Doctor's Advice not to Drive
Discussion
Hi all
Can anyone help with a query please.
My mother-in-law has recently had laser eye surgery (nothing major) and has been advised not to drive.
If this were me I would do exactly what the Dr said and not drive until given the green light. However this is the mother-in-law we're talking about so a law unto herself.
I hope this isn't a stupid question but is a Dr's advice something that will invalidate her insurance?
Is there any difference between 'shouldn't' drive and 'mustn't drive? In my mind there is but car insurance may be different.
Any advice appreciated. Thanks
Can anyone help with a query please.
My mother-in-law has recently had laser eye surgery (nothing major) and has been advised not to drive.
If this were me I would do exactly what the Dr said and not drive until given the green light. However this is the mother-in-law we're talking about so a law unto herself.
I hope this isn't a stupid question but is a Dr's advice something that will invalidate her insurance?
Is there any difference between 'shouldn't' drive and 'mustn't drive? In my mind there is but car insurance may be different.
Any advice appreciated. Thanks
I think she will be in a very difficult position should she drive and have an accident. If the insurance company find out she was told she shouldnt drive then they will probably seek to discover whether the accident was due to her eyesight etc.
The good news though is that for laser eye surgery the recovery period is very quick. I wouldnt have wanted to drive for a couple of days after mine but then once the scars heal you are fine.
The good news though is that for laser eye surgery the recovery period is very quick. I wouldnt have wanted to drive for a couple of days after mine but then once the scars heal you are fine.
Had a similar situation with FIL, had heart attack and was advised by doctor to not drive for at least 6 months. 3 days after coming out of hospital he rocks up at ours for a coffee! I had a little chat and agreed to do his driving, kept his car to make sure, worst 6 months taxi job ever! Once he got the all clear he got the car back 
maybe a sensible chat from daughter? Explain how she could be putting others at risk?
maybe a sensible chat from daughter? Explain how she could be putting others at risk? When I broke my collarbone a few years back there reached a point where I was out of the sling etc but my consultant said he'd rather wait until after my next appointment (which wasn't for another 4 weeks) before I drove. I checked with the police and they said that as I had been advised by a doctor not to drive that I would almost certainly be invalidating my insurance if I were to do so. They didn't quote any legislation at me or anything but it was made fairly clear that it would NOT be a good idea!
I was under the impression (and we all know how dangerous impressions can be) that with doctors it can either be:
We advise that you do not drive for xxxx amount of time.
or
You must NOT drive for xxxx amount of time.
The latter being something that you've really not got much choice in.
I had a kidney transplant 20 months ago and after the transplant I was advised not to drive for 2 months. After about a month I was fed-up of waiting for hospital transport so started taking myself to the hospital.
Speaking with the doctor he told me that it was just advice and if driving was a potential danger to myself or others then it would have been a demand rather than some advice.
But I'm sure somebody must know the actual legal implications of all this.
We advise that you do not drive for xxxx amount of time.
or
You must NOT drive for xxxx amount of time.
The latter being something that you've really not got much choice in.
I had a kidney transplant 20 months ago and after the transplant I was advised not to drive for 2 months. After about a month I was fed-up of waiting for hospital transport so started taking myself to the hospital.
Speaking with the doctor he told me that it was just advice and if driving was a potential danger to myself or others then it would have been a demand rather than some advice.
But I'm sure somebody must know the actual legal implications of all this.
It's not nice to be told you can't drive for medical conditions especially if it's for someone with something they're unlikely to come back from.
Convince your MiL that it's just a slight inconvenience for a few weeks and thakfully not due to something like a brain tumour and how would she feel if the benefit of having her eyesight corrected was tainted by killing or injuring some other innocent in an accident that may arise because she's vision impaired for a while?
It's a bit selfish. It's like people using handheld phones and texting while driving.
She could be in an accident through no fault of her own and then it comes out that she shouldn't have been driving as she was recovering from eye surgery and something that should have been simple and clear cut suddenly gets a whole lot more complicated. It's not worth the risk is it?
Imagine the slating she'd get in the local press even if the above hypothetical scenario did happen and she was involved in an accident that wasn't her fault.
She's risking a driving ban?
Convince your MiL that it's just a slight inconvenience for a few weeks and thakfully not due to something like a brain tumour and how would she feel if the benefit of having her eyesight corrected was tainted by killing or injuring some other innocent in an accident that may arise because she's vision impaired for a while?
It's a bit selfish. It's like people using handheld phones and texting while driving.
She could be in an accident through no fault of her own and then it comes out that she shouldn't have been driving as she was recovering from eye surgery and something that should have been simple and clear cut suddenly gets a whole lot more complicated. It's not worth the risk is it?
Imagine the slating she'd get in the local press even if the above hypothetical scenario did happen and she was involved in an accident that wasn't her fault.
She's risking a driving ban?
How it affects her insurance would depend on the terms of her policy. FWIW mine says nothing at all about doctor's advice. It does say that I have to inform my insurers if I have a medical conditions which must be notified to the DVLA. But that doesn't include most short term conditions - generally you only have to tell the DVLA about conditions which are expected to last longer than 3 months. They really don't want you ringing up every time you have a touch of flu and feel too woozy to drive after all...
Her insurance can't be entirely invalidated regardless - the Road Traffic Act prevents insurers from making the minimum required cover conditional on the driver's medical condition. That's not as reassuring as it sounds though as while it means you can't commit the criminal offence of driving without insurance because of a medical condition and your insurer would have to pay out to a third party regardless of the wording on your policy, they could subsequently still come after you for the money they paid out if you'd breached the terms and conditions and they'd had to pay out solely because of the RTA.
The fact that she's not driving without insurance doesn't mean that she can't be committing other offences by driving though. Driving with uncorrected defective eyesight would be the obvious one, or even dangerous driving if her eyesight is very bad or if there's a risk of it deteriorating suddenly... and if she's been warned by a doctor not to drive she could hardly claim that the danger wasn't obvious.
Her insurance can't be entirely invalidated regardless - the Road Traffic Act prevents insurers from making the minimum required cover conditional on the driver's medical condition. That's not as reassuring as it sounds though as while it means you can't commit the criminal offence of driving without insurance because of a medical condition and your insurer would have to pay out to a third party regardless of the wording on your policy, they could subsequently still come after you for the money they paid out if you'd breached the terms and conditions and they'd had to pay out solely because of the RTA.
The fact that she's not driving without insurance doesn't mean that she can't be committing other offences by driving though. Driving with uncorrected defective eyesight would be the obvious one, or even dangerous driving if her eyesight is very bad or if there's a risk of it deteriorating suddenly... and if she's been warned by a doctor not to drive she could hardly claim that the danger wasn't obvious.
Thanks all.
She's not wearing a patch as I don't think it was major surgery. It was the release pressure from both eyes to avoid future problems. From a quick google it seems that 80-90% is gained in a 48 hours but can take 6 months to fully recover. Another website says that you shouldn't drive up to 14 days after surgery, depending on the type carried out.
I think as a precaution I will advise on 14 days, unless her optometrist (sp?) says otherwise. I just thought 2 days after surgery was a bit questionable but then the MIL is a bit stubborn.
She's not wearing a patch as I don't think it was major surgery. It was the release pressure from both eyes to avoid future problems. From a quick google it seems that 80-90% is gained in a 48 hours but can take 6 months to fully recover. Another website says that you shouldn't drive up to 14 days after surgery, depending on the type carried out.
I think as a precaution I will advise on 14 days, unless her optometrist (sp?) says otherwise. I just thought 2 days after surgery was a bit questionable but then the MIL is a bit stubborn.
SOL111 said:
I think as a precaution I will advise on 14 days, unless her optometrist (sp?) says otherwise. I just thought 2 days after surgery was a bit questionable but then the MIL is a bit stubborn.
Why stick this problem to the optometrist when a more qualified person has already advised her.She should seek clarification through the ophthalmologist.
If she has had laser trebeculectomy then the advice varies on a number of factors.
There is a requirement to notify DVLA of anything that put you or others at danger in relation to medical condition.
This obviously includes eyesight.
DVLA have a standard requirement for eyesight, so
Go to a good optician, have an eyesight test geared to DVLA requirements. If he is prepared to certify OK all the better.
New proceedure has come in recently (7.2.13) whereby if Plod feels the safety of others road users will be put at risk if the driver remains on the road he can request an ugent revocation through DVLA. If DVLA agree they reply imediately with E Mail revocation authority.
dvd
This obviously includes eyesight.
DVLA have a standard requirement for eyesight, so
Go to a good optician, have an eyesight test geared to DVLA requirements. If he is prepared to certify OK all the better.
New proceedure has come in recently (7.2.13) whereby if Plod feels the safety of others road users will be put at risk if the driver remains on the road he can request an ugent revocation through DVLA. If DVLA agree they reply imediately with E Mail revocation authority.
dvd
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff