In June of last year, Angela Zodrow in Green Lake, Wis., got the phone call no parent wants: her 12-year-old son Emmet had been struck by a vehicle. Emmet had been on the sidewalk near the public library when a silver minivan mounted the curb, went through a metal fence and stopped in a nearby grassy lot. The driver, 85-year-old Jean Woolley, later told police she had confused the brake and accelerator and panicked. Woolley was cited and fined but not criminally charged.
The crash left the Zodrow family reeling. Angela still speaks of Emmet in the present tense, describing a boy who “loves life.” The family is pushing to change Wisconsin’s rules, which allow older drivers to renew their licenses every eight years. Zodrow says the system relies too heavily on self-reporting and offers too few checks to catch declines in driving ability. She wants more frequent relicensing and greater accountability for drivers involved in serious collisions.
Across the United States there is no single approach to when or how to test older drivers. States set their own renewal schedules and testing requirements, and Americans are generally driving longer than previous generations. That has sparked a debate between protecting public safety and preserving independence for older adults who rely on cars to maintain daily life, especially in rural areas with limited transit options.
Experts warn against blanket age-based punishments, noting that most older drivers remain safe. Anne Dickerson, an occupational therapy professor, says two decades ago she might have recommended additional testing beginning at 70, but improved health and vehicle safety make it reasonable to delay testing for many until 80 or later unless there are dementia or serious medical conditions. Research shows drivers ages 70 to 79 are often safe and that many older drivers self-restrict—avoiding night driving or bad weather, for example.
Overall crash rates for older drivers have fallen over the past 25 years even as the share of older drivers has increased. Aimee Cox of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety points to longer, healthier lives and better vehicle occupant protection as factors that have reduced fatalities. Crash risk is not uniform by age: teenagers and drivers in their 20s have the highest crash rates, drivers from about 30 to 79 are generally the safest, and risk rises again for drivers 80 and older.
Ideally, clinicians would advise patients when to stop driving, but doctors often lack time or are reluctant to intervene. Police officers may hesitate as well, not wanting to penalize older adults. Because declines in abilities are often gradual and hard to detect, experts say nuanced measures—such as limiting nighttime driving or avoiding highways—can be more appropriate than immediate license revocation.
State policy has swung back and forth over the last two decades. In the early 2000s some states tightened relicensing by adding mandatory vision tests, requiring in-person renewals and making it easier for relatives, police and doctors to report unsafe drivers. More recently a number of states have loosened rules. Illinois, historically strict, raised the age for mandatory behind-the-wheel testing from the 70s to 87 while also making reporting of unsafe drivers easier; supporters argued older rules were ageist and burdensome.
Research on the effects of these policy shifts remains limited. Cara Hamann, an epidemiologist who reviewed two decades of crash data covering more than 19 million drivers across 13 states—seven of which loosened relicensing—found increases in crash rates among drivers ages 65 to 74 in states that relaxed rules. She cautions that more study is needed, but her findings suggest loosening relicensing requirements may raise crash and injury rates among some older drivers.
Policymakers must weigh competing harms: stricter rules can improve public safety but may strip mobility and independence from older adults who lack viable alternatives to driving. For families like the Zodrows, who lost a child in a collision involving an older driver, the trade-off is clear. “Maybe it is a little difficult or inconvenient,” Angela Zodrow says of stricter rules. “It’s harder to live without my son.”