26 of 218 DOCUMENTS The Boston Herald July 22, 2009 Wednesday ALL EDITIONS Old drivers put to unfair test BYLINE: By JACK LEVIN SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 021 LENGTH: 612 words Almost every summer we create an epidemic which dominates public opinion as well as media coverage. During the 1990s, pit bulls were reportedly attacking humans in record numbers - but only in June and July; more recently it was reported that numerous children were being abducted by strangers - but only dur-ing the summmer months. By September, newscasters and talk show hosts found something else to exag-gerate. This summer's epidemic consists of an outbreak of older drivers who have committed serious auto acci-dents. In the last few weeks, for example, a 92-year-old Reading man backed his car into his wife, killing her; an 88-year-old Canton woman fatally struck a 4-year-old girl in Stoughton; and a 93-year-old man drove his car into a Danvers Wal-Mart, injuring three people. It is true that older drivers have been responsible for several deadly accidents this summer, but so were younger drivers. Just as we focused only on deadly attacks by pit bulls rather than other breeds, just as we downplayed the numerous parents who abducted their own children during custody battles, so we now con-centrate only on dangerous drivers over the age of 70. In so doing, we ignore the 53-year-old resident of West Dennis who, on June 11, was charged with motor vehicle homicide. Or the 29-year-old Chicopee man who seriously injured a Springfield boy on a bicycle. Or the 52-year-old Cheshire woman whose car hit and killed a 90-year-old man outside of a Pittsfield restaurant. Or the 18-year-old Saugus man allegedly driving home drunk who struck and killed a woman walking her dog. Or the 21-year-old Bourne man whose car hit a tree, taking the life of his passenger. Headlines hardly ever place a driver who causes a deadly accident in an age category. Unless a driver is at least 70 years old, his or her age is viewed as irrelevant. It would, therefore, appear foolish for a headline to read: ``Middle-aged man has deadly accident'' or ``Young adult driver injures three.'' When a 75-year-old has a serious accident, however, the assumption is that his or her advanced age was responsible. ``Elderly driver indicted.'' ``Elderly hubby's license revoked.'' ``Elderly driver cited in Wal-Mart crash.'' The use of the term ``elderly'' or ``senior'' represents more than a description. It also provides an expla-nation for the driver's dangerous behavior. The assumption is that he or she is in a period of physical and intellectual decline, perhaps a victim of senility, and therefore lacking in the sound judgment or fast reflexes that most younger drivers possess. Just as I am not suggesting that all pit bulls can be trusted, so I understand that certain older people should give up their licenses to drive. Yet according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 20-year-old drivers have the largest number of fatal crashes per 100,000 people. Ironically, it is drivers over the age of 85 who have the LOWEST rate of fatal accidents. Older drivers tend to drive fewer miles than their younger counterparts, which explains their lower involvement in fatalities. But they also travel less on high-ways and more on crowded city streets, where fatal accidents are more likely to occur. Moreover, the fragility of many drivers older than 75 explains why they are especially prone to be killed in accidents. Perhaps we should upgrade our driving tests so that drivers new to the roads, often in their teens or early 20s and most accident-prone, are actually required to learn the rules of the road. Then, we might also ask their grandparents to take a road test every few years. Jack Levin is co-director of the Brudnick Center on Violence and Conflict at Northeastern University. LOAD-DATE: July 22, 2009 LANGUAGE: ENGLISH PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newspaper |