A new thread about driving.

[Matthew74]

Bernard recently posted a poll about whether driving laws are fair to people with epilepsy. It's here: http://www.coping-with-epilepsy.com/forums/f27/do-you-think-driving-laws-fair-regards-epilepsy-983/

The consensus was that they are fair because most people think that driving with epilepsy, in spite of differences in people's condition, is generally dangerous.

I think that's true, but I also think that driving laws are unfair. The poll lists many other conditions that are also dangerous to drive with. Some examples would be young drivers, very elderly drivers, people on a lot of medication, alcoholics, not to mention healthy drivers texting, using their cell phones, reading the paper, or even watching TV on their tablets.

I think it stems from the assumption that people with epilepsy are incompetent, whereas the same prejudice does not apply in the cases above, even though everyone knows that those things are also dangerous. The implications of not being able to drive are well known to everyone here.

So, I think that driving laws ARE prejudicial and excessively harsh on people with epilepsy. Obviously, if you loose control because of having a seizure it's dangerous. It makes sense to have some laws about it. However, there are lots of other reasons for loosing control, most of them far more common.

Personally, through no fault of my own whatsoever, I have been nearly hit by inattentive drivers many times, usually while walking or riding my bicycle. And, more than once I narrowly escaped death.

I'm not arguing that we should have MORE dangerous people on the road, but that if we are going use safety as a justification for taking away people's licences, perhaps we should look more closely at other offenders. We should also review laws regarding epilepsy to make them more reasonable. For example, if someone only has a few seizures a year, and only has them at night, never during the day, they ought to be able to use their own judgement, rather than be barred for life. Also, I think that mandatory reporting by doctors is a terrible idea. Amongst other serious problems, it could lead to people lying to their doctors or avoiding treatment.

 

[Ruth]

I decided not to drive when I turned 16 years old. At that time, it was legal for people with epilepsy to drive. My sister decided to drive. She had 3 car accidents, with seizures. Then her epilepsy went into remission.

I thought it through for quite a while. My final decision was, what if I hit a car, during a seizure and killed someone or killed myself. I decided not to drive.

I have never regretted that decision.

Matthew74, you are right about being a pedestrian. I have almost been hit a few times myself. My son is also a pedestrian. He has also had the same problem. People just are not keeping their eye on the road. They do not seem to know if it is a green or red light.

There are some responsible drivers. I am not saying that all drivers are bad drivers. My husband is so responsible that we do not talk while he is driving. He does not want to be distracted by anything.

 

[sjconner]

In Montana, until last year, an identification card was only good for 4 years. Those who could not and/or chose not to drive (blind, etc) had to renew their ID card every four years. A driver's license is good for 8 years. The Montana legislature decided that requiring a new ID card every 4 years vs a driver's license every 8 years was discrimination. Montana ID cards are now good for 8 years.

Montana's laws on seizures and driving are the most lenient in the country. When you renew your license, you self report seizures. The person behind the counter makes the decision and may/may not ask for physician documentation. There is no waiting period. However, we do have a graduated licensing program for teens!

I choose not to drive. To get most places, you have to drive on a two lane road where the speed limit is 65 miles an hour. Scary!

 

[Nakamova]

In Massachusetts, you need to be 6-months seizure-free before being allowed to drive. There's no mandatory reporting however, so my neuro doesn't tell the DMV, the DMV doesn't have it on my record, and there are no restrictions on my license. So in some ways, it's up to me to make the decision. One way to think about it: If you do have a seizure while driving during the restricted period, are you prepared to deal with the physical, emotional and legal consequences of injury to yourself and/or others? If the answer is no, then you should think twice about getting behind the wheel.

I understand how frustrating it is not to be able to drive when you feel that you are at no risk. But as the stockbrokers like to warn, "past performance is no predictor of future results". In other words, just because you only have seizures at night, that's no guarantee that you won't have one during the day. For liability reason, the government tends to assume the worst-case scenario when assessing risk, so the driving laws may not be a perfect fit in every case.

 

[AndrewIrish]

I had reservations about posting in here because my opinions are a little on the fringe and I'm trying not to upset anyone... so I'll try to explain myself.

In a world where I had the ability to NOT drive... I would NOT drive... I don't live in a circumstance that affords me to not have transportation. I do not work in a field that's in the city or on a bus line... just before I quit my job last week.... I looked up a bus route from the motel room I'm living in to work... 3 and a half hours travel time... ONE WAY... and still would have left me walking for a clip... so... 8 hours traveling time a DAY to a job or a 10 minute ride in my car? What's the choice? I am the only person... the ONLY person in my family or circle of friends who HAS a car... the others work minimum wage mostly and walk to work... i'd like to not drive... i'm getting pretty tired of the cost of gas... but I CAN drive. I have jerks... I am having myoclonic seizures as I write this very post... but I don't have them when driving... why? I have driven for so long and so much and so often... it's peaceful and relaxing to me... I've never had even ONE myoclonic jerk while driving... closest I came to having a seizure in my car... WAS IN MY CAR... I wasn't feeling well, came out of a store... recognized I wasn't feeling well and slammed my car into e-brake and then went into a tonic clonic in my car... now... I drove post-ictal(which was pretty bad in and of itself)... and drove my own butt to the ER 'cuz I'd broken my shoulder during the seizure.. but it didn't happen while DRIVING... this happened 3 weeks ago... so trust me... I know I'm human... I don't want to drive... I just don't see a choice... I'm essentially homeless right now... I have $1.87 to my name... I have to work again, I HAVE to drive... I don't have time for accomodations or laws.... in my personal case I was honest... and lucky in timing... a month ago found out my license was suspended due to seizures from 2 years prior... i hadn't had a seizure entire time it was suspended, told the DMV that, they reinstated my license... now of course, a week later, I have a seizure... do I just put my license down... hobble around town and hope to find a good-paying job in a plethora of fast food chains? I can't work at McDonalds and live, I'm sorry... I can't do it... not enough money... I need a car to work be able to work at a place where I Can JUST scrape by alone... a car equals money... like I said though... in my personal case, I have to drive... if someone has the ability to NOT drive... if they actually have a CHOICE to drive or not... someone in my circumstance should definately NOT drive... it's an unneccessary risk... sadly, right now, it's one I HAVE to take... I don't HAVE a choice... luckily, there's no reporting laws in Ohio, Kentucky or Indiana... the only reason my license got suspended originally is because I was open and honest with the DMV when I last got my license reissued when it expired... I told them I'd had seizures... they suspended the license... had I known it was suspended, I wouldn't have been driving... but I got unsuspended... until the next time it gets suspended... if ever... I'ma be rolling around...

 

[Ruth]

I have a seizure... do I just put my license down... hobble around town and hope to find a good-paying job in a plethora of fast food chains? I can't work at McDonalds and live, I'm sorry... I can't do it... not enough money

I am glad that you posted it and were honest. Honesty is the best policy!!

Epilepsy is hereditary in my family. My sister chose to drive with epilepsy. Her epilepsy went into remission at the age of 18. Her epilepsy came back when she was in her 50's. She was not able to drive. Her daughter was her caregiver.

I chose not to drive.
.
I have 2 sons with epilepsy. They chose not to drive. They worked at Burger King and were able to move out on there own. We did not force them out.

Were you forced out by your parents? A lot of parents do that and I think it is horrible.

Take care, :hugs:

 

[Matthew74]

In the end what made me decide against it was that I just don't have the situational awareness. I'm afraid I'd wreck because I couldn't keep track of what is going on, or couldn't react fast enough. My drug induced stupor is far more dangerous than my seizures. But, if I was in a worse drug induced stupor without any seizures, I would be perfectly legal. I could be dizzy and nodding off, as long as I hadn't had a seizure for six months. That's nuts.

Maybe what is most frustrating to me is that people have absolutely no idea how disabling not having a car is. I can't drive. I accept that. Unfortunately almost everybody does drive, and because they do, they don't understand what it's like not to. Just listen to how they complain when their car is in the shop. I routinely walk 1 to 3 miles, often while carrying stuff. People with cars think they can't walk to the other end of the parking lot. But they expect me to have a great job, go shopping, go to the doctor, go to the hardware store, etc.

It's the same thing with jobs, or appointments. Nobody knows when public transportation runs. Their schedules don't line up, and sometimes it becomes impossible to make things work. Public transportation isn't exactly convenient either. When I was living in Virginia it was often quicker to walk three miles than to take the bus. Commuting times get to be insane.

I don't have a solution. I just know it's a huge problem.

 

[Ruth]

Matthew74, you worded my sentiments exactly. I use to walk 3-4 miles and people were puzzled by it. I do not know why they were. I got good exercise and kept in shape. So does my sons who walk everywhere. They like walking.

When we were living in Sonoma, one person would walk from Santa Rosa to Sonoma to his place of work. It was about 13 miles. He liked doing the exercise.

 

[masterjen]

In the end what made me decide against it was that I just don't have the situational awareness. I'm afraid I'd wreck because I couldn't keep track of what is going on, or couldn't react fast enough. My drug induced stupor is far more dangerous than my seizures. But, if I was in a worse drug induced stupor without any seizures, I would be perfectly legal. I could be dizzy and nodding off, as long as I hadn't had a seizure for six months. That's nuts.

Very true; it is nuts.
Yes, taking anti-seizure medications can muddle our thoughts and slow reaction times. Where are the laws for people in these circumstances?? Their decision to drive is left to their "best judgment", and let's be honest: not everyone has or uses best judgment. Who is less of a threat on the road: a clear-headed epileptic on low dose or no medication and who has a seizure 1-2 times per year, or a medicated epileptic who is feeling "foggy" etc. much of the time but who has not had a seizure for 6 months?? Food for thought . . .

 

[BlueCat]

Very true; it is nuts.
Yes, taking anti-seizure medications can muddle our thoughts and slow reaction times. Where are the laws for people in these circumstances?? Their decision to drive is left to their "best judgment", and let's be honest: not everyone has or uses best judgment. Who is less of a threat on the road: a clear-headed epileptic on low dose or no medication and who has a seizure 1-2 times per year, or a medicated epileptic who is feeling "foggy" etc. much of the time but who has not had a seizure for 6 months?? Food for thought . . .

True - but (and this is someone who is not having any side affects from the AED's so only a thought) at least here, the doctor has to sign something affirming that one is considered safe to drive. If we're honest with the docs then being dozy wouldn't exactly qualify for a sign-off. Don't want anyone on any meds (e or otherwise) driving medicated in that condition, it's no better than driving drunk.:twocents:

 

[kirsten]

I wrote a post in the longer driving thread Bernard linked to but I'll repeat some of it here.

When I look at the studies often cited here, they don't offer objective data. Looking at how many accidents are currently caused by seizures, as reported to law enforcement, does not offer objective figures for two reasons:

a) people with uncontrolled epilepsy are already legally barred from driving so of course there are fewer accidents caused by seizures.
b) when we rely on legal reporting of how accidents went down, it is unlikely that epilepsy sufferers are going to be honest about whether or not they had a seizure. Their licences would be taken away and they might be held accountable for the damage they have caused.

There are more objective studies, one showing that as many as a quarter of epilepsy sufferers have had car accidents as a result of seizures. None of those were due to tonic clonic seizures--all were partials, which puts paid to the excuse that 'I can drive because I don't have tonic clonics.'

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1762211

"(1) Fifty-seven percent were caused by complex partial seizure without an aura in which consciousness was immediately impaired at onset, while about 10% were attributed to simple partial seizure in which the conscious state was not altered. No accident was caused by a first seizure; (2) Fifty-one percent occurred on an empty road with little pedestrian and/or vehicular traffic; (3) In about half the accidents, the driver's vehicle collided against an immovable object, and only 20% involved crashing into another car; (4) Most accidents caused damage to only the driver's car and/or mild physical injury; and (5) Fifty-four percent of the accidents were not reported to the police, and many that were reported were ascribed to driving while asleep, to careless driving or to similar behavior."

The issue is this:

"adherence to a 12-month seizure-free interval was estimated to prevent about 80% of all crashes associated with seizures, but it also would prohibit driving for about 50% of all those with epilepsy who would not crash. "
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673400/

With those numbers in mind, all I ask is for absolute awareness of the potential consequences of driving with uncontrolled epilepsy. I suppose I might have more awareness than some because when I was in college, one of my class mates accidentally killed someone in a car accident directly before he arrived for lectures. I will never forget his face, or the way he changed afterwards. For the rest of the year, he was a completely different person. This is a long article written by a man who killed someone in an accident, but please do read it and make a conscious choice as to whether these are risks you're willing to take.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you...23-years-guilt-accidentally-killing-girl.html

A friend posted a facebook message today that said, "You can have excuses or results. You can't have both." I have commuted on public transport for six hours a day to get to work for two years and I still commute four hours to get to and from my doctors' appointments. I don't bemoan the fact. This is a choice I have made because the alternative is unacceptable to me. I haven't even gone into how acceptable it would be to the family of the person I might have killed one day in a car accident during a seizure.

The decision to drive or not is not an isolated one that can be made by the individual alone because the potential consequences affect the entire community. It is up to us to make an unselfish decision based not only on our circumstances but those of the people around us who use the road as well and who might be hurt by our decision.

 

[N Sperlo]

If it were up to me, most people I encounter on the road would have lost their license long ago.

 

[masterjen]

If it were up to me, most people I encounter on the road would have lost their license long ago.

Yes, good point!! Maybe the issue comes down to our various licensing organizations being too lenient, and not doing enough (any?) "auditing" of all drivers (not just those with known issues behind the wheel, such as advancing age) and out-of-the-blue calling up someone to retake a health exam, and written and road tests. Can you imagine the outcry that would cause - I would say tough luck to the complainers; I'd rather know efforts are being made to get drivers off the road who shouldn't be there in the first place.