Quasimodo at the wheel?

Opinions and generalisations in the media have from time to time raised doubts regarding the fitness, or otherwise, of disabled people to hold driving licences and be responsible for driving their own vehicles. Joseph M. Camilleri, chairman of the National Commission for Persons with Disability, himself a disabled Maltese driver, addresses some of these concerns.

Can disabled people drive a car?

Yes, of course. However, this 'yes' hinges upon the nature and degree of one's impairment and whether or not the vehicle adaptations are suitable. For instance, an appreciable degree of intellectual or visual impairment will always preclude an individual from driving a car, no matter how excellent the modifications to the vehicle.

On the other hand, it is a fairly straightforward process for deaf people to become proficient and safe drivers. Profoundly deaf drivers require nothing other than more frequent use of rear-view and wing mirrors.

It is also possible for quite severely mobility impaired individuals, such as myself, to drive safely. And by safely, I mean that we do not pose any disproportionate danger, either to ourselves, or to others.

According to the National Disability Survey carried out by the National Commission of Persons with Disability in 1999, 223 registered disabled persons reported that their main means of transport was a specially adapted car. This figure is incomplete, as registration is purely voluntary.

Most special adaptations can be done with standard, inexpensive kits. However, if the impairment is more severe, then the cost of adaptation can rise. This is why the Finance Ministry provides assistance to disabled persons who wish to drive their own car.

.....

My own vehicle is adapted with power brakes, extra power steering, an electronically activated handbrake, electronic starter button, an electronically adjustable driver's seat, extended steering column, extended gear lever, electronic door opener, and the now almost standard options of automatic transmission, power windows and central locking. Without these adaptations, I am helpless as a driver. With them, I am a safe and totally independent driver.

Incidentally, I am also very proud of the fact that many of these essential modifications were carried out by Maltese workers.

Other disabled friends of mine have extra modifications which allow them to stow their wheelchairs in their car without help from anyone else. Hand-controls also enable one to drive without the use of one's legs.

.....

Still other friends have vehicles equipped with automatic transmission and a steering-wheel knob. This simple device enables them to drive their vehicles, using one arm and one hand.

Should disabled people be allowed to drive?

The Maltese Constitution gives every Maltese citizen the right to freedom of movement; disabled persons are no exception. However, although we have the right to freedom of movement, we are too often denied the exercise of that right.

The built-up environment is already unacceptably hostile for people with mobility impairments, add to this a completely inaccessible public transport system and for all practical purposes you have consigned us to the prison of our own homes. Driving one's own vehicle is the only medium by which disabled adults can exercise their right to freedom of movement.

There are two immediate benefits to allowing disabled persons to drive. On the one hand, we reduce the stress placed on family members and friends who generally give us the support not provided by the social service structure. On the other hand, when we become independent, we also relieve pressure on over-subscribed and scarce social services.

After a 20-year interval, last year I resumed driving. The beneficial effect this has had on our family life has been immense. Hitherto my wife has had to plan her whole day around my own movements and my timetable being what it is, this meant that she wasted a great deal of her precious time ferrying me to and from evening and weekend appointments. Now that I drive myself, my wife can organise her time as she sees fit.

If my own experience is anything to go by, my first car (purchased in 1974) conferred upon me a high status as one of a handful of car-owning, university students. Driving improved my social life, gave me the independence and self-confidence to initiate and maintain what has become a lifelong relationship and still later it was to help me hold down my first job.

Are disabled people properly examined and tested before they are granted a driving licence?

One widespread misconception is that in order to drive safely one must possess the physical size and strength of an average male. No doubt this convenient piece of deception is put about by the same macho types who are a constant menace on our roads and make the lives of all law-abiding drivers (particularly women) a perpetual misery. But it is amazing how often this falsehood goes unchallenged.

I, for one, do not have the size or strength of an average male, nor do I need it when I have a vehicle which more than compensates for my physical weakness.

When a registered, disabled person applies for a driving licence, the individual is referred to the Occupational Health Unit (OHU). Before that the person will usually have spoken to members of staff at the National Commission for Persons with Disability who offer advice on the types of adaptations available and those most suited to the needs and pockets of the disabled client.

At the OHU, the medical practitioner ensures that the disabled person undergoes a detailed physical examination to determine: (a) whether or not the person is medically able to drive (strength, movement, reflexes and vision are all taken into careful consideration) and (b) to ensure that the vehicle modifications proposed are the most appropriate according to the nature and extent of the driver's impairment.

Furthermore, a disabled person's driving licence is never granted on a 'blank cheque' basis. Some disabled drivers, like myself, have to undergo regular medical checkups to make certain that we are still in a fit condition to drive. How many non-disabled drivers are regularly reviewed and face the possibility of having their driving licences revoked?

I made myself an exception to this procedure. Having been away from driving for 20 years, I felt that I should undergo the most vigorous testing possible. Therefore, in 1999, I visited the Mobility Information Service (MIS) in the United Kingdom to determine whether or not I could drive safely. At MIS, I was submitted to a computerised test for strength, mobility, visual acuity and reflexes with the added bonus of knowing that there was no way I could bribe my electronic examiner. It was only after I was certified fit to drive by an utterly neutral machine that I initiated the process which has led to my becoming truly mobile again.

Still, this is an extreme example. I must emphasise that I have every confidence in the present local system and the introduction of computerised testing would only enhance what is already a careful and perhaps even overly-cautious procedure.

Are disabled people more of a hazard on the roads than non-disabled drivers?

This is yet another misconception.

Let us begin with deaf drivers. Deaf drivers are statistically proven to be less of a risk on the roads than their non-disabled peers. They are physically and intellectually on a par with non-disabled drivers. Furthermore, they have learnt to make allowances for their impairment.

In fact, they are generally more visually alert and more conservative in their driving habits. I have rarely felt safer than when I was a passenger in a car driven by a deaf person.

What is true of deaf drivers is also true of drivers who are mobility impaired. We are, as a general rule, more conservative in our driving habits and more alert to the hazards of poor roads, and to the appalling driving habits of many non-disabled drivers. There are three main reasons for this.

First of all, we have usually lived with our impairments for many years and in the process we have developed coping mechanisms which non-disabled people are usually unaware of, and more often than not find difficult to comprehend.

Secondly, living with a permanent impairment is not easy and obviously, we decrease, not increase stress in our daily lives. Nor do we want to add to the anxiety of family and friends.

Thirdly, we are acutely conscious of the fact that a driving licence is one of the most precious of all our earthly treasures. We recognise the widespread prejudice that exists wherever disabled people seek to go "beyond their limits" (limits usually imposed on us by uncomprehending and patronising non-disabled people). Therefore we are extremely careful not to put this priceless possession into jeopardy.

You will find very few disabled drivers who are consistently careless, because we know that if our driving licence is withdrawn no one will defend us and try to help us get it back. And we know that having lost our driving licence, we will have lost a major contributory factor to our own, and our family's, quality of life.

Is the impairment always to blame whenever disabled people are involved in a traffic accident?

Having a physical impairment or defect does not mean that we are automatically unfit to drive. Just as not having an impairment does not automatically make one fit to drive. As I stated earlier, in this day and age technology can more than compensate for a physical shortfall.

Of course we are sometimes involved in accidents. After all we are all human (disabled, or not) and subject to human error.

However, the vast majority of the accidents we are involved in are mundane 'fender benders'.

And yet, somehow, the fault is always ours because we have an impairment. The general attitude is that non-disabled driver is always absolved of all blame if the collision involves a disabled driver. Indeed, the non-disabled driver's (and general public's) knee-jerk question is almost always: "How are people like you granted a driving licences in the first place? You shouldn't be allowed on the roads".

Then again, how could any disabled driver be more of a hazard than the innumerable non-disabled kings and queens of the road who rampage into main roads with never a look to right or left, equate indicator lights with Christmas-tree decorations, who stop suddenly on busy roads for a little chat, overtake a single car in a traffic jam just for the hell of it and who consistently jump red lights ?

We must also acknowledge that many drivers keep serious medical conditions hidden away to avoid the possibility of having their driving licence withdrawn. Do such people not pose a greater threat on our roads than people, like myself, whose fitness to drive is under constant scrutiny? If the answer is yes, (as it cannot fail to be) then the next question is: What are we doing to ensure that they are identified and stopped, before they cause a fatality: their own or someone else's?

Sadly, and contrary to local popular belief, disabled people are not angels. In very rare instances, disabled drivers will be (indeed, have been) involved in fatal traffic accidents. But, before rushing to any conclusions we must ensure that the accident wasn't caused by pure negligence, simple human error, or any of a thousand other reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with having a physical impairment, or deformity.

Generalisations, especially negative generalisations about disabled persons, are very dangerous and can create far-reaching and long-lasting damage.

Before we are disabled people, we are human individuals. As such, we are all different and should not be tossed into one measure. Yes, it is true, that if there are cautious, prudent disabled drivers, then, there are also those very few reckless, disabled drivers. But it is their recklessness and lack of responsibility that we should be condemning, not the fact that they have an impairment. We all have to be vigilant drivers, whether we are disabled, or not.

For many people, like myself, with today's technology, it is often easier to drive a car than it is to walk. That driving a car is preferable is made palpably clear by the many non-disabled people who use their car even for a journey of a few hundred metres.

Having to live with a permanent impairment does not, and should not, absolve one from abiding by the rules and regulations which govern our society as a whole. We cannot demand inclusion in one breath and in another, expect to be exempted from codes of behaviour which govern the rest of society. If the fault, or crime is serious, then we have to be prepared to face the consequences, whether we are disabled, or not.

However, each case has to be judged on its own merits. As I said earlier on, for a disabled person driving one's own car can make the difference between existing and living. Before we condemn, we must be careful. When a disabled person is involved in even the most serious of traffic accidents, we must ask ourselves: Are we demanding the severest form of punishment merely because the driver has a physical impairment, or deformity?

Would we demand the same degree of punishment for a non-disabled driver?

We must reflect very, very carefully.

To deny a disabled person the independence of driving is tantamount to imprisonment, no more, no less. I know, I feel as if I have only just come out after serving a 20-year sentence.

Privacy policy | Disclaimer / Copyright Notice Accessibility | Contact Us