That’s only the case if it’s entirely statistical, while the whole point is that there are factors under your control. Hiring someone/something to drive your family around isn’t a reversion to the mean. You can make certain efforts (interviewing, not tolerating bad behavior, etc). It’s a third person version of the usual debate of ‘I’m a safe driver’ versus ‘I only had like three beers and that was two hours ago’ versus ‘robo car.’ If you bucket the first two together and throw your hands up in the air saying humans are humans oh well, you’re pretending you don’t have the agency you actually have.

In the third person version, I suppose there’s an implicit unstated option that while your particular chauffeur has evidence they are better than average, you have an option to hire someone more responsible. That aspect of agency is central here.

> if the statistics he cites are correct and also apply to chauffeurs

I meant compared to the general population. As in self driving versus general population stats.

Ok, I see what you're going for. But then the question is how much safety is that agency buying you? And how many people even have an option to exercise such agency? You do not have it when it comes to other drivers that may cause accidents or run you over (or your children if you wish) as pedestrian. You have far less of it for taxi, rideshare or public transport services. And how many parents will drive their children even when they're stressed or haven't slept because the children simply have to go somewhere and they can't afford other options?

In aggregate we can probably buy more safety by having policies that encourage replacement of bad drivers with merely average autonomous vehicles rather than attempting to rely on individual behavior to improve safety.

If you want to still exercise personal options you could choose an autonomous car plus safety driver.