Thursday, 28 February 2019

Driving Whilst Autistic - The Research

A picture of a green Jaguar open top sports car

Updated 5 March 2019

Here in the UK, we have been having an interesting set of discussions with the Government driving authority, the DVLA.  There was input from various Police Officers, the National Autistic Society, GPs and other interested parties.  The subject - whether it's compulsory to notify the Government that we're autistic, and get a medical professional to confirm we're safe...when we're already assessed and passed as competent drivers. The subject is raised often for discussion by the DVLA's Panel of Experts, so it is important to be clear about what autism is, and is not.


Let us remember that most autistic people wishing to drive make a choice to have driving lessons, where a highly qualified driving instructor already assesses our competence.

We also have to pass the same tests as everyone else, on eyesight, on knowledge, and on practical skills behind the wheel.  These tests are taking by highly qualified examiners, who test every aspect of competence.  100% of autistic licensed drivers were autistic when they took  - and passed - their test.  It's a lifelong neurodiversity, not a sudden health condition.  Not a mental illness/ 'psychiatric disorder'.  That's a fact, not a judgement of mental health conditions.  See the National Autistic Society for details, for example.

Apparently, someone has told the DVLA that autistic people may be more likely to have driving problems than others.

Aside from the illogic of assuming that this would only be apparent after we've passed a test showing we're competent, let's have a romp through the research on this subject.  Brace yourselves and buckle up, my lovelies, because this is going to be a rough journey.

First up, the paper by Haley Bishop and colleagues, published 2018.  They reviewed whatever competent papers they could find on the subject of autism and driving.

We know that much of what we 'knew' about autism, historically, has turned out to be rubbish, and therefore materials from the last few years are the relevant ones.

Ready?
Away we go.

Almberg et al. 2015.  Forgot to assess whether their autistic people also had ADHD.  Thus cannot tell which characteristics of good or bad are which. Ooops.

Bishop et al. 2017. Autistic participants, "Showed no difference in reaction time between hazard types" (compared to non-autistic ones).   Small sample. But this is hardly a sign of a problem.

Brooks et al. 2016. Minimal performance differences were observed between autistic and non-autistic participants. Nothing of danger here then.

Cox et al. 2017.  Only bothered looking at novice drivers in a computer simulation of driving, which isn't evidence of anything in particular.  Small sample. 


Factor, 2016, looked at young adults in a computer driving simulator again, which - as for Cox, above, isn't evidence of on-road driving ability.  The autistic people had less driving experience than the non-autistic participants, also.

Reimer et al. 2013 looked at 10 young male autistic people, and..used a computer simulator, not real driving.

Sheppard et al. 2016 looked at a small group of young male autistic adults, and noticed that slower reaction speed was related to IQ, not autism. None actually had a driving licence.

Wade et al. 2015 looked at 6 autistic teenagers.  I don't think I need to say more about this, do I.

We have had concerns about 'executive function'  - the ability to plan and do something.  But the most recent research shows that autistic adults have practised tasks well enough that this isn't any more of a problem, generally, than for any other adult group.  


The research on ADHD, a group also affected by DVLA random rule changes, seems no better.  For example Aduen et al. (2018) who put drivers with ADHD into their own cars, equipped with monitoring technology, and counted how many accidents they had. Then compared that to non-ADHD drivers, also in their own cars, also monitored.  Except...the drivers with an ADHD diagnosis were generally younger, with less education, less overall driving experience, less money to buy a car that had anti-crash technology in it.  They were not comparing like for like.  They hadn't even considered that the car was an independent variable.

Back to autism, where Chee et al (published 2019 in Disability & Rehabilitation) looked at 17 autistic drivers, of which one was female. (I'll let you think about that...).  All were put into a driving simulator.  The autistic drivers had on average 500 hours less driving experience than the non-autistic participants, but the researchers decided that greater error rates were because of autism.  Autistic people were better at not tailgating, but this was framed as a potential deficit of our spatial awareness.  What is this stuff?


Well.  Mmm.  Older drivers? No.  Experienced drivers? No.  Women drivers?  No.  In fact, no thought at all to the usual groupings of any kind.

Most autistic people are adults.  Most are over age 30.  Around half are not male.  Many are from minority ethnic groups, or the Professions.  Some are serving Police, Fire Crew, Ambulance and Paramedic staff.  Doctors, Nurses, professionals of every kind.  Where is the evidence of incompetent driving for those latter groups? There is none.


Do you understand how depressing it is to be in a world where this research passes as 'evidence' of anything at all?

Our young people deserve a future where their competence is taken as seriously as it is for everyone else.

If they pass a test, they have been assessed as competent.  If that test does not test for competence, improve the test.  Do not punish those taking it.

After hard campaigning and shocked outrage in the UK, the DVLA changed its guidance back to a need to report only 'if it affects your driving', and issued an apology.  This is good.


But...the episode has left behind a trail of damage.  Autistic people who had been shocked and afraid.  Afraid of losing their car, their freedom, their jobs.  Afraid of going forward for support or diagnosis in case someone did indeed remove their licence for Driving Whilst Autistic.  After all, if they are not diagnosed, they wouldn't have had to report in to the DVLA.  All of this happened, it seems, on sheer misunderstanding.  That is an error we cannot afford.  


Any Panel meeting to discuss such a life-changing, financially devastating move should convene only with the finest and best members & facts.  Openly and transparently.

There should be:
Evidence heard directly from those affected, in ways that enable, without exhaustion.  Research commissioned from those with a good modern understanding of autism, using a participatory model that fully involves autistic professionals and colleagues in its inception, methods and implementation. 
At meetings, the top specialists from affirming and enabling charities and groups, with many autistic specialists amongst them
.
Similar Panel aims should happen for any other affected group such as ADHD, of course.

The autistic communities have had quite enough of having things taken away from us, and quite enough of meetings about our lives being held without reference to us.  It is really not OK.  We need better than groups whose only experience of autism may have been to watch Rain Man, or meet one of us in a prison.


Meantime, lovely autistic people, continue to drive safely and wonderfully. Do follow legal requirements at all times.  Just like you already do.

Or, if you don't feel driving is for you/something you can do safely, take full advantage of whatever other means of transport exist.  Just like you already do.


Thank you for reading.