Test drivers 85-plus yearly

No act of the Utah Legislature could conceivably salve the pain of the family of a man and his 5-year-old daughter who were struck and killed by an 86-year-old driver while the pair were walking through a crosswalk en route to the girl's Murray elementary school. But the Legislature could take steps to increase public safety by requiring drivers 85 and older to submit to yearly driving tests.

This group of drivers is more likely to cause accidents than even 16-year-old drivers, statistics say. That's significant considering that teen drivers cause a disproportionate number of accidents.

In the wake of the fatal auto-pedestrian accident in Murray, the mother and grandmother of the victims has asked state lawmakers to reconsider a previously rejected proposal to permit anonymous reporting to authorities of the names of drivers whose driving skills have deteriorated due to age.

At the time, we opposed the bill because families — not the government — should take the initiative to take car keys from aging and declining relatives. In most families it would be fairly easy to discern who made the call to the state driver license division.

However, lawmakers should not abandon this issue. A legitimate argument can be made for more stringent licensing requirements of Utahns 85 and older. A study by Carnegie Mellon University showed drivers 85 and older have a mile-for-mile fatality rate about three times higher on weekdays than teenagers have on weekends, according to recent press reports. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety attributes the higher accident rate to declining vision, motor skills and perception.

If older drivers whose skills are deteriorating know they will face annual driving tests, perhaps they would voluntarily give up their drivers' licenses. Perhaps such a requirement would give families a natural opening to have "the talk" with an elderly parent.

But as lawmakers institute such a requirement, they must take care not to leave seniors stranded. They need to be mindful of seniors statewide who will need transportation to shop, go to church or go to medical appointments. Perhaps lawmakers could target some surplus revenue to agencies that provide such transportation. It would seem a small price to pay for safer roads.