Seniors behind the wheel: "Give up your driving license at 65, but work until 70?"

More and more seniors are causing serious traffic accidents – this is shown by current figures from the Federal Statistical Office, as can be read in the article "Driver's License for Life? Why the Age Debate is Now Gaining Speed ." However, the demand for regular driving aptitude tests from age 65 onwards continues to meet with fierce resistance and political reluctance. The debate surrounding driver's license checks for seniors is also gaining momentum among our readers: Between demands for more safety and criticism of age discrimination, one can read

Many readers, 23 percent of whom are of the opinion that calls for driver's license suspensions, increased insurance premiums, and general restrictions on older people reflect a contemptuous and discriminatory attitude. Many particularly find the unequal treatment between long-term work capacity and abrupt restrictions on freedom of movement deeply unfair.

"Work until 70, then do a year of community service and pay the Boomer solidarity tax, lose your driver's license, and then die immediately. How contemptuous can you really be?" Original comment

"Old people are a burden on pension funds and health insurance, they have more accidents, and they're no longer fit to work. Why do we even have old people? They can go, right?" Original comment

"The 'old' people again. They always stand out, they can't drive and they just use up their pensions and assets. That's not right." Original comment

Around 14 percent of readers criticize the illogicality of encouraging older people to work until they're 65 or 70, while at the same time restricting or even questioning their ability to drive. Several voices are already anticipating legal conflicts, as they believe this contradiction is difficult to reconcile.

"Exactly my sense of humor. At 65, my driver's license might be taken away, but I can work until I'm 70. Let's see how politicians explain this." Original comment

"But working until 70... leave us alone!" Original comment

"Letting people work until they're 67 and then questioning their ability to drive from age 65 onward. What kind of nonsense is that? If this scenario were to occur, the German courts could already prepare for numerous lawsuits." Original comment

"Strangely, pensioners are allowed to work until they're 70 and save the country, but they're not allowed to drive, or their ability to drive is questioned." Original comment

"Exactly my sense of humor. In the future, we're supposed to work until 70 or even longer, but it's implicitly assumed that at some point after the age of 60, you'll no longer be able to drive a vehicle properly. What will happen to seniors who operate heavy machinery or even drive trucks, taxis, buses, or trams? And how do they get to work if not by car?" Original comment

Some readers question the validity of current accident statistics and advocate a comparison with the accident rate among younger drivers. Demographic trends are also cited as a possible explanation for the higher number of older drivers involved in accidents. The debate surrounding the consequences of accidents depending on the age group is also addressed.

"Couldn't it also be partly due to the fact that there are more and more older people over 65 in this country, and therefore more accidents are happening in this age group? And what are the comparable figures for younger people?" Original comment

"The statistics clearly show that younger drivers cause significantly more and significantly more serious accidents than older drivers." Original comment

"These figures should be compared with those of young drivers. Only then are they relevant." Original comment

"Of course, the principle applies: Don't believe any statistics you didn't fake yourself. My AI says otherwise. The 18-24 age group is disproportionately involved in accidents and is then the main cause. Relative to the population, older people tend to be less involved in accidents. However, when people 65 and older are involved in accidents, they often bear the primary blame. People 80 and older are less involved in accidents because they often don't even own a car anymore. Will this actually matter at all when we have autonomous driving in a few years, or is this just occupational therapy for EU officials?" Original comment

While a portion of readers (12 percent) supports regular medical and driving exams for seniors over 65, they reject the high costs or additional bureaucratic burden. Instead of expensive MOT tests, many prefer a simple health checkup by a family doctor and question the necessity of constantly reissuing driver's licenses.

"Since I have a truck driver's license, I've had to take a vision, hearing, and reaction test, as well as a medical examination, every five years since my 50th birthday. And yes, I think this is necessary and sensible for every driver's license holder over 65! But I doubt you need a new license every time!" Original comment

"A health check is enough. Mobility, eyesight, and reactions. General fitness. The family doctor should be allowed to do that. They usually know their patients' physical condition and complaints. A driving test for the TÜV (German Technical Inspection Authority) is pure money-making. Sure, younger people drive more kilometers, but for older people, the statistics are often clouded by accidents in the parking lot. My father drives 200 km, no accidents. He goes shopping, two accidents." Original comment

"Reduce the requirements, especially the theory, and then give everyone a quick check-up every four or five years, including a vision test. Simple rules, simple tests, and then you could identify the most serious problems without much damage (not just those that arise with age). But as long as we inspect everything excessively, like with the MOT, and thus make it expensive, I can understand anyone who gets upset about the additional effort. Even today, the probability of failing is not small for any experienced driver, because with enough experience, you can quickly assess situations where the examiner might require an extra look over your shoulder, even if you can see less than in a modern exterior mirror." Original comment

"If insurance companies are required not to increase premiums based on a successful driving test, I'm in favor. Driving tests simply to satisfy bureaucracy are something I'm against." Original comment

Seven percent of readers are demanding fairer treatment in car insurance and criticizing that age is often used as an excuse for high premiums. Many are particularly annoyed that this happens regardless of mileage and that younger drivers are rarely considered.

"Every year, I can only smile. There's nothing better for insurance companies than using age as a justification for higher premiums. The insurance companies shamelessly exploit this. It's just strange that no statistical comparisons with younger drivers are mentioned at all. That probably doesn't fit, and in the news, younger drivers are very often involved in accidents. Let's finally leave the older generation alone." Original comment

"My father-in-law is 82 and can easily outdo many a young man. But when it comes to insurance, age discrimination strikes mercilessly..." Read the original comment.

"If insurance companies are required not to increase premiums based on a successful driving test, I'm in favor. Driving tests simply to satisfy bureaucracy are something I'm against." Original comment

Also with a share of 7 percent, some readers suspect political and economic ulterior motives behind the debate: They see the initiatives for driving tests and driver's license revocation primarily as a way to reduce car traffic through bureaucracy and pressure on insurance companies, thus strengthening public transport. Suspicion of selfish motives and little genuine concern for safety is widespread.

"is picking up speed because the "officials" in the EU need jobs and someone "smells" sales." To the original comment

"It's not about the driver's license, they just want to get the cars off the road." Original comment

"It's all just another thumbscrew from the Green-Reds – so that fewer people are traveling by car and more can be robbed and harassed in the now established environment of public transport." Original comment

"If I remember correctly, this was first brought up by the Greens in the Bundestag, with the words that there should no longer be a lifetime driving licence and since then the topic has been raised from all different directions, so that there should only be young drivers, but they will also get old one day and then, there will be," To the original comment

"I don't vote for parties whose politicians make such demands. It's quite simple." Original comment

Ironic and sarcastic comments, poking fun at the absurdity of the debate, age discrimination, and political decisions, make 6 percent of the comments. Many of these voices succinctly address the discussion with pointed humor and illustrate how contradictory individual lines of argument appear.

"Compulsory seat belts and airbags were the death of the pension fund. Therefore, pension or driver's license, not both at the same time. Otherwise, I say: if you can drive until 80, you can also work until 70 :)" To the original comment

"As a pensioner, I am in favor of euthanasia from the age of 60. It's unbearable how one is discriminated against as "hey old man." Irony off." To the original comment

What's your opinion: Should mandatory driving aptitude tests be introduced from a certain age—or do such proposals fall far short and stigmatize an entire generation? Share your thoughts and experiences in the comments.