Before the DVLA bans us oldies...
I actually fall into the above age group. I have done so for nearly a year now as I write this. Just over three years ago, I underwent a double cataract operation on my eyes. Not both at the same time; there had to be an interval of about six to eight weeks between procedures. Until my optician advised me that my eyesight had got so bad, I hadn't realised what a menace I was to other users on the roads. So, I quickly signed on the dotted line to get something done about it, as being a full-time carer without transport is a non-starter.
During my recovery period, which spanned the two operations and a few weeks beyond, I was not permitted to drive. Or, rather, I was advised in no uncertain terms not to drive. The upshot of it now is, I do not need to wear glasses any longer to drive or watch TV or view anything from a distance. However, because I have an astigmatism in each eye, I have a pair of glasses that correct that problem and since having the cataracts done the spectacles I've had for those three years give me 20/20 total clarity long distance vision and absolute suitability for driving safely, whereas without specs I am still legally able to drive but the glasses just sharpen things up a bit more.
That is my personal journey.
I now turn to another issue. As you may probably guess from the image at the top left of this article, I am now going to be discussing the fact that it is not always 'old people' that should really be having their eyes tested before they drive a vehicle on UK roads. Nor, indeed, should banning people from driving on our roads who happen to be over a certain age when they are still fully capable of doing so. Let alone the ageist aspect, not all accidents are caused by us old 'uns. So, here's an obvious one...
Several times each year, the local or national news on the TV report that a lorry or (more alarmingly) a double-decker bus has either crashed into or got wedged underneath a low railway bridge. It makes a mess and creates all manner of delays for the commuters whose trains have to be cancelled or rerouted, not to mention the potential traffic tailbacks in the immediate area. And yet, do we ever hear that the drivers of such vehicles have had an eyesight test, or whether they have passed or failed such a test, before being let loose on our roads again? No.
Now, who is safer on our roads, an older car driver who has all their faculties about them and with good eyesight or someone driving a heavy lorry or double-decker bus who can't see the obvious road signs indicating that a bridge ahead is lower than the height of their vehicle? I think we should all know the answer to that already. Yes, satnavs are easily blamed but, each driver of a tall vehicle still has a duty of care towards their surroundings and other road users and still needs to be fully aware and observant at all times.
For me, if it is an eyesight test that governs whether I should remain safe while driving my car on the roads, I should now pass with flying colours. In over 53 years of driving, since I passed my test first time, I have never had an accident that has been my fault. Indeed, the only accident I have ever been involved in as a driver was when I was heavily rear-ended while waiting to turn right at a junction. Luckily for me, there was a witness who saw everything and stopped to make sure I was okay. Other than being shaken up a bit, when my car was shunted towards a lamp post at an alarming rate, I was okay and managed to limp my car home from the accident spot. The car was afterwards declared an insurance write-off.
So, before other, younger motorists, or faceless bureaucrats in an office in Westminster and Swansea condemn those of us who have been safely driving for more years than they have been born by writing us off, they should really check our back history. They may be surprised by what they learn.