Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post by Doom&Gloom » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:08 pm
Has anyone here gone through the process of having the restriction of wearing corrective lenses being removed from a driver's license? Or is it even necessary in the case below?
I recently had cataract surgery and the implanted lenses have resulted in ~20/20 vision. [State law for DL requires 20/40 in the best eye, which I now exceed in each eye.] I have had a corrective lens restriction on my DL since my 15th birthday and never thought twice about it. I would like to avoid any hassles with a cop if stopped for a traffic violation or at a checkpoint. But I would also like to avoid a hassle at the DMV. My current DL is a 10-year license with 4 years remaining. I have searched for laws in my state as well as dropping by the DMV, at which the only option to talk to an employee was to take a number and wait, so I left. There were numerous forms on a table, but none related to my issue.
Most of my friends think it is a non-issue, but I am concerned about the reasonableness of cops on the street. Friends have pointed out that people with contact lenses have no issue and cops must have surely run across people with intra-ocular lenses and/or lasik surgery before. I do have copies of the specifications of my IOL's, date of insertion, etc in both of our vehicles. My wife insists that is proof of "corrective lenses." In searching online, I have found reports that trying to get this restriction removed has sometimes opened a can of worms for drivers in other states. I certainly want to avoid that.
Am I overthinking a non-issue? My hope is that I am, and that I can confidently keep my current DL and pick up another 10-year renewal in 2020 and avoid dealing with a bureaucracy.
livesoft Posts: 87382 Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:00 pmPost by livesoft » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:14 pm
You are overthinking a non-issue.
This signature message sponsored by sscritic: Learn to fish.
Rupert Posts: 4122 Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:01 pmPost by Rupert » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:23 pm
Yes, you are overthinking it. Just get it fixed next time you renew your license. If it makes you feel better, keep a copy of your insurance EOB or some sort of statement from your doctor re your surgery in the glovebox of your car to present to any unreasonable cop you might encounter. I bet you'll never need to display it. I actually have the opposite problem: I've worn corrective lenses since I got my original driver's license and it's never been reflected on my license even though I mention it every time I renew my license, have worn glasses in all of my DMV photos, and have been asked to take the eye test more than once.
dm200 Posts: 23214 Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:21 pm Location: Washington DC areaPost by dm200 » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:30 pm
I would get it changed. It was drilled into me by my mother that this was important because an erroneous indication on my grandfather's drivers license nearly led to financial ruin for her family many years ago.
Millennial Posts: 502 Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 4:46 pmPost by Millennial » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:31 pm
I had mine removed about two years after lasik, when I was at the DMV to register a new car. I meant to do it earlier but never made it down there.
FWIW, it only took me about 10 minutes in MA. I got checked when I took my driving test, because my permit had the restriction and the cop wanted me to prove I had contacts in before administering the exam - but I've never heard of anyone having trouble at a traffic stop.
JPH Posts: 1455 Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:56 pmPost by JPH » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:38 pm
After my cataract surgery, my doctor advised me that I still could be legally ticketed for not wearing glasses. I never have bothered to have the restriction removed. Living on the edge.
While the moments do summersaults into eternity | Cling to their coattails and beg them to stay - Townes Van Zandt
Lexi Posts: 130 Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 9:28 amPost by Lexi » Wed Mar 09, 2016 4:12 pm
Legally you are supposed to report it and get the restriction removed. In my state you submit a form signed by a professional licensed to test vision, e.g. optometrist, ophthalmologist, or others, that reports the qualifying results of a vision test. If you don't do this, it could be used to your detriment if you are stopped by police or are involved in an accident. Once the form documenting the results is completed, dealing with the DMV could all be done by mail. It is not any easier to do if you wait for the license renewal.
Topic Author Doom&Gloom Posts: 5651 Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 3:36 pmPost by Doom&Gloom » Wed Mar 09, 2016 9:12 pm
Thanks for all the responses. It seems my inclination to worry about it if it does become a problem is the way to go. I'll try to relax and carry on!
Lexi wrote: Legally you are supposed to report it and get the restriction removed. In my state you submit a form signed by a professional licensed to test vision, e.g. optometrist, ophthalmologist, or others, that reports the qualifying results of a vision test. If you don't do this, it could be used to your detriment if you are stopped by police or are involved in an accident. Once the form documenting the results is completed, dealing with the DMV could all be done by mail. It is not any easier to do if you wait for the license renewal.
I don't doubt that this is the case in many states, but I'm not at all sure this is the case in my state. I read as much as I could find online in the Codes and regulations, but this issue doesn't seem to be addressed at all.
TXJuice Posts: 119 Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 8:43 pmPost by TXJuice » Wed Mar 09, 2016 10:23 pm
Technically, you are supposed to have it updated. While most would probably accept your IOL cards, they don't say anything about what your vision is - some people still require glasses after surgery. It only takes 1 person having a bad day.
You can either get it updated at the DMV or bring in the appropriate form the next time you get your eyes checked (show it to them ahead of time, it makes it a lot easier on us than bringing it out at the end). You could also check with the surgeon to see if he/she would fill it out for you with the information/vision from the post-op appointment (up to their discretion).
Post by dratkinson » Thu Mar 10, 2016 12:39 pm
Restriction removed by DMV worker after I read the test line presented. (Forgot my glasses. Turns out I don't need glasses to be legal, but it is more comfortable driving with.)
d.r.a., not dr.a. | I'm a novice investor; you are forewarned. CedarWaxWing Posts: 894 Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 11:24 amPost by CedarWaxWing » Thu Mar 10, 2016 7:12 pm
You do have corrective lens . they are implanted.
Freddy Posts: 244 Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 10:41 pmPost by Freddy » Thu Mar 10, 2016 10:48 pm
A friend had cataract surgery in both eyes and went to DMV to hav the restriction removed. An eye test and all of ten minutes to get it done.
mouses Posts: 4217 Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:24 amPost by mouses » Fri Mar 11, 2016 5:42 am
My eye doc said I could do this since my eyes have improved. I didn't get around to it this time, but I might next time. I just have to take some form from him to the DMV.
Toons Posts: 14493 Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:20 am Location: Hills of TennesseePost by Toons » Fri Mar 11, 2016 5:45 am
Non Issue in my opinion"One does not accumulate but eliminate. It is not daily increase but daily decrease. The height of cultivation always runs to simplicity" –Bruce Lee
LiveSimple Posts: 2398 Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:55 amPost by LiveSimple » Fri Mar 11, 2016 7:06 am
mspadorchard wrote: You do have corrective lens . they are implanted.
Invest when you have the money, sell when you need the money, for real life expenses. tim1999 Posts: 4211 Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:16 amPost by tim1999 » Fri Mar 11, 2016 9:36 am
My driver's license has said that corrective lenses are required probably for the last 15 years. I don't even own a pair of corrective lenses. I've been stopped by police for speeding twice, neither time did they make any mention of it.
dratkinson Posts: 6216 Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:23 pm Location: Centennial COPost by dratkinson » Fri Mar 11, 2016 4:23 pm
LiveSimple wrote:mspadorchard wrote: You do have corrective lens . they are implanted.
+1. Couldn't resist.
Translation: DL requires corrective lenses + yours are implanted = you are in compliance.
d.r.a., not dr.a. | I'm a novice investor; you are forewarned. Topic Author Doom&Gloom Posts: 5651 Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 3:36 pmPost by Doom&Gloom » Fri Mar 11, 2016 4:31 pm
dratkinson wrote: LiveSimple wrote:mspadorchard wrote: You do have corrective lens . they are implanted.
+1. Couldn't resist.
Translation: DL requires corrective lenses + yours are implanted = you are in compliance.
shh! I would hate for my wife to find out that so many people here agree with her opinion. I do, as well, but it was not a well-reasoned opinion that I was concerned about
Thanks again to everyone for chiming in. I'll keep motoring on and worry about other issues instead of this one
mikep Posts: 3867 Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:27 pmPost by mikep » Fri Mar 11, 2016 4:40 pm
Get it corrected. The accident issue would be my worry not being stopped by the police. Do you really want an attorney for the other driver stating you were negligent for not wearing glasses and the accident was your fault and not the other drivers?
"Judge, the other driver's license requires him/her to wear corrective lenses and they did not. Therefore, I believe my party is not 100% at fault in this accident, since if the other driver could have seen, he/she would have gotten out of my client's way"
beyou Posts: 7463 Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:57 pm Location: If you can make it therePost by beyou » Fri Mar 11, 2016 5:01 pm
And a lawyer can't prove you don't need the glasses in court ?
I think a HS kid doing a moot court project could win that argument !
My son just got his DL, and they mistakenly put on the license that he needs corrective lens,
when in fact he does not (does not own glasses or contacts, certainly did not wear them for the driving test).
Careless DMV workers, don't really want to go and correct those people and waste our time.
Post by BolderBoy » Fri Mar 11, 2016 11:51 pm
Doom&Gloom wrote: I recently had cataract surgery and the implanted lensesBy definition then, you have "corrective lenses" - they are intraocular lenses.
Ignore this non-issue and it will be removed when you renew your license (and look in the vision machine) the next time.
"Never underestimate one's capacity to overestimate one's abilities" - The Dunning-Kruger Effect OnTrack Posts: 801 Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:16 pmPost by OnTrack » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:14 am
Doom&Gloom wrote: Am I overthinking a non-issue? My hope is that I am, and that I can confidently keep my current DL and pick up another 10-year renewal in 2020 and avoid dealing with a bureaucracy.
What could go wrong? DoubleClick Posts: 605 Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 1:12 amPost by DoubleClick » Sat Mar 12, 2016 4:09 am
I wonder if this could become an insurance/liability issue if left uncorrected. Mudpuppy Posts: 7463 Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:26 am Location: Sunny CaliforniaPost by Mudpuppy » Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:40 pm
DoubleClick wrote: I wonder if this could become an insurance/liability issue if left uncorrected.Why? The OP has corrective lenses, they are just implanted instead of glasses or contacts. Any issues that come up, there would be a surgical report and followup eye doctor visits certifying that the OP's vision was corrected by the implanted lenses.
DoubleClick Posts: 605 Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 1:12 amPost by DoubleClick » Sat Mar 12, 2016 6:57 pm
Mudpuppy wrote: DoubleClick wrote: I wonder if this could become an insurance/liability issue if left uncorrected.Why? The OP has corrective lenses, they are just implanted instead of glasses or contacts. Any issues that come up, there would be a surgical report and followup eye doctor visits certifying that the OP's vision was corrected by the implanted lenses.
That sounds reasonable and I agree, but reason isn't worth much in the hands of a suing lawyer. Mudpuppy Posts: 7463 Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:26 am Location: Sunny CaliforniaPost by Mudpuppy » Sat Mar 12, 2016 7:00 pm
DoubleClick wrote: Mudpuppy wrote: DoubleClick wrote: I wonder if this could become an insurance/liability issue if left uncorrected.Why? The OP has corrective lenses, they are just implanted instead of glasses or contacts. Any issues that come up, there would be a surgical report and followup eye doctor visits certifying that the OP's vision was corrected by the implanted lenses.
That sounds reasonable and I agree, but reason isn't worth much in the hands of a suing lawyer.But it's worth quite a bit in the hands of a defending lawyer.
If anything, the OP should check his auto insurance liability levels, and perhaps consider an umbrella policy, to make sure the insurance company is particularly motivated to get a good defense lawyer.
OnTrack Posts: 801 Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:16 pmPost by OnTrack » Sun Mar 13, 2016 1:48 am
Mudpuppy wrote: DoubleClick wrote: Mudpuppy wrote: DoubleClick wrote: I wonder if this could become an insurance/liability issue if left uncorrected.Why? The OP has corrective lenses, they are just implanted instead of glasses or contacts. Any issues that come up, there would be a surgical report and followup eye doctor visits certifying that the OP's vision was corrected by the implanted lenses.
That sounds reasonable and I agree, but reason isn't worth much in the hands of a suing lawyer.But it's worth quite a bit in the hands of a defending lawyer.
If anything, the OP should check his auto insurance liability levels, and perhaps consider an umbrella policy, to make sure the insurance company is particularly motivated to get a good defense lawyer.
I would update the license. There have been a number of cases in the news recently where what should have been routine traffic stops resulted in tragic outcomes. I see no point in having even a hint of something incorrect on the license, registration or insurance card.
Flobes Posts: 1793 Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 11:40 pm Location: HomePost by Flobes » Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:09 pm
When this topic was posted, I followed with interest. I too recently had cataract surgery and no longer require glasses for driving.
I promptly emailed my state's DMV customer line and inquired. I specifically asked if this should be adjusted immediately, if I might be ticketed, or if there might be an insurance problem in the event of an accident.
It appears that (in my state) immediate action is not necessary. I intend to print this email (question and answer) and put it in the glove compartment: just in case.
From: Driver License Communications
Date: March 14, 2016 at 12:40:25 PM
Subject: Re: Change Vision restriction on license
When you come in the office for a renewal, please mention to the technician that you had vision correction surgery and that you would like your vision restriction removed. As long as you are able to successfully pass the in-office vision screening, the vision restriction will be removed from your license.
Jack FFR1846 Posts: 19222 Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:05 am Location: 26 miles, 385 yards west of Copley Square
Post by Jack FFR1846 » Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:42 pm
Cherokee8215 wrote: My driver's license has said that corrective lenses are required probably for the last 15 years. I don't even own a pair of corrective lenses. I've been stopped by police for speeding twice, neither time did they make any mention of it.
Did he let you out of a ticket when you told him: "Officer, I didn't know the speed limit because I couldn't see the sign because my glasses are at home."?
Bogle: Smart Beta is stupid dm200 Posts: 23214 Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:21 pm Location: Washington DC areaPost by dm200 » Tue Mar 15, 2016 2:13 pm
Mudpuppy wrote: DoubleClick wrote: Mudpuppy wrote: DoubleClick wrote: I wonder if this could become an insurance/liability issue if left uncorrected.Why? The OP has corrective lenses, they are just implanted instead of glasses or contacts. Any issues that come up, there would be a surgical report and followup eye doctor visits certifying that the OP's vision was corrected by the implanted lenses.
That sounds reasonable and I agree, but reason isn't worth much in the hands of a suing lawyer.But it's worth quite a bit in the hands of a defending lawyer.
If anything, the OP should check his auto insurance liability levels, and perhaps consider an umbrella policy, to make sure the insurance company is particularly motivated to get a good defense lawyer.
Getting a ticket if this is not corrected is, in my opinion, not a big deal or big risk.
It is the risk of a huge lawsuit where this could be used by the suing party's attorney(s) to place blame and liability. Having actually been the target of a jusry trial in a civil, contactrual matter (not auto/traffic) - that we lost, I can say, first hand, that high powered and high priced attorneys can use any and every document, statement, etc. and, often, twist the meaning to their advantage. You are in a multiple fatality auto accident. The families of the deceased sue you. Your license requires "corrective lenses", but you are not wearing them. You may have to hear the opposing attorney tell the jury, "
Ms. Jones, with reckless abandon for the obvious and clear violation of the drivers license of such and such state, deliberately chose to not wear the required corrective lenses. This self-imposed impariment of her vision was a very significant factor in the horrendous dealths of X, Y and Z - who leave many small children orphaned. Ms. Jones has even admittied in er testimony that she knew of the requirement - but chose to ignore it.
And - you have to sit there and listen to these deliberate lies. yes, your attorney can state that you don't need them - but do you want to take that risk? I can say that listening to this kind of lies in a courtroom in front of a jury was one of the most terrible experiences of my life. And, in our case, these horrendous lies led to our losing the civil case.
