Daughter denied Colorado driver's permit because of blind mother
This story via Sam at Disability Law. Here's an excerpt:
Julie Barber is 15, with a learner's permit and a burning desire to get behind the wheel of a car. But due to a combination of a recent change in state law and her mother's severe vision problems, she won't be driving anytime soon.
In a lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Denver, Barber and her mother contend they are victims of discrimination. That's because the state requires a parent or guardian with a Colorado driver's license to be in the car with Julie. But her mother doesn't have a license, and state authorities are refusing to allow the Barbers to substitute another adult.
Marcia Barber, 50, contends Colorado Attorney General John Suthers suggested she assign legal guardianship of her daughter to someone else so the girl could drive, according to the lawsuit.
6 comments:
Yeah, this defies understanding. If an unlicensed underage driver is out alone, they already have an established means of dealing with that since it's unrelated to ability of the parent and likely not a rare event. And if the teen is driving with any adult, I would think they'd be able to hold both that adult and the parent or guardian responsible for the teen's driving. Professional instructors don't need to take on legal guardianship to instruct a teen to drive.
It appears to me that said legislators are upset that their so-called authority has been questioned.
Shocking! Asking them to think outside the box? Who knew??? Be reasonable?? Please!
This is quite possibly the most absurd law I have ever seen. It IS a disability issue because of how it's played out (and amazingly offensive), but it affects so many more families, too. What about kids whose guardians just never learned how to drive? Or who work during daylight hours? Or who are self-aware enough to recognize someone else would do a better job of teaching their kid? This makes no sense: not only are kids in these situations being unfairly burdened (which, as learning to drive is not a right, is probably not of great interest to the court) but the entire community is being put at risk as the kids may not receive the best driving instruction they can.
I can understand requiring the guardian to grant formal, written permission to another adult to teach the child to drive: I think it's unnecessary, but if it would make the DMV happy to have more paperwork, they could even have an official form that has to be filed that grants the permission to a set number of specific adults. Have an age limit so it's not just any ol' driver (21, or even 25), or, even better, a minimum number of years of driving experience for the adult who will be doing the instructing.
Do they allow professional instructors in Colorado? Or do they not even have those? 'Cause, that's just brilliant. The notion that parents/guardians are inherently the best driving instructors for their teenagers is unbelievably absurd, as I suspect many of even outstanding drivers who've taught their own children to drive would agree. Just as my mother recognized that it would be best for all involved if someone else besides HER taught me to play the piano--despite her being a music teacher--I think that those who recognize that there may be better options should be applauded, not stopped.
That this comes into play because someone is not physically able to drive is all the more reprehensible. And the solution suggested is just repugnant. I can't even get over that this isn't an April Fools joke. And ten bucks says these are the same people who argue for The Sanctity of Marriage And Family who are recommending that the mom "just" give up guardianship of her own child. Wow.
(But, I'm so thrilled that the law may be appended to allow a grandparent to take the place of the guardian. That will work out well, for few kids who have grandparents who are alive, living near them, willing to take on the responsibility, and fit to be driving instructors. A perfect solution, indeed).
(I wonder if kids whose guardians ARE their grandparents will then be allowed to use their GREAT-grandparents? Or those who live with other relatives or non-relatives can use the parents of said non-parental guardians? And, if their guardians also weren't raised by their parents? The mind boggles).
"God, I wish legislators would use just a teeny tiny bit of the common sense God gave an ant when they think up these solutions."
Legislators using common sense? Don't hold your breath.
Which means "Parents" with BAD driving habits, will ultimately pass on those bad driving habits to their kids!..
Ladies and Gentleman, "Logic has left the Building!"
hi,
I can understand requiring the guardian to grant formal, written permission to another adult to teach the child to drive: I think it's unnecessary, but if it would make the DMV happy to have more paperwork, they could even have an official form that has to be filed that grants the permission to a set number of specific adults.
====================================
kimzz
Colorado Alcohol Addiction Treatment
Post a Comment