weekends.

Of course, statistics look at the aggregate. Not all senior citizens are dangerous drivers. Some who are 90 or older are quite safe, while other drivers less than half that age are tremendous hazards as they talk on cell phones, eat lunch or engage in other distractions behind the wheel. But the statistics ought to cause policymakers to take notice.

Earlier this year, Utah lawmakers rejected a bill that would have allowed a friend or family member to secretly turn someone in to state officials to be retested for a driver's license. It was a bill rich with good intentions but poor in application.

A better idea would be to require yearly driving tests for people 85 and older. As society ages, this would put a burden on state officials, who would need to hire more personnel. But as society ages, the need will become so much greater.

In the meantime, many families face the difficulty of having to remove car keys from an elderly loved one who may not realize he or she is no longer competent to drive. That isn't easy. It is, however, far easier than dealing with a tragic accident.