Congress Examines Pilot Medical Record Fraud

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:44:35 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:
This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate
the thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
medical certificates?

Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.


Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who are
receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it not
plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that might
document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their FAA medical
application?

I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases is
where this came from.

Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.

Do you have reason to think that they are getting the data from somewhere
else?

No. But I try not to make unfounded assumptions.

"Ken Finney" wrote

Being that at least one airplane manufacturer (Diamond?) has a option to
get it configured for being flown by disabled pilots, is it not possible
that a person can be disabled "enough" to draw SS but not disabled enough
to not have a medical?

I would certainly think so, but I don't have anything but gut feeling to
back that up.

At some point, I will probably be drawing disability, for a wretched back.
I could certainly see a point where I could not stand being at work for more
than a couple hours at a time (without laying down flat), but if I could
stand 2 hours at work, I could fly for two hours.
--
Jim in NC

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:41:38 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases is
where this came from.

Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.

Yeah, I can.. it came from following one of your links. Page one, last
paragraph.

SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER:

http://transportation.house.gov/Medi...7/SSM71707.pdf


--
Dallas

Ken Finney wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Larry Dighera wrote:
This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate
the thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
medical certificates?

Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.


Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who
are receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it
not plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that
might document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their
FAA medical application?

I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases
is where this came from.

Do you have reason to think that they are getting the data from
somewhere else?

Being that at least one airplane manufacturer (Diamond?) has a option
to get it configured for being flown by disabled pilots, is it not
possible that a person can be disabled "enough" to draw SS but not
disabled enough to not have a medical?


Sure, but the point is that they lied to either the FAA or the SSA because
the FAA database did not list the problems they were getting benefits for
from the SSA.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:11:05 GMT, Dallas
wrote in
:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:43:24 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

Is it not
plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that might
document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their FAA
medical application?

We have some very strong medical privacy laws in effect, does the
government even have the power to snoop into someone's medical
records for any reason?

It would seem the Bush administration has the power, if not the
authority, to snoop at will. :-(

Can you show a single cite showing that the Bush administration has obtained
private medical records without the proper warrants?

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:44:35 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:
This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate
the thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
medical certificates?

Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.


Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who
are receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it
not plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that
might document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their
FAA medical application?

I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases
is where this came from.

Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.

Sure I can. Does a case that ended with a criminal conviction provide the
level corroboration you need?

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cae/press_...Conviction.pdf

"This case is the product of an extensive/joint investigation by the Office
of Inspector General, Department of Transportation, and the Office of
Inspector General, Social Security Administration. The investigation began
in 2004 as part of Operation Safe Pilot, a joint effort between the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Social Security Administration (SSA)
to cross-check their databases for people receiving social security
disability payments who were also being licensed to fly aircraft."


Do you have reason to think that they are getting the data from
somewhere else?

No. But I try not to make unfounded assumptions.

Bull****, you love to do that. In fact just 4 minutes before you posted this
completely reasoned message you posted...

"It would seem the Bush administration has the power, if not the
authority, to snoop at will. :-("

....when talking about the same subject.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 06:36:27 GMT, Dallas
wrote in
:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:41:38 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases is
where this came from.

Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.

Yeah, I can.. it came from following one of your links. Page one, last
paragraph.

SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER:

http://transportation.house.gov/Medi...7/SSM71707.pdf


That is an interesting document indeed.

Here's the relevant cite:

In July 2005, a Department of Transportation Inspector General
("IG") investigation uncovered "egregious cases" of airmen lying
about debilitating medical conditions on their applications for
Airmen Medical Certificates. In a sample of 40,000 airmen
certificate-holders, the Inspector General found more than 3,200
airmen holding current medical certificates while simultaneously
receiving Social Security benefits, including those for medically
disabling conditions. While the U.S. Attorney's Office ultimately
prosecuted more than 40 cases, the IG believes that hundreds more
could have been pursued if the U.S. Attorney's resources had not
been constrained. These cases involved pilots with a variety of
medical conditions including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
The extent of the problem of falsified Airmen Medical Certificate
applications is unknown beyond the initial IG investigation.

As a result of this investigation, the Inspector General
recommended that the FAA coordinate with the Social Security
Administration and other providers of medical disability to
identify individuals whose documented medical conditions are
inconsistent with sworn statements made to the FAA. The IG also
recommended that the application for an Airman Medical Certificate
be amended to ask applicants whether they are currently receiving
medical disability payments from any disability provider.

But that only addresses airmen receiving medical disability. Consider
those airman medical certificate applicants who are using
disqualifying drugs prescribed by a private physician who fail to
report it on their applications. The above sample of 40,000 airmen
revealed that 8% were receiving disability; the percentage would
doubtless be considerably larger if all "egregious cases" were
discovered.

Here's another quote from the document:

The FAA's own researchers have documented hundreds of fatal
accidents where pilots failed to disclose potentially
disqualifying medical conditions on their Airman Medical
Certificate applications. In a research study that analyzed the
post-mortem toxicology reports in every fatal accident (386)
during a ten-year period (1995-2005), the FAA research team found
toxicology evidence of serious medical conditions in nearly 10
percent of pilots. Fewer than 10 percent of these medical
conditions (or medications used to treat the conditions) were
disclosed to the FAA. Furthermore, of the 386 pilots included in
the FAA study, 38 percent (147) were rated for Air Transport or
Cargo operations. Fifty-seven percent (219) were private or
student pilots. Of the total number of pilots involved in fatal
accidents, one-third (127) held first or second class medical
certificates. These statistics imply that the falsification issue
is not limited to recreational general aviation pilots.

And that study was limited to only those airmen who were killed. The
implications are ominous.

It looks like the court sentence for failing to report disqualifying
medications on airman medical application is $1,000 and three years
probation. Ouch!

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:18:11 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

That is an interesting document indeed.

I don't know where to come down on this issue... On the one hand I think
the government has better things to do than fix a non-problem.

On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
Oxycontin?


--
Dallas

"Dallas" wrote in message
.. .

I don't know where to come down on this issue... On the one hand I think
the government has better things to do than fix a non-problem.

On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
Oxycontin?

It depends. Are there any demonstrated problems with pilots taking
oxycontin? (I kinda shudder at the thought, but, what if there are no
accidents involving oxycontin?)

The FAA has a pretty interesting system for random drug testing that rewards
the industry for lack of positive results. As long as the flying community
stays below the rate of failure threshold, the random testing rate is
halved.



-c

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:38:34 GMT, Dallas
wrote in
:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:18:11 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

That is an interesting document indeed.

I don't know where to come down on this issue...

It think the issue is pretty clear. Those who violate FAA regulations
are dishonest in addition to causing a hazard to themselves and
others.

On the one hand I think the government has better things to do than fix a non-problem.

What criteria did you use to come to the conclusion that violating FAA
medical regulations is a "non-problem?" As I recall, one study showed
10% of fatal accidents had a pilot aboard who violated FAA medical
regulations.

On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
Oxycontin?

Not only that, but I don't want her commanding my airline flight nor
over-flying my home, nor person, nor those of those I love.

If you believe the rigor of FAA medical regulations should be
reformed, that's another issue.