• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.
  • We seem to be having technical difficulties with new user accounts. If you are trying to register please check your Spam or Junk folder for your confirmation email. If you still haven't received a confirmation email, please reach out to our support inbox: support.forum@diabetes.org.uk

Driving Licence revoke new eye sight laws

Status
This thread is now closed. Please contact Anna DUK, Ieva DUK or everydayupsanddowns if you would like it re-opened.
I think someone is getting confused here. The VFT should only be required if you have a notifiable eye defect (like Glaucoma in both eyes) or have had laser eye treatment (like for diabetic retinopathy):

If you have notified the DVLA of any eye condition that may affect your driving capability, the DVLA may ask you to have an extra test done at the opticians of their choosing.
Click to expand...
from http://www.adlamandcoomber.co.uk/services/visual-field-testing-to-dvla-requirements.html

Taken from the guide for completing form DIAB1 from the DVLA website:
However, if you have had laser treatment in both
eyes, (or in the remaining eye if you only have one
eye), for any diabetic eye disease or another eye
condition (please do not include corrective surgery
for short sightedness) you will need to fill in section 2.

Section 2 is the read a number plate and the VFT requirement.
In particular from DIAB1 on-line: Question 5.
Do you have cataracts or any corneal dystrophies e.g. Fuchs
Yes/No
in both eyes (or remaining eye if one eye only)?
If you have answered YES to Q5 and have had your eyes tested within the last 6 months, please take the visual
acuity certificate to your optician to complete. If you have answered NO, DO NOT return the opticians certificate.
 
I personally think the government made a big mistake when they starting issuing licences to age 70. Over the years they have added to notifiable conditions and illnesses. However this relies on people notifying them. A full medical report should be required on the issue of a provisional licence and a number of times before age 70. The way some people drive hereabouts a psychological report would not go amiss either. This all might be unpopular but probably better than focussing on certain groups.
 
StephenM said:
I personally think the government made a big mistake when they starting issuing licences to age 70. Over the years they have added to notifiable conditions and illnesses. However this relies on people notifying them. A full medical report should be required on the issue of a provisional licence and a number of times before age 70. The way some people drive hereabouts a psychological report would not go amiss either. This all might be unpopular but probably better than focussing on certain groups.
Click to expand...

What gets me is that none of it is based on statistical data. How many accidents are caused by hypos? compared to how many are caused by alcohol consumption? Do you need to inform DVLA if you drink? We are supposed to be responsible adults so there should be no problem informing the DVLA of a notifiable condition (if it was clear🙄).
What evidence do you have to support your ageist opinion? Maybe you would have everyone over 70 forced to wear baggy cardigans, slippers and a tattoo on their forehead saying 'Beware - over 70'.
 
Vicsetter said:
What gets me is that none of it is based on statistical data. How many accidents are caused by hypos? compared to how many are caused by alcohol consumption? Do you need to inform DVLA if you drink? We are supposed to be responsible adults so there should be no problem informing the DVLA of a notifiable condition (if it was clear🙄).
What evidence do you have to support your ageist opinion? Maybe you would have everyone over 70 forced to wear baggy cardigans, slippers and a tattoo on their forehead saying 'Beware - over 70'.
Click to expand...

I know many people in their 70s who are far fitter and more capable than many in their 50s, and some of the worst drivers are in their 20s and 30s. I think it is far too arbitrary to base things on a particular age milestone these days.
 
Well I dunno if Stephen was being ageist - if he was I'll join you in bopping him one though.

What I think is everybody without exception ought to have to have their eyes tested every say 5 years, in order to retain their licences anyway. No idea why you aren't required to provide medical proof that you can see properly before you even get a licence in the first place? What does 'Read that numberplate' tell anyone about their peripheral vision? - and you've been driving for months at that stage anyway (admittedly with someone qualified, but who says they can see?)

But I think the prob might be worsened by people just not being able to afford new glasses. Esp on a pension. My lenses cost an arm and a leg before I invest in frames. Hard getting old ones reglazed, opticians really don't like doing it.
 
Vicsetter said:
I think someone is getting confused here. The VFT should only be required if you have a notifiable eye defect (like Glaucoma in both eyes) or have had laser eye treatment (like for diabetic retinopathy
Click to expand...

After feeling slightly worried about this thread a simple explanation has been given.....

Thanks.....:D
 
Ouch! OUCH!!! I was not being ageist just stating the age laid down by the government where they first recheck a person?s fitness to drive after they receive their licence. Peoples' honesty cannot be relied upon. As Trophywrench points out a diabetic may have a very comprehensive eye check but everyone else just has to read a number plate at 25 yards. Someone I know has now been told not to drive as a new optician did a field test and found they had tunnel vision! I was just suggesting everybody?s fitness to drive should be properly assessed when they apply for their first provisional licence and at intervals thereafter. Age is no guide. I know of someone who had to be stopped in their 40s with early onset dementia and someone who is a highly competent driver in their 90s. Our local paper has ~6 people each week who lose their licence due to drink driving ? a number of these after an accident. Should they not have a rigorous medical?
 
Last edited:
No - I couldn't find it either (I mean they couldn't when I clicked on the link LOL)
 
Status
This thread is now closed. Please contact Anna DUK, Ieva DUK or everydayupsanddowns if you would like it re-opened.
Back
Top