Frequency of convictions for lying on FAA medical form

[Sally Grozmano]

Hi,

I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA medical,
but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that have
occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
"common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
convictions.


Thanks,
Sally

[Ron Natalie]

Sally Grozmano wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA medical,
> but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that have
> occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
> "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
> convictions.
>
>
Don't know if there are many convictions. The FAA doesn't have to go to
that length, they can levy civil penalties and pull the pilot and
medical certificates without having to go through any criminal action.
This certainly happens, a number of unreported DUI's have ended up that
way I know.

The FAA did lodge criminal charges against the guys who were found to
have claimed to be disabled to the SSA and not injured to the FAA.

[David in NYC]

Ron Natalie > wrote in
m:


> Don't know if there are many convictions. The FAA doesn't have to go
> to that length, they can levy civil penalties and pull the pilot and
> medical certificates without having to go through any criminal action.
> This certainly happens, a number of unreported DUI's have ended up
> that way I know.
>

Are those civil penalties part of the public record, i.e. is it possible to
get an idea of the range of penalties levied, what the circumstances were,
etc?

Thanks

[Grumman-581[_1_]]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:49:58 +0000, in
>, Sally Grozmano wrote:
> It seems to be "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never
> hear of actual convictions.

There's a fine line between not volunteering additional information and
actually lying... Or perhaps it's just not volunteering information that
the FAA has no way of finding out anyway... <evil-grin>

[Guy Elden Jr]

I wouldn't worry so much about what the FAA does... I would worry that
leaving any pertinent information off the form would be more than
enough reason for a company to invalidate one's insurance coverage
should one ever get into an accident while flying. FAA penalties /
certificate suspensions / re-checkrides all pale in comparison to
having your entire net worth at risk for one simple omission.

--
Guy

[Sally Grozmano]

Grumman-581 > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:49:58 +0000, in
> >, Sally Grozmano wrote:
>> It seems to be "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never
>> hear of actual convictions.
>
> There's a fine line between not volunteering additional information and
> actually lying... Or perhaps it's just not volunteering information that
> the FAA has no way of finding out anyway... <evil-grin>
>

Once one signs the bit that says, "I have completed this to the best of my
knowledge" (or whatever) it becomes lying. But anyway....

I know that the FAA can actually find out about some omissions, e.g. DUIs
(because you also sign the bit that allows them to search the driver
registry) and the recent case where people were also claiming SSI benefits.
I'm just not so sure on stuff like prescriptions. If they are controlled
substances, they have to be on record with the DEA or something, no? Non-
controlled substances are known by one's insurance company, but I am pretty
sure those records are private.

[Ron Natalie]

Guy Elden Jr wrote:
> I wouldn't worry so much about what the FAA does... I would worry that
> leaving any pertinent information off the form would be more than
> enough reason for a company to invalidate one's insurance coverage

How the hell is the insurance company going to get a look at my medical
application?

[Dallas]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:02:20 -0500, Ron Natalie wrote:

> How the hell is the insurance company going to get a look at my medical
> application?

They wouldn't need to look at your medical, they just need to find things
in your medical records that are known disqualifications.

The questions I have are: Can an insurance company even gain access to your
medical records?

And, can they deny coverage if the omission had nothing to do with the
accident?

--
>>> Dallas <<<

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Sally Grozmano wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA medical,
> but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that have
> occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
> "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
> convictions.


I knew a guy who knew a guy who heard about a guy who got caught cheating on the
form. They say he was lined up against the wall and shot.

I suspect pretty much everyone here isn't going to get any closer to the
absolute truth than I did. The fact is probably that it's very rare, and
probably directly tied to accidents. (No accident/no investigation) As for
penalties, it's whatever your lawyer can work out for you. Probably a
suspension and civil penalty at worst. That would also be predicated on what
condition you hid from them. Are you having daily seizures?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Jim Macklin]

Just ask the FAA, statistics must be reported.

But like most FAA enforcement, investigations follow
accidents. They don't have convictions or civil penalties
for dead pilots, although there may be torts for innocent
losses.



"Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
. ..
| Hi,
|
| I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on
the FAA medical,
| but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual*
convictions that have
| occured for this, and what the associated penalties were?
It seems to be
| "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never
hear of actual
| convictions.
|
|
| Thanks,
| Sally

[Jim Macklin]

Consider what you're hiding? A prescription for a banned
FAA drug means you're being treated by a doctor and the
condition requires treatment and the drug may have
side-effects. You get to fly with the worry that you'll be
caught or die from the disease or drug. Maybe it is a
sedative and your judgment will be effected further and
you'll fly into freezing rain or a thunderstorm.

Odds are the only people you'll kill will be family and
friends of yours, so go ahead.



"Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
. ..
| Grumman-581 > wrote
in
|
:
|
| > On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:49:58 +0000, in
| > >, Sally
Grozmano wrote:
| >> It seems to be "common knowledge" that many pilots do
lie, but I never
| >> hear of actual convictions.
| >
| > There's a fine line between not volunteering additional
information and
| > actually lying... Or perhaps it's just not volunteering
information that
| > the FAA has no way of finding out anyway... <evil-grin>
| >
|
| Once one signs the bit that says, "I have completed this
to the best of my
| knowledge" (or whatever) it becomes lying. But anyway....
|
| I know that the FAA can actually find out about some
omissions, e.g. DUIs
| (because you also sign the bit that allows them to search
the driver
| registry) and the recent case where people were also
claiming SSI benefits.
| I'm just not so sure on stuff like prescriptions. If they
are controlled
| substances, they have to be on record with the DEA or
something, no? Non-
| controlled substances are known by one's insurance
company, but I am pretty
| sure those records are private.

[C J Campbell]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:49:58 -0800, Sally Grozmano wrote
(in article >):

> Hi,
>
> I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA medical,
> but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that have
> occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
> "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
> convictions.

I would expect convictions to be rare. It is difficult to prove, since your
medical records are confidential. Usually, if drugs such as anti-depressants
show up in your medical tests they just deny a medical certificate.

One problem is just remembering when you went to the doctor to see if that
mole had grown any three years ago. Filling out those medical forms implies
that you have either a perfect memory or that you keep far better medical
records than the average Joe.

That said, you are playing with your own life and with the lives of others if
you are not medically fit to fly.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Ron Natalie]

Jim Stewart wrote:

> If you read the fine print when you sign an insurance
> application, I think you'll find that you've given
> them the right.

I signed no such thing, nor is it in any subsequent contract I have
with them. Further, even if I did authorize it, I doubt the FAA is
going to turn over my medical records to a commercial entity.

[Jim Macklin]

The issue is will the commercial entity [insurance company,
HMO, or other] turn your records over to the FAA.




"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
| Jim Stewart wrote:
|
| > If you read the fine print when you sign an insurance
| > application, I think you'll find that you've given
| > them the right.
|
| I signed no such thing, nor is it in any subsequent
contract I have
| with them. Further, even if I did authorize it, I doubt
the FAA is
| going to turn over my medical records to a commercial
entity.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

C J Campbell wrote:
> One problem is just remembering when you went to the doctor to see if that
> mole had grown any three years ago. Filling out those medical forms implies
> that you have either a perfect memory or that you keep far better medical
> records than the average Joe.



Then there's guys like me who work in a hospital and see doctors every day. I
haven't been in a doctor's office in well over a year. I usually get my minor
ailments treated as a courtesy by the docs I'm friendly with. No bill / no
record. Fortunately, there have been no major problems in quite a while.


> That said, you are playing with your own life and with the lives of others if
> you are not medically fit to fly.


No question about that. Now can somebody who's recently gone for a flight
physical tell me: do they ask for any changes since the last flight physical or
are you expected to regurgitate your entire history every time you go in. Mine
is quite extensive and I'm not sure I can remember all of it at this point.
I've had numerous I&Ds, skin grafts, orthopedic procedures and redoes in the
past. Please tell me I'm not going to have to tell them all that crap all over
again. OTOH, just asking for changes in the last couple of years is fair
enough... especially since there's been none.


--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Bill Denton]

Since you brought up anti-depressants...

Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but someone
running around with an untreated problem can?





"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:49:58 -0800, Sally Grozmano wrote
> (in article >):
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA
medical,
> > but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that
have
> > occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
> > "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
> > convictions.
>
> I would expect convictions to be rare. It is difficult to prove, since
your
> medical records are confidential. Usually, if drugs such as
anti-depressants
> show up in your medical tests they just deny a medical certificate.
>
> One problem is just remembering when you went to the doctor to see if that
> mole had grown any three years ago. Filling out those medical forms
implies
> that you have either a perfect memory or that you keep far better medical
> records than the average Joe.
>
> That said, you are playing with your own life and with the lives of others
if
> you are not medically fit to fly.
>
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor
>

[Mxsmanic]

C J Campbell writes:

> That said, you are playing with your own life and with the lives of others if
> you are not medically fit to fly.

Yes, but that may not be synonymous with legally fit to fly.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Ron Natalie]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> Just ask the FAA, statistics must be reported.
>
> But like most FAA enforcement, investigations follow
> accidents. They don't have convictions or civil penalties
> for dead pilots, although there may be torts for innocent
> losses.

Doesn't need to be a dead pilot, just a fatal accident (someone
other than the pilot may have died)...

[Allen[_1_]]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
...
> Consider what you're hiding? A prescription for a banned
> FAA drug means you're being treated by a doctor and the
> condition requires treatment and the drug may have
> side-effects. You get to fly with the worry that you'll be
> caught or die from the disease or drug. Maybe it is a
> sedative and your judgment will be effected further and
> you'll fly into freezing rain or a thunderstorm.
>
> Odds are the only people you'll kill will be family and
> friends of yours, so go ahead.
>
>
>
> "Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
> . ..
> | Grumman-581 > wrote
> in
> |
> :
> |
> | > On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:49:58 +0000, in
> | > >, Sally
> Grozmano wrote:
> | >> It seems to be "common knowledge" that many pilots do
> lie, but I never
> | >> hear of actual convictions.

Y'all see you are talking to someone with a Washington DC IP address, right?

Allen

[Ron Natalie]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> The issue is will the commercial entity [insurance company,
> HMO, or other] turn your records over to the FAA.
>
>
That's a different story. The assertion was that the insurance
company was going to not pay a claim based on a supposed misstatement
on the FAA medical application. Ain't going to happen. All the
policy says is I have the certificates. If the insurance wants
to use that excuse not to pay, they'll have to wait for the FAA
to revoke 'em first.

[Jim Macklin]

But if the pilot dies, he won't be prosecuted. That was the
point.



"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > Just ask the FAA, statistics must be reported.
| >
| > But like most FAA enforcement, investigations follow
| > accidents. They don't have convictions or civil
penalties
| > for dead pilots, although there may be torts for
innocent
| > losses.
|
| Doesn't need to be a dead pilot, just a fatal accident
(someone
| other than the pilot may have died)...

[Jim Macklin]

Who cares. People break rules and laws if they want. On a
medical application you're required to report your medical
conditions and physician visits and treatment. The rules
further require that pilots self-police themselves when ill,
tired or just feel like crap.

Yet, there have been F14 Naval pilots crashing on landing on
the carrier. The investigation showed proscribe drugs. [OTC
decongestants]

The FAA has some stupid rules, some are medical and some
deal with pilot performed maintenance, among others. But
use common sense, safety is the goal, do what is safe and in
the spirit of the rules and you'll probably be OK with the
law.



"Allen" > wrote in message
. net...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| ...
| > Consider what you're hiding? A prescription for a
banned
| > FAA drug means you're being treated by a doctor and the
| > condition requires treatment and the drug may have
| > side-effects. You get to fly with the worry that you'll
be
| > caught or die from the disease or drug. Maybe it is a
| > sedative and your judgment will be effected further and
| > you'll fly into freezing rain or a thunderstorm.
| >
| > Odds are the only people you'll kill will be family and
| > friends of yours, so go ahead.
| >
| >
| >
| > "Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
| > . ..
| > | Grumman-581 >
wrote
| > in
| > |
| >
:
| > |
| > | > On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:49:58 +0000, in
| > | > >,
Sally
| > Grozmano wrote:
| > | >> It seems to be "common knowledge" that many pilots
do
| > lie, but I never
| > | >> hear of actual convictions.
|
| Y'all see you are talking to someone with a Washington DC
IP address, right?
|
| Allen
|
|

[Sally Grozmano]

"Allen" > wrote in
. net:

>
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Consider what you're hiding? A prescription for a banned
>> FAA drug means you're being treated by a doctor and the
>> condition requires treatment and the drug may have
>> side-effects. You get to fly with the worry that you'll be
>> caught or die from the disease or drug. Maybe it is a
>> sedative and your judgment will be effected further and
>> you'll fly into freezing rain or a thunderstorm.
>>
>> Odds are the only people you'll kill will be family and
>> friends of yours, so go ahead.
>>
>>
>>
> Y'all see you are talking to someone with a Washington DC IP address,
> right?
>
> Allen
>

Implication being that I am some sort of government agent, I take it? I
know the FAA is inefficient, but paying someone to catch a pilot on Usenet
is a stretch even for them.

And to the previous poster, I acknowledge your safety concerns. There have
been enough flame wars regarding the justification of particular banned
prescriptions that I won't rehash them here.

[Sally Grozmano]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in
:

> The issue is will the commercial entity [insurance company,
> HMO, or other] turn your records over to the FAA.

Yes, that is my main concern. As far as insurance goes, frankly, I hope to
God I never get into an accident, and if I do, I'm more worried about my
health and the health of others than the financial bit. Of course, losing
all I own is a close second.

[Peter Dohm]

> Since you brought up anti-depressants...
>
> Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
> you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but
someone
> running around with an untreated problem can?
>
>
Ironic is the word.

Actually, a lot of this thread would be funny--but it is too depressing.

Peter

[Sally Grozmano]

Ron Natalie > wrote in news:45b5151e$0$28100
:

> Jim Macklin wrote:
>> Just ask the FAA, statistics must be reported.
>>
>> But like most FAA enforcement, investigations follow
>> accidents. They don't have convictions or civil penalties
>> for dead pilots, although there may be torts for innocent
>> losses.
>
> Doesn't need to be a dead pilot, just a fatal accident (someone
> other than the pilot may have died)...

Just to reiterate what I said before, if I am involved in an accident where
someone dies, the last thing on my mind is going to be financial penalties.
That would haunt me for the rest of my life (whether I was at fault or
not). My main concern is getting my ticket, and slapped with a huge fine
from the FAA finding out about my ommisions through other channels
(insurance, DEA, etc).

[Allen[_1_]]

"Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Allen" > wrote in
> . net:
>
>>
>> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Consider what you're hiding? A prescription for a banned
>>> FAA drug means you're being treated by a doctor and the
>>> condition requires treatment and the drug may have
>>> side-effects. You get to fly with the worry that you'll be
>>> caught or die from the disease or drug. Maybe it is a
>>> sedative and your judgment will be effected further and
>>> you'll fly into freezing rain or a thunderstorm.
>>>
>>> Odds are the only people you'll kill will be family and
>>> friends of yours, so go ahead.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Y'all see you are talking to someone with a Washington DC IP address,
>> right?
>>
>> Allen
>>
>
> Implication being that I am some sort of government agent, I take it? I
> know the FAA is inefficient, but paying someone to catch a pilot on Usenet
> is a stretch even for them.
>
> And to the previous poster, I acknowledge your safety concerns. There have
> been enough flame wars regarding the justification of particular banned
> prescriptions that I won't rehash them here.

What type of plane do you fly?

Allen

p.s. I do see hat same IP address was registered by Road Runner in Texas at
one time.

[Jim Macklin]

Ask Rush Limbaugh about medical privacy.

If there is an accident and the FAA begins an investigation
and that investigation raises a medical condition, then the
FAA would probably seek your medical records. Unless you
have signed a release, the private companies should not
divulge your records beyond strict limits. But you may have
signed some release or you may find that your insurance
company will be sharing financial amounts with other
insurance companies, but not "private" medical info. But
what the FAA can determine, combined with a forensic lab
test is just a guess.



"Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
. ..
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in
| :
|
| > The issue is will the commercial entity [insurance
company,
| > HMO, or other] turn your records over to the FAA.
|
| Yes, that is my main concern. As far as insurance goes,
frankly, I hope to
| God I never get into an accident, and if I do, I'm more
worried about my
| health and the health of others than the financial bit. Of
course, losing
| all I own is a close second.

[Jim Stewart]

Bill Denton wrote:
> Since you brought up anti-depressants...
>
> Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
> you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but someone
> running around with an untreated problem can?

Exactly. I'd prefer to fly with a pilot who
is taking Prozac than one who should be taking
it and isn't.

[Jim Macklin]

Hello, fire department? Hey, we have a little smoke here.
If you get some time later today, could you, perhaps stop by
and see what is going here?



"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
| Bill Denton wrote:
| > Since you brought up anti-depressants...
| >
| > Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you
can't get a medical if
| > you have your depression treated and control it with
medication, but someone
| > running around with an untreated problem can?
|
| Exactly. I'd prefer to fly with a pilot who
| is taking Prozac than one who should be taking
| it and isn't.

[Montblack]

("Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote)
> I knew a guy who knew a guy who heard about a guy who got caught cheating
> on the form. They say he was lined up against the wall and shot.

Q. FAA person who carries out the order?

A. Yup, Designated Executioner.

> That would also be predicated on what condition you hid from them. Are
> you having daily seizures?

Big deal - as long as they don't effect your mood, or make you drowsy.
Although, you might go through a good number of microphone booms over the
course of a year.


Montblack

[Jim Macklin]

That's what is needed , antidepressants that don't effect
your mood, wait, depression is a mood.



"Montblack" > wrote
in message ...
| ("Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote)
| > I knew a guy who knew a guy who heard about a guy who
got caught cheating
| > on the form. They say he was lined up against the wall
and shot.
|
| Q. FAA person who carries out the order?
|
| A. Yup, Designated Executioner.
|
| > That would also be predicated on what condition you hid
from them. Are
| > you having daily seizures?
|
| Big deal - as long as they don't effect your mood, or make
you drowsy.
| Although, you might go through a good number of microphone
booms over the
| course of a year.
|
|
| Montblack
|
|

[Allen[_1_]]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
...
> But use common sense, safety is the goal, do what is safe and in
> the spirit of the rules and you'll probably be OK with the
> law.

heh heh, yah, ok

[Mxsmanic]

Bill Denton writes:

> Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
> you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but someone
> running around with an untreated problem can?

There are many inconsistencies in this domain. The rules seem to date
from the 1800s.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Denny]

Wow, 34 thread drifts in a bit over 4 hours,,, Has to be close to a
record for this group...


If you are beating the system somehow why would you discuss it in
public? <doh>


denny

[Dallas]

On 22 Jan 2007 20:17:46 GMT, Sally wrote:

> My main concern is getting my ticket, and slapped with a huge fine
> from the FAA finding out about my ommisions through other channels
> (insurance, DEA, etc).

Aren't you a bit worried about Google Groups archiving this admission, with
what looks like your real name, well into the next century?

--
>>> Dallas <<<

[Mark Hansen]

On 01/22/07 14:59, Dallas wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2007 20:17:46 GMT, Sally wrote:
>
>> My main concern is getting my ticket, and slapped with a huge fine
>> from the FAA finding out about my ommisions through other channels
>> (insurance, DEA, etc).
>
> Aren't you a bit worried about Google Groups archiving this admission, with
> what looks like your real name, well into the next century?
>

Admissions? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see the OP admit anything.
Just asked a few 'What if...' questions.

[Sally Grozmano]

"Allen" > wrote in
om:

> What type of plane do you fly?
>
> Allen
>

Not flying, yet. I would really love to start, though, so am weighing my
options. I'm also looking into the sport pilot certification (I used to fly
ultralights), but there are not a lot of places around me that rent out
SLAs, so I would worry about not keeping current. The funny thing is, if I
*do* get my PPL, chances are I would be flying around in a Cessna or
something, and I cannot imagine I would do *that* much more damage in a
Cessna than in a plane that just comes in under the SLA limits. But you
only need a driver's license to get your sport pilot license. Granted, the
sport pilot certificate by default does not allow flight in B/C/D airspace,
but I would get those endorsements.

-Sally

[JGalban[_7_]]

Jim wrote :
>If you read the fine print when you sign an insurance
>application, I think you'll find that you've given
>them the right.

If you're talking about health or life insurance, I'd agree. If
you're talking about aircraft insurance, I'd disagree. I've never
signed a release for my medical records (nor would I) to an aircraft
insurance company. Since the advent of HIPAA, there are pretty strict
rules about the release of medical records.

Being an inusurance company, they could probably look at your records
by peeking through the backdoor, by way of the MIB database. But they
couldn't do much with the info since they would have accessed it
illegally.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)


--
JGalban
Posted at www.flight.org

[Jay Beckman]

"Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Allen" > wrote in
> om:
>
>> What type of plane do you fly?
>>
>> Allen
>>
>
>Not flying, yet. I would really love to start, though, so am weighing my
>options. I'm also looking into the sport pilot certification (I used to fly
>ultralights), but there >are not a lot of places around me that rent out
>SLAs, so I would worry about not keeping current. The funny thing is, if I
>*do* get my PPL, chances are I would be >flying around in a Cessna or
>something, and I cannot imagine I would do *that* much more damage in a
>Cessna than in a plane that just comes in under the SLA >limits. But you
>only need a driver's license to get your sport pilot license.

Provided you've never had a medical denied or revoked...

>Granted, the sport pilot certificate by default does not allow flight in
>B/C/D airspace, but I would get those endorsements.
>
> -Sally

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> Bill Denton wrote:
>> Since you brought up anti-depressants...
>>
>> Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical
>> if
>> you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but
>> someone
>> running around with an untreated problem can?
>
> Exactly. I'd prefer to fly with a pilot who
> is taking Prozac than one who should be taking
> it and isn't.

So, like, no one here actually knows the answer to the original question -
or did I miss it somewhere?

But, now that we have wandered off into never-never land, ADD is another
example - you can get a ticket and all the medicals you want as long as it's
undiagnosed and untreated.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Mike 'Flyin'8']

>No question about that. Now can somebody who's recently gone for a flight
>physical tell me: do they ask for any changes since the last flight physical or
>are you expected to regurgitate your entire history every time you go in. Mine
>is quite extensive and I'm not sure I can remember all of it at this point.
>I've had numerous I&Ds, skin grafts, orthopedic procedures and redoes in the
>past. Please tell me I'm not going to have to tell them all that crap all over
>again. OTOH, just asking for changes in the last couple of years is fair
>enough... especially since there's been none.


I recently went and had to reenter all the info from the last medical.
Good thing I brought the copy of the prior application for reference.
One bit of good info is that you ALSO mark a box that says previously
reported. As such, no other questions were asked about those items.

I did notice it was diffictult to remember all the visits ... when/why
etc. In preperation for the NEXT medical, I will be keeping a folder
where I can enter all that info for next time... Kinda like a flight
log for my Dr visits I guss.

Mike Alexander
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
See my online aerial photo album at
http://flying.4alexanders.com

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "JM" == Jim Macklin > writes:
JM> But use
JM> common sense, safety is the goal, do what is safe and in the
JM> spirit of the rules and you'll probably be OK with the law.

Uh, no. Try inadvertently busting a popup VIP TFR--zero flight safety
issues--and you'll see what I mean.
--
"If you go flying back through time, and you see somebody else flying
forward into the future, it's probably best to avoid eye contact.
- Jack Handey

[[email protected]]

Jim Stewart wrote:
> Bill Denton wrote:
> > Since you brought up anti-depressants...
> >
> > Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
> > you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but someone
> > running around with an untreated problem can?
>
> Exactly. I'd prefer to fly with a pilot who
> is taking Prozac than one who should be taking
> it and isn't.

There is a counter argument...

Somebody who is chronically depressed and unmedicated is firstly
perhaps unlikely to be flying anyway becuase they simply don't want to.
A depressed pilot is probably less depressed when flying.
Medications for the treatment of depression can have undesirable
psychological effects for pilots. Two people died here locally in
exactly this way, pilot was on some anti-depressant, which had known
sideeffect of feelings of invincibility (of course this isn't the
technical description but you get the gist), pilot didn't tell anybody
nor disqualify himself, took one too many risks because he felt like he
could get away with it, stall-spin-splat, pilot and passenger both bit
the big one.

Sometimes the treatment can cause more problems from a safety
standpoint than the disease.

[Margy Natalie]

C J Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:49:58 -0800, Sally Grozmano wrote
> (in article >):
>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>> I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA medical,
>>but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that have
>>occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
>>"common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
>>convictions.
>
>
> I would expect convictions to be rare. It is difficult to prove, since your
> medical records are confidential. Usually, if drugs such as anti-depressants
> show up in your medical tests they just deny a medical certificate.
>
> One problem is just remembering when you went to the doctor to see if that
> mole had grown any three years ago. Filling out those medical forms implies
> that you have either a perfect memory or that you keep far better medical
> records than the average Joe.
I figured this one out!!! Just before my FAA medical I go to my Dr. and
ask for the "flow sheet" off the front of my chart. I don't fill in
anything on the medical and hand the sheet to the AME and ask him what I
should put down. They don't want to know about PAP smears, mamograms or
any of those "fun" things, but they do want, gee, I don't remember what
they wanted. The flow sheet really helped as I seemed to have forgotten
a number of things.

Margy
>
> That said, you are playing with your own life and with the lives of others if
> you are not medically fit to fly.
>

[Mxsmanic]

Dallas writes:

> Aren't you a bit worried about Google Groups archiving this admission, with
> what looks like your real name, well into the next century?

It doesn't contain an admission of anything.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Jim Stewart]

Dallas wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:02:20 -0500, Ron Natalie wrote:
>
>
>>How the hell is the insurance company going to get a look at my medical
>>application?
>
>
> They wouldn't need to look at your medical, they just need to find things
> in your medical records that are known disqualifications.
>
> The questions I have are: Can an insurance company even gain access to your
> medical records?

If you read the fine print when you sign an insurance
application, I think you'll find that you've given
them the right.

> And, can they deny coverage if the omission had nothing to do with the
> accident?

This is a I-am-not-a-lawyer-and-this-is-not-legal-advice
question. Nonetheless, I think the answer is that they
*may* try, but probably not.

[Barney Rubble]

If is "Common knowledge" that many pilots are pathological liars, why can't
you find the evidence? Maybe because you just made that line up.Why don't
you give the FAA a call in OKC, I'm sure they would love to chew the fat
with you....

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> Sally Grozmano wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA
>> medical, but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions
>> that have occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It
>> seems to be "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear
>> of actual convictions.
> Don't know if there are many convictions. The FAA doesn't have to go to
> that length, they can levy civil penalties and pull the pilot and medical
> certificates without having to go through any criminal action.
> This certainly happens, a number of unreported DUI's have ended up that
> way I know.
>
> The FAA did lodge criminal charges against the guys who were found to
> have claimed to be disabled to the SSA and not injured to the FAA.

[Morgans]

"Barney Rubble" > wrote

> If is "Common knowledge" that many pilots are pathological liars, why
> can't you find the evidence? Maybe because you just made that line up.Why
> don't you give the FAA a call in OKC, I'm sure they would love to chew the
> fat with you....

Careful how you attribute quotes. Your response makes it seem as though Ron
wrote the "common knowledge" line, but it was the originator of the thread
that said that.
--
Jim in NC

[Mark Hansen]

On 01/23/07 14:24, Morgans wrote:
> "Barney Rubble" > wrote
>
>> If is "Common knowledge" that many pilots are pathological liars, why
>> can't you find the evidence? Maybe because you just made that line up.Why
>> don't you give the FAA a call in OKC, I'm sure they would love to chew the
>> fat with you....
>
> Careful how you attribute quotes. Your response makes it seem as though Ron
> wrote the "common knowledge" line, but it was the originator of the thread
> that said that.

I was able to easily tell that it was the OP and not Ron. FYI.

For example, in this response, you (Morgans) wrote the text with a single "> ",
while Barney Rubble wrote the text with ">> ".

[Matt Whiting]

Morgans wrote:
>
> "Barney Rubble" > wrote
>
>> If is "Common knowledge" that many pilots are pathological liars, why
>> can't you find the evidence? Maybe because you just made that line
>> up.Why don't you give the FAA a call in OKC, I'm sure they would love
>> to chew the fat with you....
>
>
> Careful how you attribute quotes. Your response makes it seem as though
> Ron wrote the "common knowledge" line, but it was the originator of the
> thread that said that.

Just another problem with top-posting.

Matt

[Dallas]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:05:12 -0800, Mark Hansen wrote:

> Admissions? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see the OP admit anything.
> Just asked a few 'What if...' questions.

Very true.

She also seems to have evaporated after I mentioned it.

Sally, if you're worried about it you can go to Google Groups and have your
posts removed from the archive.

--
>>> Dallas <<<

[Happy Dog]

"Sally Grozmano" > wrote in message >
> I am familiar with the potential penalties for lying on the FAA medical,
> but was curious if anyone had any stats on *actual* convictions that have
> occured for this, and what the associated penalties were? It seems to be
> "common knowledge" that many pilots do lie, but I never hear of actual
> convictions.

There are none. Your query lacks credibility. Know why?

m

[Happy Dog]

"Sally Grozmano" >

> Just to reiterate what I said before, if I am involved in an accident
> where
> someone dies, the last thing on my mind is going to be financial
> penalties.
> That would haunt me for the rest of my life (whether I was at fault or
> not). My main concern is getting my ticket, and slapped with a huge fine
> from the FAA finding out about my ommisions through other channels
> (insurance, DEA, etc).

Well, don't kill anyone and you'll never be noticed..What, exactly, did you
do that requires discipline? Your "main concern" is boring.

m

[Sally Grozmano]

Dallas > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:05:12 -0800, Mark Hansen wrote:
>
>> Admissions? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see the OP admit
>> anything. Just asked a few 'What if...' questions.
>
> Very true.
>
> She also seems to have evaporated after I mentioned it.

Nope, still here. The thread has drifted somewhat from my original question
, so I am guessing the answer is not known. I have not responded to posts
such as "You are claiming all pilots are pathological liars" or "Your
question is boring" because they are obvious flamebait.

>
> Sally, if you're worried about it you can go to Google Groups and have
> your posts removed from the archive.
>

Thanks for the tip. I'm not worried about the FAA looking through the
archives; if anything, my concern would be an overzealous participant in
this NG trying to raise a stink. In any event, I have taken the necessary
precautions :)

[Mxsmanic]

Happy Dog writes:

> There are none. Your query lacks credibility. Know why?

Because you disagree?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Jim Stewart]

wrote:

> Jim Stewart wrote:
>
>>Bill Denton wrote:
>>
>>>Since you brought up anti-depressants...
>>>
>>>Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
>>>you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but someone
>>>running around with an untreated problem can?
>>
>>Exactly. I'd prefer to fly with a pilot who
>>is taking Prozac than one who should be taking
>>it and isn't.
>
>
> There is a counter argument...
>
> Somebody who is chronically depressed and unmedicated is firstly
> perhaps unlikely to be flying anyway becuase they simply don't want to.
> A depressed pilot is probably less depressed when flying.
> Medications for the treatment of depression can have undesirable
> psychological effects for pilots. Two people died here locally in
> exactly this way, pilot was on some anti-depressant, which had known
> sideeffect of feelings of invincibility (of course this isn't the
> technical description but you get the gist), pilot didn't tell anybody
> nor disqualify himself, took one too many risks because he felt like he
> could get away with it, stall-spin-splat, pilot and passenger both bit
> the big one.
>
> Sometimes the treatment can cause more problems from a safety
> standpoint than the disease.

Thanks. Good point.

[C J Campbell]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:47:54 -0800, Bill Denton wrote
(in article >):

> Since you brought up anti-depressants...
>
> Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical if
> you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but someone
> running around with an untreated problem can?
>

Nonsense. You are not allowed to fly if you suffer from depression. The FAA
takes the position that if your depression is bad enough to require
medication then it is bad enough to keep you from flying. But if your
depression is that bad and you fly anyway without taking any medications then
the FAA would still consider you medically unfit.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Bill Denton]

The issue is not one of medical fitness.

The issue is that one cannot obtain a medical...



"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:47:54 -0800, Bill Denton wrote
> (in article >):
>
> > Since you brought up anti-depressants...
> >
> > Am I the only one here who finds it ironic that you can't get a medical
if
> > you have your depression treated and control it with medication, but
someone
> > running around with an untreated problem can?
> >
>
> Nonsense. You are not allowed to fly if you suffer from depression. The
FAA
> takes the position that if your depression is bad enough to require
> medication then it is bad enough to keep you from flying. But if your
> depression is that bad and you fly anyway without taking any medications
then
> the FAA would still consider you medically unfit.
>
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor
>

[Mxsmanic]

C J Campbell writes:

> Nonsense. You are not allowed to fly if you suffer from depression. The FAA
> takes the position that if your depression is bad enough to require
> medication then it is bad enough to keep you from flying. But if your
> depression is that bad and you fly anyway without taking any medications then
> the FAA would still consider you medically unfit.

What if failing your medical and losing the ability to fly causes you
to lapse into depression?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Bill Denton writes:

> The issue is not one of medical fitness.
>
> The issue is that one cannot obtain a medical...

Indeed. Two different things.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[C J Campbell]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:41:21 -0800, Bill Denton wrote
(in article >):

> The issue is not one of medical fitness.
>
> The issue is that one cannot obtain a medical...
>

Very well. You cannot obtain a medical if you suffer depression, whether you
are taking medication or not. It is bogus to claim, as the OP did, that you
can fly with depression as long as you are not taking any medication for it.

[C J Campbell]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:33:38 -0800, Mxsmanic wrote
(in article >):

> C J Campbell writes:
>
>> Nonsense. You are not allowed to fly if you suffer from depression. The FAA
>> takes the position that if your depression is bad enough to require
>> medication then it is bad enough to keep you from flying. But if your
>> depression is that bad and you fly anyway without taking any medications
>> then
>> the FAA would still consider you medically unfit.
>
> What if failing your medical and losing the ability to fly causes you
> to lapse into depression?
>
>

The FAA does not care, obviously, if it causes depression. It is, in fact,
their job goal. Their motto is "We're not happy until you're not happy."

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Bill Denton]

If you are untreated, you may not know that you suffer from depression.

If you are untreated, how would the FAA know that you suffered from it?



"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:41:21 -0800, Bill Denton wrote
> (in article >):
>
> > The issue is not one of medical fitness.
> >
> > The issue is that one cannot obtain a medical...
> >
>
> Very well. You cannot obtain a medical if you suffer depression, whether
you
> are taking medication or not. It is bogus to claim, as the OP did, that
you
> can fly with depression as long as you are not taking any medication for
it.
>

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:41:21 -0800, Bill Denton wrote
> (in article >):
>
>> The issue is not one of medical fitness.
>>
>> The issue is that one cannot obtain a medical...
>>
>
> Very well. You cannot obtain a medical if you suffer depression,

Sure you can. As long asit hasn't been diagnosed...

Or, how about ADD? I know for a fact that you can get a medical (and a
license) even if you have ADD as long as it is undiagnosed and untreated.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Mxsmanic]

C J Campbell writes:

> Very well. You cannot obtain a medical if you suffer depression, whether you
> are taking medication or not.

But "suffering" in the context of a medical generally means
"diagnosed" or "undergoing treatment."

> It is bogus to claim, as the OP did, that you can fly with depression
> as long as you are not taking any medication for it.

Sure you can, as long as you have the medical, which is not the same
as having the disorder.

You can be prevented from flying by a past diagnosis of something you
no longer actually have. Conversely, you can fly with a condition as
long as you haven't been diagnosed with it and/or treated for it.

This is just one of the dangers of improper and excessive regulation
of physical fitness requirements.

The worst thing is that some pilots may be tempted to leave medical
conditions untreated just so that they can continue to fly. As long
as their condition is undiagnosed and untreated, they are fine from a
regulatory standpoint.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

C J Campbell writes:

> The FAA does not care, obviously, if it causes depression. It is, in fact,
> their job goal. Their motto is "We're not happy until you're not happy."

I'm surprised that it works this way. The medical requirements seem
to be inspired by (but not inspected by) NASA's astronaut programs or
something. They fail to properly address real potential problems
while dramatically overemphasizing things that aren't problems at all.
They generally impose a higher-than-necessary standard for fitness.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Barney Rubble]

Outlook has taken to placing responses in seemingly random places in the
hierarchy, sorry for the confusion, it was of course direct to the OP.

- Barney

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Morgans wrote:
>>
>> "Barney Rubble" > wrote
>>
>>> If is "Common knowledge" that many pilots are pathological liars, why
>>> can't you find the evidence? Maybe because you just made that line
>>> up.Why don't you give the FAA a call in OKC, I'm sure they would love to
>>> chew the fat with you....
>>
>>
>> Careful how you attribute quotes. Your response makes it seem as though
>> Ron wrote the "common knowledge" line, but it was the originator of the
>> thread that said that.
>
> Just another problem with top-posting.
>
> Matt

[Barney Rubble]

No because the OP pulled statement out of their backside and presented it is
common knowledge.

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Happy Dog writes:
>
>> There are none. Your query lacks credibility. Know why?
>
> Because you disagree?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.