Seniors get another chance back at the wheel…
Posted by editor on May 1, 2012 · 8 Comments
Dear Editor,
Changes in the DriveABLE BC processes have been implemented and directly address the concerns raised by seniors throughout the province about the DriveABLE in-office assessment.
DriveABLE is an assessment tool designed to provide the Office of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles (OSMV) and is an accurate, safe way to determine if a suspected cognitive impairment is affecting an individual’s driving ability.
Medical practitioners provide 95 per cent of related reports to the Superintendent. Typically, these doctors have already conducted an in-office cognitive screening. Upon turning 80, and every two years after, drivers must go to their doctors and complete a Driver Medical Examination Report. This is part of a regular review to identify any possible driver fitness issues. The Province pays the costs of DriveABLE assessments.
There are two components to the DriveABLE assessment. The first involves a touch-screen assessment, and it takes about an hour. No knowledge of computers or how they work is needed. It’s a matter of touching a screen or button – no mouse is involved.
Trained healthcare professionals (like kinesiologists and occupational therapists) guide clients through the assessment. These professionals will make sure clients understand the task fully before they’re asked to complete it. In fact, they walk you through practice sessions so that you can get comfortable with it. Those who pass the on-screen assessment, will retain their license.
New to the process and for drivers who did not pass the in-office assessment, they can now take a DriveABLE on-road evaluation conducted on a designated route in a dual-brake vehicle. The test is at no cost to the individual.
As reported by seniors in rural communities, travelling distances to testing centres were a major and expensive concern. For the Columbia Valley, I am pleased to report that DriveABLE assessments began in Cranbrook on Friday, April 27, making it the first permanent mobile location in BC. Today there are currently 17 DriveABLE offices in BC compared to 3 in 2005.
The OSMV is in the process of reaching out to drivers who failed the in-office assessment in the six months prior to the assessment changes, to invite them to take an on-road evaluation. Letters started going out the week of April 16th.
ICBC will provide these drivers with a 3-day temporary license before they take on-road portion of the DriveABLE assessment. This allows drivers – who must be accompanied by a licensed adult driver – to familiarize themselves with being in the driver’s seat.
People who failed the in-office assessment more than six months ago must go to their doctor for another Driver’s Medical Examination. The physician provides the Driver’s Medical Examination Report (DMER) to the Superintendent for review. If the DMER indicates an improved cognitive condition, they will be offered an on-road assessment.
The Superintendent will also consider new medical information, such as an improvement in a medical condition, changes to prescription medications, or additional physician advice. Individuals may also write to the Superintendent to appeal a licensing decision.
I am proud of those seniors who took the time to let their government know how they felt about this issues and I am also proud of the BC Liberal government for hearing your voices and acting on them. We are working for you.
Doug Clovechok
BC Liberal Candidate
Columbia River Revelstoke Riding
Now here is some one who gets things done.
I seem to recall a couple of weeks ago, Clovechok stated that at least he was working with beaureacrats and politicians to make this available to our seniors.
Not Do Nothing DNN was puffing and huffing though with a very loud voice.
David, I guess your welcome for the new policy for the new policy on commenting on stories doesn’t extend as far as restraining your abuse for political opponents.
Nick, if calling the truth is, in your words, abuse, then guilty I stand.
Another manner of considering my critisism of Do Nothing Norm, is so that after about 6 years of taking and not achieving anything, I am giving him, DNN, the opportunity to change his ways and help the community in a substantive manner.
I recognized very quickly, that many do not agree with criticism of DNN, but, if some one is hired to accomplish something, and does not, it is the imperative of every citizen to call that employee for what they have not done.
Otherwise, we are simply subsidizing incompitance in our elected officials or our beaureacrats or our employees or our co workers or or or.
We as society hired Do Nothing to accomplish things for this large area. He accepted, he has taken the “king’s” coin, and he has talked and he has huffed and puffed, but other than that, he has ?????????
I have not seen anything either Nick
So yes, I am calling him on his lack of performance. It is called criticism by the electorate.
David, one of my biggest disappointments after landing in Canada was the low level of political campaigning here. I thought that negative campaigning was bad in the UK – it is much more prevalent in Canada. So I am not surprised that you think that only referring to an opponent by an abusive nickname is appropriate behaviour.
I hope that one day you can stand back and look at this from a more detached perspective. Then you might learn something about polite debate.
I do appreciate your thoughts on this topic Nick but when so many people see so many things not being done by our elected representative, some thing has to be said. And said publicly. And said often.
I know many would apologize for Norm’s inability to accomplish things in the area, and they would brush it off to him being in the opposition, but, and it is a huge but, many many people demand more from this individual. We demand a higher standard of service to all the constiuents rather than his supporters in an election.
We demand better roads, and that DNN make that happen.
People demand that our elected representative produce something other than rhetoric.
People expect that some one who is receiving, I beleive it’s around $100,000 a year do a lot lot more than bluster and huff and puff and yes, listen.
We need that representative to help make jobs happen in the valley. DNN has been doing just the opposite to sjupport his suppoters. That is not what a local, a regional, or a national representative is hired to do, is it? Just talk and listen but rather produce something substantive.
I’m sorry if you feel calling attention to DNN is abusive, but really, it is just a call from the wilderness for him to do something for the area for a change.
And I will again, as I have for the last 5 + years now, ask the question, ” What has Norm Done that is substantive?”
And the screaming answer that thunders through the world of the Columbia is a resounding and defaning silence.
And some would not have it repeated every time the thunder calls because it shatters their image of DNN.
To address your comment of ” negative campaigning”?, is it negative to call attention to someone’s complete failure to produce anything for the area?
Is it “negative campaigning” to say it often?
Is it “negatiive campaigning” when there is no campaign?
Just because some one calls attention to an elected official for not doing his job, that is not negative except to that elected official. To have high expectations of our elected officials and to be disappointed and discouraged for over 6 years, that is negative. But to say it out loud? To say, Norm, it’s not good enough to meet expectations of the electorate? That is not, in your words “negative campaigning”. Not by a stretch.
Methinks Negative Dave protests too much! Negative Dave, perhaps your negativism might work (like it has for Harper’s campaigns). But Negative Dave, if it doesn’t, you might find it hard to get things done in opposition.
Oh and how do you like your name being fixed with a pejorative prefix? If you don’t like it perhaps you could point out your ‘truths’ about your opponent with out doing the same thing to him!
I think it’s time I stepped in with a word or two: political discourse is always a volley of positive and negative comments, but name-calling aimed at political opponents every time you breathe is taking liberties I’m not really prepared to put up with.
THAT, after all, was one of the major reasons the new commenting regime was imposed. The other was anonymity.
David has some valid points but he neglects to come clean on the fact that a New Democratic Party MLA’s ability to achieve his goals is solely dependent on the willingness of — at this point — a BC Liberal government’s to work with him on anything. And we all know that isn’t going to happen
Enough with this, please.
David
Thanks David (editor). I’m sorry that I had to descend to schoolyard name calling to make my point that political debate should be conducted at a higher level than that.
Oh and if anyone is concerned about my ‘anonymity’ my full name is Nicholas Thomas.