Antidepressants and 3rd Class Medical

[Tim Howell]

Last I knew all antidepressants were immediately disqualifying for any
class of medical certificate. Is this still the case? If a pilot has a
current 3rd class medical, and then begins taking antidepressants, I
assume his certificate immediately becomes void. What is the process
for re-obtaining the medical certificate after treatment is completed?
What kinds of things is the FAA looking for? Are there certain
antidepressants that they are more lenient on than others (after
treatment)?

Thanks! =)

--TWH
--PP-ASEL-IA

[Mike Granby]

"Tim Howell" > wrote:

> What is the process for re-obtaining the
> medical certificate after treatment is completed?

That rather depends whether he tells the FAA or not.....

[C J Campbell]

Lately it seems to depend somewhat on why the antidepressant is prescribed.
Some antidepressants are sold under two different names; one as a pain
medication, for example, and the other as an antidepressant. Even your
doctor may not be aware that they are really the same drug.

[Maule Driver]

> > What is the process for re-obtaining the
> > medical certificate after treatment is completed?
>
> That rather depends whether he tells the FAA or not.....
>
That's the key. There are 2 issues here that the FAA will react to - the
depression that is being treated and the medication that is being used.
While it may be reasonable for the FAA to specify what medications are
safe/unsafe, I don't think it is reasonable to have them wading around in
psychological conditions.

Fortunately, you do have the room to manage your health and the FAA by
maintaining separate medical relationships. But with that ability comes a
great deal of responsibility.

[Ron Natalie]

"Tim Howell" > wrote in message ...
> Last I knew all antidepressants were immediately disqualifying for any
> class of medical certificate. Is this still the case?

To my knowledge, yes. The FAA has a bug up it's ass about anything remotely
psychoactive.

> What is the process
> for re-obtaining the medical certificate after treatment is completed?
> What kinds of things is the FAA looking for? Are there certain
> antidepressants that they are more lenient on than others (after
> treatment)?

Mostly they want a statement from the treating doctors that the medication
is no longer required. They want a statement that you've been off for 90
days and don't need them anymore. Depending on the conditions that
caused you to need them to begin with, they may require additional
Psychiatric/Psycological tests.

It's excruciatingly slow to work through the FAA bureaucracy on this (only
because the medical certification office is wallowing in disorganized paper
pushing and it's not getting any better). However, the process is rather
straight forward and other than time and expense usually is resolved in
favor of the pilot.

[Ron Natalie]

"Toks Desalu" > wrote in message news:3f15ac79@shknews01...
> Tim-
> From my experience, anideppressants/anxiety medications do not mix with
> flying, no question about it.

Only because of FAA obstinance. There is no indication that controlled SSRI
use isn't advantageous in some people.

> If a pilot has current 3rd class medical, and then
> begins taking antidepressants, you are required to void your certificate
> VOLUNTARILY according to FAA regulation.

No, you're just required not to use it.

> To re-obtain your certificate, you
> would require a six-month evaluation without a medication.

90 days in most cases.

[Toks Desalu]

Tim-
From my experience, anideppressants/anxiety medications do not mix with
flying, no question about it. There is no other way around it. Actually,
there is one other way but, it is against the regulation. So, I wouldn't do
that if I were you. If a pilot has current 3rd class medical, and then
begins taking antidepressants, you are required to void your certificate
VOLUNTARILY according to FAA regulation. To re-obtain your certificate, you
would require a six-month evaluation without a medication. A Letter must be
written to FAA by your psychologist. FAA will approve it and you are free to
soar!

Toks
PP-ASEL

[Maule Driver]

"Toks Desalu" > wrote in message
news:3f15ac79@shknews01...
> From my experience, anideppressants/anxiety medications do not mix with
> flying, no question about it. There is no other way around it. >

Hmm. Might you agree that:

If your experience is as a patient, the experience is somewhat narrow and
the conclusion a bit broad given the variety of such medications?

If your experience is as a doctor, the experience is 2nd hand and the
conclusion a bit broad "" "" "" ?

I agree that it may be the only reasonable policy for the FAA to follow but
I think it is inaccurate to say that certain medications and flying don't
mix. e.g. Wellbutrin IMHO

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Ron Natalie" > said:
>> To re-obtain your certificate, you
>> would require a six-month evaluation without a medication.
>
>90 days in most cases.

It took me nearly a year. First, I took the Welbutrin for a couple of
months. Then I stopped just before Sun n Fun last year. I asked the FAA
medical expert there and he said I had to wait 6 months before I could
reapply. So I did. And then it took them about 4 months with several
followup questionaires and requests for further information from my doctor
and my therapist to process the reapplication. I got it back just before
Sun n Fun this year, and it's a special issuance only good until August
this year.

However, after starting the reapplication process, I realized that I could
take dual without a medical, so I started on (and recently finished) my
instrument rating.


--
Paul Tomblin >, not speaking for anybody
"Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the
usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody
thinks of complaining."

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Toks Desalu wrote:
> If a pilot has current 3rd class medical, and then
> begins taking antidepressants, you are required to void your certificate
> VOLUNTARILY according to FAA regulation.

What FAA regulation would this be? Can you provide a reference?

My understanding is: don't act as PIC while suffering from a medical
condition or taking medication which preclude safe flight or which
are not approved by FAA. When the condition is ameliorated and
the medication is out of one's system, go for it.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Mike Granby]

"William Plummer" > wrote:

> Suppose you have an accident. The NTSB _will_ check to
> see what prescriptions you got filled. If you used a banned
> drug and did not disclose that fact, your medical certificate
> will be declared invalid and you were flying illegally. The
> insurance company and lawyers will line up sharpening
> their knives.

NTSB reports are not admissible in legal proceedings.

[Todd Pattist]

Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote:

>Toks Desalu wrote:
>> If a pilot has current 3rd class medical, and then
>> begins taking antidepressants, you are required to void your certificate
>> VOLUNTARILY according to FAA regulation.
>
>What FAA regulation would this be? Can you provide a reference?

There isn't one, except through 61.53 by a back door route.

>My understanding is: don't act as PIC while suffering from a medical
>condition or taking medication which preclude safe flight or which
>are not approved by FAA. When the condition is ameliorated and
>the medication is out of one's system, go for it.

Your understanding is a bit off. The applicable FAR 61.53
only mentions safety if a medical is *not* required to act
as PIC (gliders, etc.) If a medical *is* required, the
standard is whether you can "meet the requirements for the
medical certificate."

IOW, let's say you take a medication. If you are safe to
fly while taking it, you can fly a glider, even while taking
it. If the medical requirements prohibit granting you a
medical when you have the underlying condition , then you
can't fly an airplane, even if you are safe, regardless of
whether you are taking the medication.

The tests are totally different for PIC where a medical is
req'd and PIC where it is not. One looks at safety and
allows the pilot to make the determination, the other looks
at the medical regulations.


Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

[Bob Fry]

However, isn't it true that if you are in an accident, and insurers
find out you've been violating FARs (by flying without a valid
medical), then they won't pay? So you could be wide open to
liability.

"Mike Granby" > writes:

> "Maule Driver" > wrote:
>
> > Fortunately, you do have the room to manage your health and
> > the FAA by maintaining separate medical relationships. But with
> > that ability comes a great deal of responsibility.
>
> Indeed. I would nonetheless advise that no-one use their family doctor as
> their AME. While none of us wants to lie to the FAA, I see no reason to
> tempt fate by vesting these functions in the same individual, and I see no
> reason to have to worry about what I tell my family doctor on the basis that
> he might have to declare it to the FAA under penalty of losing his
> certification.
>
> --
> Mike Granby, PP-ASEL,IA
> Warrior N44578
> http://www.mikeg.net/plane

[Snowbird]

Todd Pattist > wrote in message >...
> Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote:

> >Toks Desalu wrote:
> >> If a pilot has current 3rd class medical, and then
> >> begins taking antidepressants, you are required to void your certificate
> >> VOLUNTARILY according to FAA regulation.

> >What FAA regulation would this be? Can you provide a reference?

> There isn't one, except through 61.53 by a back door route.

I think there isn't one, period.

> >My understanding is: don't act as PIC while suffering from a medical
> >condition or taking medication which preclude safe flight or which
> >are not approved by FAA. When the condition is ameliorated and
> >the medication is out of one's system, go for it.

> Your understanding is a bit off. The applicable FAR 61.53
> only mentions safety if a medical is *not* required to act
> as PIC (gliders, etc.) If a medical *is* required, the
> standard is whether you can "meet the requirements for the
> medical certificate."

I don't think my understanding is off a bit.

The standard is whether you can "meet the requirements for the
medical certificate", true.

If you can't, don't fly.

But that's not the issue.

The issue is, Toks claims you have to "void your medical
certificate voluntarily" and be re-examined and have a new
certificate issued when the condition ameliorates.

> If the medical requirements prohibit granting you a
> medical when you have the underlying condition , then you
> can't fly an airplane, even if you are safe, regardless of
> whether you are taking the medication.

No argument. But that's not the issue here.

I want to know where it's required that one "void one's
medical certificate", rather than simply refraining from
flying while unable to meet the requirements of the medical
certificate, and resuming flight when one can.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Roger Halstead]

On 19 Jul 2003 18:43:26 -0700, (Snowbird)
wrote:

>Todd Pattist > wrote in message >...
>> Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote:
>
<snip>
>
>> If the medical requirements prohibit granting you a
>> medical when you have the underlying condition , then you
>> can't fly an airplane, even if you are safe, regardless of
>> whether you are taking the medication.
>
>No argument. But that's not the issue here.
>
>I want to know where it's required that one "void one's
>medical certificate", rather than simply refraining from
>flying while unable to meet the requirements of the medical
>certificate, and resuming flight when one can.

I've never heard of such a rule and I don't think it exists.
It may, but I seriously doubt it.
You just don't fly while the condition exists.

For example, you get a really bad head cold and have to take
antihistamines. That's disqualifying, but who in their right mind
would expect the pilot to void the medical certificate and then take a
new exam when over the cold.

OTOH any one who goes flying as PIC with a really bad head cold
probably would be disqualified under the mental case....

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)

>
>Cheers,
>Sydney

[Marty Ross]

I've been following this thread, since my 3rd class was issued by Warren
Silberman himself, after a 9 month wait, because I checked the box that
said: "now have suffered or have ever suffered migraine headaches"...
Though I'd had only a few in my life, I am now required to get and submit a
full neurologic examination each time I renew my medical.

Anyways, long story short, my letter from him after 9 months of waiting said
I was qualified for the certificate, but issued a special caution to abide
by FAR 61.53, and re-stating that "operation of aircraft is prohibited [to
me] at any time new symptoms or adverse changes occur." So, I am prohibited
to fly while I have a migraine (or feel one coming on, I guess)... Go
figure!!

By the way, I found soloce on Gene Whitt's "Medical From Hell" webpages (he
also calls these pages "The Silberman Files") that might interest some of
you: http://www.whittsflying.com/pagee51%20Medical%20from%20Hell.htm

Regards,

-- Marty

"Roger Halstead" > wrote in message
...
> On 19 Jul 2003 18:43:26 -0700, (Snowbird)
> wrote:
>
> >Todd Pattist > wrote in message
>...
> >> Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote:
> >
> <snip>
> >
> >> If the medical requirements prohibit granting you a
> >> medical when you have the underlying condition , then you
> >> can't fly an airplane, even if you are safe, regardless of
> >> whether you are taking the medication.
> >
> >No argument. But that's not the issue here.
> >
> >I want to know where it's required that one "void one's
> >medical certificate", rather than simply refraining from
> >flying while unable to meet the requirements of the medical
> >certificate, and resuming flight when one can.
>
> I've never heard of such a rule and I don't think it exists.
> It may, but I seriously doubt it.
> You just don't fly while the condition exists.
>
> For example, you get a really bad head cold and have to take
> antihistamines. That's disqualifying, but who in their right mind
> would expect the pilot to void the medical certificate and then take a
> new exam when over the cold.
>
> OTOH any one who goes flying as PIC with a really bad head cold
> probably would be disqualified under the mental case....
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
> N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)
>
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Sydney
>

[Todd Pattist]

(Snowbird) wrote:

>> There isn't one, except through 61.53 by a back door route.
>
>I think there isn't one, period.

I've been through this argument before, when someone was
told his medical was "void" after a medical episode. During
that argument, I was on your side :-) The "back door route"
I'm referring to is that 61.53 won't let you fly if you
can't meet the requirements for a medical, but sometimes
those requirements say that after a medical episode, you
have to be have a particular test and be re-examined and
only if you have the test and pass the re-exam will you be
permitted to fly. The re-exam, however counts as a new
medical and resets the date for your next medical. Is the
first medical void? No, not really, you could probably say
to the doc that you don't want a new one, but practically,
who would do that? It's pretty clear however, that until
you have the test and get the new test, you don't meet the
conditions for a medical, and until you do, you can't fly,
regardless of how safe you are.

>> >My understanding is: don't act as PIC while suffering from a medical
>> >condition or taking medication which preclude safe flight or which
>> >are not approved by FAA. When the condition is ameliorated and
>> >the medication is out of one's system, go for it.
>
>> Your understanding is a bit off. The applicable FAR 61.53
>> only mentions safety if a medical is *not* required to act
>> as PIC (gliders, etc.) If a medical *is* required, the
>> standard is whether you can "meet the requirements for the
>> medical certificate."
>
>I don't think my understanding is off a bit.

I do. You used "preclude safe flight" to determine when you
can fly. That's not the FAR standard. Their standard is
"meet the requirements" for a medical.

>But that's not the issue.

I didn't say it was the issue. I said your description of
when you can fly was "a bit off" since it referred to
"safety."

>The issue is, Toks claims you have to "void your medical
>certificate voluntarily" and be re-examined and have a new
>certificate issued when the condition ameliorates.

Which I agree, is not true, but via the back door, described
above, there are some conditions for which the practical
effect is exactly that - no flight until you pass a new
medical

>> If the medical requirements prohibit granting you a
>> medical when you have the underlying condition , then you
>> can't fly an airplane, even if you are safe, regardless of
>> whether you are taking the medication.
>
>No argument. But that's not the issue here.

Agreed. I was commenting on your shorthand description,
which I thought "was a bit off."

>I want to know where it's required that one "void one's
>medical certificate", rather than simply refraining from
>flying while unable to meet the requirements of the medical
>certificate, and resuming flight when one can.

No, it's not required, unless the FAA requires a new medical
after the medical condition you suffer from. I know it's a
technical point, but pilots have been hung on less. You
need to be able to pass a medical. If the requirements for
people with your condition are to pass a medical test that
you haven't had and then have that test reviewed by an AME
during a new medical exam, and that hasn't been done, then
you can't fly until you've gone through all that, no matter
what your physician says about your condition or your
"safety" during flight.

Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.