DVLA and my driving licence

[Divrom]

My psychiatrist said yesterday that if I don't inform the DVLA that I'm not currently driving due to my issues, he will. That's bad, right?

I thought I was doing the right thing in managing it myself. I'm dealing with impulsive thoughts, auditory hallucinations and poor concentration due to depression exacerbated by aspergers. I'm also on diazepam. So, *I* decided that I wasn't safe to be driving. And I intended to stay off of the roads until I felt better, although I've driven twice in the middle of the night just as a kind of exposure therapy.

Now I've been told that the DVLA might actually direct me to give up my licence. Shiiiiiiiit! The trouble is that the form I'm sending in doesn't really give much space for commentary by me.

Does anyone know if it will involve an assessment or further conversation before the DVLA make a decision?

 

[Judge]

Good questions. I can only hope Britain's policies are more lenient than ours are over such matters. In my state it's entirely in the hands of one's physicians and invisible state bureaucrats interpreting one's medical conditions. With particular focus on cognitive impairment. And they can be downright brutal on the elderly over any number of concerns.

Have you seen this web link ?

Medical conditions, disabilities and driving - GOV.UK

 

[DudBomb]

I am assuming that the DVMA is similar to the DMV. Unless you have a history of these auditory hallucinations, telling you to drive and you listen too them, or a history of traffic accidents caused by your symptoms, in my opinion that isn't his decisions to make. It would be like a bartender Informing the DVLA that you had a several beers and owned a car. I'm in the US, so I don't know the liability laws in your area. That would be the only reason I would accept. If he was somehow liable if you were to have an accident. Idk.

 

[Divrom]

Thanks, Judge. No, I hadn't seen those links.

Over here, bureaucrats will consult with GPs etc., but in the end they have the final decision.

 

[Divrom]

Dudbomb,

The issue is that a voice I hear tells me to drive into other cars.

Plus, in the past, I've driven over roundabouts without stopping in what I call "passive suicide attempts". I'm pretty sure I told my Psych that, so I guess DVLA will be able to access that.

 

[DudBomb]

Yeh, that's a pretty good reason. I have a similar response in high places. I don't have hallucinations, unless there is such a thing as magnetic hallucinations. It's almost as if I have to hold myself back.

 

[Divrom]

Yeh, that's a pretty good reason. I have a similar response in high places. I don't have hallucinations, unless there is such a thing as magnetic hallucinations. It's almost as if I have to hold myself back.

So you think I'll lose my licence? Even though I'm currently responsibly choosing not to drive?

 

[DudBomb]

Like I said I don't know your liability laws, but If they are convinced you are a serious threat to others or yourself while driving, they are probably required to take some sort of action.

Even though I'm currently responsibly choosing not to drive?

If they think that "voices" influence your decision making they may conclude you are not fit to make that decision. The thing is, if they do suspend your license, it would be up to your psychiatrist if you get them back. I think It would be a much better outcome if you went to the DVLA.

You could anonymously call the DVLA and ask them what the law is, and what the outcome would be.?

 

[Suzanne]

It is crazy, because rather than being condemned, you should be applauded for thinking safety first!

I don't need to add anything else, for I see you have excellent advice.

 

[Suzanne]

anonymously call the DVLA and ask them what to law or outcome would be.?

What a good idea!

 

[xudo]

So you think I'll lose my licence? Even though I'm currently responsibly choosing not to drive?

I don't think it matters that you are being responsible and not driving, because the way the DVLA see it, while you still have a licence, there's always the possibility you could drive. I had to inform them about my AS diagnosis and GAD. That was a while ago and so far I've had letters saying they've contacted the professor who did my assessment but have had no reply.

 

[Judge]

I had to inform them about my AS diagnosis and GAD.

Interesting. But then you exist in a somewhat different political and economic system. In many of our state DMVs, as far as I can see operators themselves are under no obligation to report themselves. But then we have a constitutional right against self-incrimination. Though just about anyone else can literally report your alleged condition to the DMV for further assessment depending on state laws.

I do know that six of our states (including Nevada) make it mandatory for physicians to contact a DMV is they feel a need to do as such. Another 25 states merely suggest it, but consider doctors to be under no legal obligation to do so.

Here's just a portion of such terms pertinent to the state of California:

"DMV receives information from many sources, including law enforcement, physicians and surgeons, judges, family members and acquaintances. Under the law, peace officers have the discretion to request a reexamination of any driver with whom they come in contact, if they observe or discover reasons to believe the person may be unable to drive safely. Court judges have similar discretion."

 

[DudBomb]

The Therapist, is being very courteous, by allowing you to go to the DVLA on your own, imo.

 

[xudo]

Interesting. But then you exist in a somewhat different political and economic system. In many of our state DMVs, as far as I can see operators themselves are under no obligation to report themselves. But then we have a constitutional right against self-incrimination. Though just about anyone else can literally report your alleged condition to the DMV for further assessment depending on state laws.

I do know that six of our states (including Nevada) make it mandatory for physicians to contact a DMV is they feel a need to do as such. Another 25 states merely suggest it, but consider doctors to be under no legal obligation to do so.

Here's just a portion of such terms pertinent to the state of California:

"DMV receives information from many sources, including law enforcement, physicians and surgeons, judges, family members and acquaintances. Under the law, peace officers have the discretion to request a reexamination of any driver with whom they come in contact, if they observe or discover reasons to believe the person may be unable to drive safely. Court judges have similar discretion."

The differences are interesting, between the DMV and the DVLA. Asperger's is something that the DVLA state you have to tell them about, although if you didn't, it's unlikely a doctor would inform them unless you have a specific issue that they thought might impair your driving. There are medical conditions which they say "consult your doctor first", which is exactly what I would have done if it said that, and the GP probably wouldn't have said to bother. As it said I should, I did as I don't want to be potentially caught out in the future and get a £1000 fine!

 

[Judge]

There are medical conditions which they say "consult your doctor first", which is exactly what I would have done if it said that, and the GP probably wouldn't have said to bother.

That's one of the unnerving aspects of our system on a state-by-state basis. Where they mention various conditions that must be reported, but then at the end of such itemizations usually add some nebulous claim that really leaves the door open to considering any number of other conditions.

In other words, a lot of legal double-talk. Just as we are protected under the 5th Amendment, but just about anyone and their dog can potentially rat us out to the authorities.

Yet the bottom line seems to be close to Britain in how much influence one's doctor ultimately has in the overall equation. I guess in retrospect you don't want to get on your doctor's bad side for any reason. Perhaps a tall order for some of us.

 

[DudBomb]

Yeahh, what was the psychiatrist thinking, wanting to keep someone from possibly hurting themselves or others. And giving them the opportunity to voluntarily do it themselves.

 

[Judge]

Yeahh, what was the psychiatrist thinking, wanting to keep someone from possibly hurting themselves or others. And giving them the opportunity to voluntarily do it themselves.

Well, between the Hippocratic oath and their professional liability concerns they probably don't see such a scenario as a choice. That if there really is the potential of someone doing harm that they're obligated to report it.

A medical professional's evaluation seems par for the course. But the opinions of other non-professionals? Not so much, IMO. That may well concern me depending on the circumstances.

 

[DudBomb]

A medical professional's evaluation seems par for the course. But the opinions of other non-professionals? Not so much, IMO. That may well concern me depending on the circumstances.

I agree.

When in doubt, google.
General information: assessing fitness to drive - GOV.UK
Driving | Mind, the mental health charity - help for mental health problems

 

[Grandmother B]

My psychiatrist said yesterday that if I don't inform the DVLA that I'm not currently driving due to my issues, he will. That's bad, right?

I thought I was doing the right thing in managing it myself. I'm dealing with impulsive thoughts, auditory hallucinations and poor concentration due to depression exacerbated by aspergers. I'm also on diazepam. So, *I* decided that I wasn't safe to be driving. And I intended to stay off of the roads until I felt better, although I've driven twice in the middle of the night just as a kind of exposure therapy.

Now I've been told that the DVLA might actually direct me to give up my licence. Shiiiiiiiit! The trouble is that the form I'm sending in doesn't really give much space for commentary by me.

Does anyone know if it will involve an assessment or further conversation before the DVLA make a decision?

It seems to me that if you know enough not to be driving, then it's wrong of him to take it upon himself to notify the DVLA. Someday you might improve and be able to drive once again, and it would save you a hassle to already have your license. Perhaps if you let someone else hold onto it for you so you won't be tempted might satisfy him? Also there is lots of help for anxiety on www.aspergerexperts.com. Best of luck to you!

 

[Judge]

It seems to me that if you know enough not to be driving, then it's wrong of him to take it upon himself to notify the DVLA.

Looks legally complicated in Britain for both patients and doctors according to this. Yet if the patient isn't operating a motor vehicle as ordered, I'd think "no harm, no foul". Thus no need to formally notify the DVLA. But does it operate as such accordingly given the circumstances of the OP? I'm not sure.

"Doctors will be obliged under new guidelines to report patients who continue to drive even though they are not medically fit to do so."

"As it stands doctors do not need a patient’s consent to inform the DVLA, which is legally responsible for deciding whether a person is medically fit to drive, when a patient has continued driving in such instances."

Doctors ordered to report patients unfit to drive to DVLA