Today’s teens steer clear of driving


Kelli Serba-Blodgett dangles car keys before her driving-resistant son Austin, 18. (Photo illustration by Will Waldron/Times Union)

“No thanks, Dad. I don’t want to borrow the car.”

As odd as it may seem for parents, who vividly recall how eager they were to get their licenses, many of today’s teens are not all that interested.

It’s fine with them if you are willing to keep driving them.

Nationally, less than a third of 16-year-olds and half of 17-year-olds have their drivers’ licenses.

The theories abound: They are too busy texting each other, they don’t have the money for insurance or gas, or they’ve been scared off by too many images of drunk driving and texting crashes.

Kathleen Crowley, a psychology professor at the College of St. Rose, theorizes that parents baby their kids and no longer consider 16- and 17-year-olds young adults.

What’s your theory?

Categories: Young drivers
Tim O'Brien

24 Responses

  1. jb says:

    I agree with the professor. If parents would stop driving the teens around at their whim, they’d quickly get a driver’s license. The money factor and drunk driving scare do not have that much impact on the teen brain. Furthermore, today’s teens are also able to connect with their friends through many social media (facebook, tweeting, IM) that getting together at a specific place isn’t really necessary anymore. All they need are their cell phones or computers. Take those away and they’ll quickly get their driver’s license to be able to get together with their friends.

  2. cp retiree says:

    Oh, I’m definitely with Kathleen: prolonged coddling, by over-protective parents. (Or are they INSECURE parents, who can’t accept the notion that they’ll be left on their own eventually?)

    There are teens who can’t even stand on their own two feet (yet). But why should they? Mommy and Daddy are right there to catch them, and make things alllll better.

    Teen years: time to start spreading those wings; pick a direction; make some life choices; make / learn from those inevitable mistakes.
    But they’ll be useless in ten years, if parents continue to insulate them from all that.

    As the nightly call comes out of the basement, from the unemployed twenty-something: “Mommy, what are you making me for dinner tonight? Remember, no green stuff; and don’t forget to cut up the meat the way I like it.” “And Dad, did you buy my cigarettes and comic books like I asked?”

  3. sj says:

    My kids have permits but do not have a license and it’s by choice. They have strong feelings about using public transit but unfortunately it’s more difficult here to access an extensive network of public transit. They don’t see themselves remaining in this region long-term and public transit is one of the reasons.

  4. Russ says:

    I think Kathleen Crowley has it wrong.

    Teens today are more environmentally conscious and just don’t think cars are “cool” the way previous generations did. They recognize how destructive an auto dependent society has been to the planet.

  5. Rangers Fan says:

    If I ran the DMV, I would keep the permit age at 16, but raise the license age to 18. But I would make an exception, in which if a person has a high school diploma or GED, then the license age drops to 17.

  6. JIM KELLY says:

    If you kill someone while texting in your car it should be considered
    a murder in the 1st deggree.

  7. Woo Hoo Supreme says:

    Woo Hoo less teenagers on the road!

  8. J says:

    I think the answer is lack of insprational cars like Chevelles, Novas, GTO’s, 442′s, Camaros and Mustangs available in abundance and available at affordable pricing (new or used).

    Kids today grew up strapped into car seats until they were 4 feet tall.
    Kids today grew up riding in very unispiring 4 door Camrys and Jetta’s.
    Forced to wear seat belts and bicycle helmets.
    Daddy’s more interested in fantasy football than wrenching on an old hot rod in the garage.

    It’s the Dodge caravan generation.

  9. cp retiree says:

    @8 J -

    Interesting slant.

  10. Bamster says:

    Just the other day I was in a store and the teenage clerk could not make change from a one dollar bill without the aid of a calculator. I don’t want to share the road with these people so if they are not getting their licenses that’s fine with me.

    Also, should I be on the lookout for Russ’ kids riding ponies on side of the highway anytime soon?

  11. jb says:



  12. Magpies says:

    Some adults don’t own cars, but there are buses and subways available to them 24/7. It’s unusual, but if you can get around, work in NYC, etc., I guess it works for some.

  13. JayK says:

    Bamster, you do realize there are other modes of transportation other than car and horse, right? You can get around quite happily without a car, and I think this trend is something to be encouraged and rewarded. One day, many of you will be asking these kids how to read a bus schedule.

  14. Bamster says:

    I’ll be asking a kid how to read a bus schedule? That’s funny considering they can’t read or do simple math.

    Other modes of transportation? Like what? How would someone in their 60′s or 70′s get from Westerlo to Syracuse? Or how about Hoosick Falls to Cooperstown? Are they supposed to bicycle? Maybe Russ’ kids can come get them in their Prius.

  15. Mike says:

    JayK, with more than 40 million people in US getting foodstamps, it’s quite logical that more and more people would be using transportation welfare as well.

  16. Ann says:

    Great. Now when they do learn to drive -in their 30′s or later -they will be terrible at it.

    Nice to know so many kids are setting their sites for NYC.

  17. JayK says:

    Mike, driving amounts to transportation welfare as well. In total dollars, transit is vastly cheaper and driving much more heavily subsidized.

  18. JayK says:

    @Bamster, bus, bike, walk. Other forms of transit where available. And if you read, oh I don’t know, any report about it, the issues that seniors are having are with not being able to drive and being stuck in places that they have to in order to get their daily needs met. Driving isn’t the solution there, either.

    @Ann, what does NYC have to do with anything? You don’t need to live there to get around without a car. Remember, it took 60 years for us to get to this dismal, suburban nightmare we’re in now. I doubt it will take that long to get back out of it, but if it does, it’s good to start with this generation, no?

  19. Mike says:

    JayK, subsidy for the bus is 50% of its cost at best (NYC). Goes up to 80% for CDTA. Hard to imagine anything else being subsidized THAT heavily.

  20. JayK says:

    Mike, please re-read: “In total dollars,…”

  21. Mike says:

    JayK – Surprizingly, if you doi the math, whatever measure you choose- in-city buses are vastly more expensive than cars and require way higher support from public funds to operate.
    Buses are a necessary part of city environment, same as welfare being a necessary part of social environment. It is impractical and impossible to get rid of either – but using either is not something to be proud of.

  22. Albany Mom says:

    @Mike – I’ve never seen any study that supports this. Please tell us where you’ve gotten your info. And why wouldn’t a government want to subsidize public transportation? It means less wear & tear on the roads; less congestion, meaning less calls to widen highways, etc; less pollution, which means lower health care costs; and, yes, even cheaper transportation to low-wage jobs to support our businesses.

  23. JayK says:

    Mike, none of that is true. Roads and maintenance, the environmental impacts, the cost of subsidy to oil companies and the fact that taxes and fees cover (usually around) half of automobile infrastructure make the total amount spent on automobiles vastly higher than transit, usually the tune of 9-1, and often more.

    And on a personal level, I’m very proud that I take the bus instead of driving. That’s why I made the choice to do so in the first place.

  24. Mike says:

    Albany Mom – just look at CDTA published data. Their budget, how much of that comes from taxes, from fares. On average, it comes to $3.50 of tax money per ride. Someone who takes the bus twice a day, 300 days a year gets about $2000 /year in subsidies. Since CDTA is more than scheduled buses – e.g. STAR is apparently not a money-maker, actual numbers are probably a bit lower.
    Compare that with average $300-350/year of taxes paid at a pump by average NYS driver, which covers “only” 2/3 of road maintenance. Oh, and by the way, CDTA is tax exempt – so whatever road wear comes from those buses, is not covered at all by CDTA riders.
    Pollution statement is shaky as well. There is not enough information to calculate exact fuel burn – estimate of 25 passenger-miles per gallon seem to be on a right page. A bit better than single occupancy SUV, but that’s about it.