Medical removal of driving license
Discussion
I have a friend who has come to the attention of a consultant.
About four months ago he fell twice (tripped on the stairs and in the dark) and fainted once (bad back, bad night and stood up too fast in the morning). Unfortunately, he's over 70 so this is causing a couple of problems.
A consultant at the local hospital is taking this as evidence that he is unfit to drive, although we disagree.
What is the consultant able to do to get his license revoked and what can we do to counter this?
About four months ago he fell twice (tripped on the stairs and in the dark) and fainted once (bad back, bad night and stood up too fast in the morning). Unfortunately, he's over 70 so this is causing a couple of problems.
A consultant at the local hospital is taking this as evidence that he is unfit to drive, although we disagree.
What is the consultant able to do to get his license revoked and what can we do to counter this?
BrassMan said:
....
A consultant at the local hospital is taking this as evidence that he is unfit to drive, although we disagree.
What is the consultant able to do to get his license revoked and what can we do to counter this?
You may disagree, but if the consultant has good reasoning that there may not be much you can do - do you have specific reasons why you disagree?A consultant at the local hospital is taking this as evidence that he is unfit to drive, although we disagree.
What is the consultant able to do to get his license revoked and what can we do to counter this?
There is a lot of info here;
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/neurological-disorders-assessing-fitness-to-drive
Unfortunately when threatened with a loss of licence, people will come up with all sorts of reasons why they shouldn't have it revoked, however the medical practitioners are the ones best placed to make that decision.
I can tell you as I have had my licence revoked on medical grounds previously.
They tell DVLA and pretty swiftly you get a letter that gives you less than a week to stop driving.
It's far better to surrender your licence. It's not as difficult to get it back if that's a realistic possibility.
They tell DVLA and pretty swiftly you get a letter that gives you less than a week to stop driving.
It's far better to surrender your licence. It's not as difficult to get it back if that's a realistic possibility.
Einstein 75:
The worry is that the consultant is misrepresenting the case. He has fallen twice and fainted once, which has become "a long history of blackouts."
We have a second opinion that he is safe, but don't know how much weigh this will carry.
PurpleMoonlight:
Get in the sea.
Barkychoc;
They've had four months, but not done that.
Are you referring to appealing to the magistrate?
The worry is that the consultant is misrepresenting the case. He has fallen twice and fainted once, which has become "a long history of blackouts."
We have a second opinion that he is safe, but don't know how much weigh this will carry.
PurpleMoonlight:
Get in the sea.
Barkychoc;
They've had four months, but not done that.
Are you referring to appealing to the magistrate?
Doctors will rather be safe than sorry. He may have fainted once but if the doctor feels there is a chance this could happen again and feels it wasn't related to just getting up too quick then it's best to revoke the licence.
If the doctor allows him to drive and he faints at the wheel tomorrow and kills a child, the doctor will probably loose his job!
Likewise, if it was your child that was killed and you found out the driver has fainted a few times and their doctor allowed him to drive following an assessment, you'd probably be a little peed off.
If the doctor allows him to drive and he faints at the wheel tomorrow and kills a child, the doctor will probably loose his job!
Likewise, if it was your child that was killed and you found out the driver has fainted a few times and their doctor allowed him to drive following an assessment, you'd probably be a little peed off.
HantsRat said:
Doctors will rather be safe than sorry. He may have fainted once but if the doctor feels there is a chance this could happen again and feels it wasn't related to just getting up too quick then it's best to revoke the licence.
If the doctor allows him to drive and he faints at the wheel tomorrow and kills a child, the doctor will probably loose his job!
Likewise, if it was your child that was killed and you found out the driver has fainted a few times and their doctor allowed him to drive following an assessment, you'd probably be a little peed off.
The question isn't that he's safe to drive, it's what are the doctor's options if he's serious and how likely is he to succeed?If the doctor allows him to drive and he faints at the wheel tomorrow and kills a child, the doctor will probably loose his job!
Likewise, if it was your child that was killed and you found out the driver has fainted a few times and their doctor allowed him to drive following an assessment, you'd probably be a little peed off.
BrassMan said:
The question isn't that he's safe to drive, it's what are the doctor's options if he's serious and how likely is he to succeed?
The doctor informs the patient that they should inform the DVLA first. If patient complies, then the doctor doesn't inform the DVLA directly. If the doctor finds out that he is driving, despite his/her heed, then they will inform the DVLA directly - at this point the consultant is very likely to succeed.
BrassMan said:
Barkychoc;
They've had four months, but not done that.
Are you referring to appealing to the magistrate?
The onus is on the driver - if he has been told not to drive the consultant may or may not inform the DVLA.They've had four months, but not done that.
Are you referring to appealing to the magistrate?
Either way they are not driving legally - they effectively don't have a licence.
I had a seizure while driving a few years ago - I was very lucky - just coming to the end of a dual carriageway - another 200 yards I'd have been head on. As it was I stuffed the car in the central reservation. I have driven since, but now again can't drive for other reasons and may well now not drive again.
It seems like a tragedy to start with - but life goes on and they need to be safe.
imdeman87 said:
BrassMan said:
The question isn't that he's safe to drive, it's what are the doctor's options if he's serious and how likely is he to succeed?
The doctor informs the patient that they should inform the DVLA first. If patient complies, then the doctor doesn't inform the DVLA directly. If the doctor finds out that he is driving, despite his/her heed, then they will inform the DVLA directly - at this point the consultant is very likely to succeed.BrassMan said:
imdeman87 said:
BrassMan said:
The question isn't that he's safe to drive, it's what are the doctor's options if he's serious and how likely is he to succeed?
The doctor informs the patient that they should inform the DVLA first. If patient complies, then the doctor doesn't inform the DVLA directly. If the doctor finds out that he is driving, despite his/her heed, then they will inform the DVLA directly - at this point the consultant is very likely to succeed.BrassMan said:
The question isn't that he's safe to drive, it's what are the doctor's options if he's serious and how likely is he to succeed?
The medical consultation is confidential, and so the onus is on the patient to inform DVLA that they have received medical advice not to drive.However, the doctor-patient relationship is not subject to absolute confidentiality, and the confidentiality can be breached if there is a public interest.
The GMC published guidance in 2015 which advises doctors that they MUST breach confidentiality and inform DVLA (even if the patient refuses consent) if they believe that the patient has not acted upon the advice to inform DVLA and stop driving.
cmaguire said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Big man.
You deserved it.You might like to impress upon others that you feel yourself better educated than they are, but it adds nothing to the thread,.
The only downside to grammar and spelling corrections is that it seems to be a waste of time as those who could benefit don't take it on board, habits are hard to break. On a car forum where most people have a driving licence in their pocket it seems particularly odd that so many people spell licence incorrectly.
It's a shame the mods haven't corrected the title.
Edited by herewego on Thursday 13th April 09:25
It will not be the consultant who revokes the licence but the DVLA, a small difference. They will take into account the type of events, what was happening at the time & the time that has elapsed since the last one. It's worth having a good detailed read of the Fitness to Drive Guidance and discussing provoking factors with your Dr. If other Drs disagree with the opinion they can send that in as well to be looked at and considered. The decision will have to be able to stand scrutiny in Court potentially.
Lay opinion will not carry as much weight as the opinion of a health professional though. Tends to be a sort of hierarchy, Dr trumps nurse who trumps lay person.
Lay opinion will not carry as much weight as the opinion of a health professional though. Tends to be a sort of hierarchy, Dr trumps nurse who trumps lay person.
"The worry is that the consultant is misrepresenting the case. He has fallen twice and fainted once, which has become "a long history of blackouts."
We have a second opinion that he is safe, but don't know how much weigh this will carry."
Just as someone who had a partner on the wrong end of a medically unfit driver (she's alive but we're no longer together), are you sure you actually know your friends full medical history regarding the issue. Also, if your second opinion is from the family GP, that wouldn't (shouldn't) carry the same weight as a consultant (Specialist trumps generalist). There is also the issue that many GPs have a 'relationship' with their patients which they are unwilling to jeopardise by giving hard advice / dobbing them in.
Is your friend on medication as a result of their problem which in turn carry a driving risk?
Despite the 2015 instructions there are still frequently reported cases of over-60s causing medically - related road accidents. To say they have driven safely for x years is no defence to declining capabilities.
We have a second opinion that he is safe, but don't know how much weigh this will carry."
Just as someone who had a partner on the wrong end of a medically unfit driver (she's alive but we're no longer together), are you sure you actually know your friends full medical history regarding the issue. Also, if your second opinion is from the family GP, that wouldn't (shouldn't) carry the same weight as a consultant (Specialist trumps generalist). There is also the issue that many GPs have a 'relationship' with their patients which they are unwilling to jeopardise by giving hard advice / dobbing them in.
Is your friend on medication as a result of their problem which in turn carry a driving risk?
Despite the 2015 instructions there are still frequently reported cases of over-60s causing medically - related road accidents. To say they have driven safely for x years is no defence to declining capabilities.
Apologies to everyone that replied. It eventually resolved in our favour and I forgot about the thread.
I had a look at the guidelines, which didn't seem to apply unless you really stretched the syncope (sp?) section and he was on no medication.
Finally, this thread was partly to help manage the stress of the process, which inevitably goes on too long.
I had a look at the guidelines, which didn't seem to apply unless you really stretched the syncope (sp?) section and he was on no medication.
Finally, this thread was partly to help manage the stress of the process, which inevitably goes on too long.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff