Can I Still Become a Pilot If I Have Psychotic Depression?

Palmpilot said:
A valid analysis would require comparing the rate of occurrence between sport pilots and medically certificated pilots.
Click to expand...
Except that the FAA made sure that no one would never have the data to be able to make a valid analysis. ( I suspect most likely due to bureaucratic laziness, but non the less, that's what they did.)

Now, for "disqualifying" conditions - if there is a medical reason that makes a person not safe to operate a Cub, they sure as aich ee double hocky sticks don't belong behind the wheel of an automobile. Where is the hue and cry over "those people" driving cars?
 
FlySince9 said:
while you guys are ranting, arguing and throwing mud at each other, have you noticed that the OP hasn't made a peep since the first post? Kinda like "she" tossed a grenade and left the scene..... LOL!
Click to expand...
No reason for the rest of us to not have some fun.
 
Personally, I suggest sticking to ultralights (if anything at all). Even that would be only after getting your shrink's okay and "renewing" it on occasion by asking if he or she still thinks you can safely fly them.

FAA is intentionally vague regarding whether or how various conditions apply to flying SP, inevitably responding to requests for clarification with something very closely along the lines of "talk to your doctor about it and decide." But most conditions aren't as universally, unequivocally, and permanently disqualifying as psychosis. There are protocols that can get a pilot back in the air again after diagnoses of common conditions such as diabetes, kidney stones, depression without psychosis, cancer, heart disease, and so forth. There is no protocol for psychosis. It would be tough to self-certify that one without putting your certificate (and possibly your freedom or your life) at risk.

Ultralights, on the other hand, don't require you to certify to anything at all. There are rules, but none of them require signing on any dotted lines. That doesn't mean you wouldn't have to use good sense and clear it with your shrink, but you wouldn't be risking any legal actions for falsely self-certifying.

Rich
 
FlySince9 said:
while you guys are ranting, arguing and throwing mud at each other, have you noticed that the OP hasn't made a peep since the first post? Kinda like "she" tossed a grenade and left the scene..... LOL!
Click to expand...
Well with responses like we all get from the gallery, wouldn't you leave the scene too?
 
It's possible OP isn't a troll. Having already had a psychotic episode by the time you are a senior in high school is not that rare, and wanting to fly at that age isn't either. And if you hadn't yet done the research into a medical and just google a forum to post a question, you would easily come up with PoA and end up here. It feels like a troll to us because we have for years known the facts so have trouble wrapping our minds around a newbie OP ignorant of something we think is obvious like you aren't allowed to fly if you have a history of psychosis, but that obvious fact is by no means obvious to the general public. If it's controlled with meds and you haven't had an episode in years, it's perfectly reasonable to assume maybe you could fly just like you can with well controlled diabetes or drive a car with well controlled epilepsy. Perfectly reasonable question for a newbie.

Having said that, sure it's possibly a troll. The profile saying male while the post speaking of a boyfriend casts some suspicion but there is no reason to think there can be no such thing as a gay male teen who wants to fly and has some medical history. Or for that matter a newbie just setting up the profile wrong.

I always answer as if the OP is for real because if he/she is, then we do them a disservice by being rude and if they are a troll no harm done, and info is posted for others' edification. One thing I am certain of is that many who come here will read but never post and it's easy to see why.
 
I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and thus tend to think the OP was asking a serious question and reasonably expected a respectful reply. If he is a gay high school senior interested in becoming a certificated pilot, he is certainly not alone and should be treated with the same courtesy you would wish to have if it were you asking the question.

http://www.ngpa.org/
 
I am OP, sorry for taking so long to reply.

I am not a troll, and I am a gay male.

Thank you for all your responses. When I get more serious about flying I will talk to an AME and consider careers other than flying.
 
He.

bbchien said:
Well the OP is not a troll....no wonder she didn’t come back! The board membership does more to inhibit participation than you all know....

Some of the posts are at nicest, off color...:(


:(
Click to expand...

uns4 said:
I am OP, sorry for taking so long to reply.

I am not a troll, and I am a gay male.

Thank you for all your responses. When I get more serious about flying I will talk to an AME and consider careers other than flying.
Click to expand...

Mr. OP:
Here is your answer.

bbchien said:
A psychotic depression off meds would make the agency "get the creeps" about certifying you due to the consequences of recurrence.
A psychotic depression on one of the 4 SSRIs would be denied as psychosis is a "severity excluder" from the SSRI protocol. You cannot be certified post psychosis, even with "good control" after a psychosis because the agency cannot control whether you took you meds on the day of the accident.


So, the answer is "no".
Click to expand...
 
bbchien said:
Well the OP is not a troll....no wonder she didn’t come back! The board membership does more to inhibit participation than you all know....

Some of the posts are at nicest, off color...:(


:(
Click to expand...
You believe the “I am not a troll”, but not the “I’m a gay male”?
 
Psychosis is a devastating illness, nothing to joke about or to troll about for that matter. If you've ever had someone close to you with this illness you would know there is nothing funny about it.

OP, you sound like you have your stuff together and are taking your meds. I think you probably understand why the FAA takes the position it does on psychosis, were you to have an episode while flying, you and innocent people could be hurt or killed, flying is a serious business. One of the bigger problems with this type of illness is that the patient feels better on the meds and decides to stop taking them only to fall back into the grips of the illness. There are many disqualifying conditions to obtaining a medical, this is one of them. Doctor Bruce (bbchien) posted his answer here, he is an AME with lots of experience in this area with airmen and medicals, he knows what he is talking about.

I would focus on something else were I in your situation. Career, maybe sailing or a boat. If you really want to fly and have the funds you can fly as much as you want with an instructor or a properly certificated pilot, you just wouldn't be able to solo.

Stay on your meds and take care of yourself.
 
SkyDog58 said:
And what percentage of pilots going the sport pilot route knowingly have disqualifying conditions that would be caught on an honest medical? I’d say it’s very high.
Click to expand...
That is rather the point, isn't it? If I'm flying with SP privileges (regardless of certificate), then I don't need to pass a medical. I don't need to be theoretically able to pass a medical, or to qualify under Basic Med. All I need is to know that I do not have a condition that would make me unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner --- no different than if I did hold a valid medical certificate.
 
DaleB said:
That is rather the point, isn't it? If I'm flying with SP privileges (regardless of certificate), then I don't need to pass a medical. I don't need to be theoretically able to pass a medical, or to qualify under Basic Med. All I need is to know that I do not have a condition that would make me unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner --- no different than if I did hold a valid medical certificate.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. If you hold an FAA medical certificate, then the standard is really whether you are able to meet the standards for the certificate. If you know you don't (I think the wording is "reason to know"), then you are really supposed to self-ground. With SP (or with BasicMed), the standard is, as you say, whether you're able to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.
 
azure said:
Not exactly. If you hold an FAA medical certificate, then the standard is really whether you are able to meet the standards for the certificate.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, negative. That's one aspect of it, sure, but not all of it. If I know I meet the standards of the certificate but am not able to operate the aircraft in a safe manner... don't fly. Too tired, distracted, any other unresolved issue that might prevent me from flying safely - whether it would prevent one from passing a medical exam or not.
 
DaleB said:
With all due respect, negative. That's one aspect of it, sure, but not all of it. If I know I meet the standards of the certificate but am not able to operate the aircraft in a safe manner... don't fly. Too tired, distracted, any other unresolved issue that might prevent me from flying safely - whether it would prevent one from passing a medical exam or not.
Click to expand...

That may be your personal standard, but it's not the FAA regulatory standard - 61.53a says "meet the requirements for the medical certificate" when operating with a medial certificate. It's only those of us who are operating without a medical certificate (61.53b) that are required by regulation to be able to "operate the aircraft in a safe manner."
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
That may be your personal standard, but it's not the FAA regulatory standard - 61.53a says "meet the requirements for the medical certificate" when operating with a medial certificate. It's only those of us who are operating without a medical certificate (61.53b) that are required by regulation to be able to "operate the aircraft in a safe manner."
Click to expand...
Then it could be argued those flying with Sport Pilot privileges are actually held to a higher standard, would you agree? Adhering strictly to the letter of the regulation means I could (if I had a medical certificate) know perfectly well that I'm unfit to fly, but as long as it's not a medical reason that would invalidate my medical cert -- I'm good to go. Common sense would tell us otherwise, and I think the AIM says something about IMSAFE or some such.

But let's indulge in a little speculation. Let's say a pilot drives to airport, knowing they meet the standard for a medical certificate. They have a valid medical in their pocket, and they're not receiving treatment for anything that would prevent them from holding it. So they meet the letter of the regulation.

They also know they're stressed out and too tired to fly, dehydrated and - even though their last drink was over 8 hours before -- more than a little hung over. Pilot takes off anyway; it's Sunday, and he or she has to be back at work the next day. Along the way they are involved in a non-fatal accident. Do you think the FAA will not cite this pilot for some violation, like perhaps "careless and reckless" operation, for ignoring clear indications that they shouldn't be flying?

My point is, we all have an absolute responsibility to ensure that we are able to fly safely. Even if it's not specifically spelled out in the letter of the FARs for medical certificate holders, I don't think you'd get very far with that argument with the FAA.
 
Last edited:
One could also argue that Lindbergh became unsafe due to fatigue during his transatlantic flight and that Yeager was unsafe due to his injury when he broke the sound barrier. Yet they are hailed as heroes who persevered and advanced aviation. And since neither one crashed and burned on those flights, well they must have been operating safely. Right?

:dunno:

Yeah. Silly argument.
 
DaleB said:
With all due respect, negative. That's one aspect of it, sure, but not all of it. If I know I meet the standards of the certificate but am not able to operate the aircraft in a safe manner... don't fly. Too tired, distracted, any other unresolved issue that might prevent me from flying safely - whether it would prevent one from passing a medical exam or not.
Click to expand...
Surely you should not be flying if you know you cannot operate the aircraft safely! I never meant to imply otherwise. But it is very possible to be quite certain that you can perform your PIC duties safely, and STILL not be legal to fly under a 3rd (or higher) class med certificate. You can have some form of cancer that has basically zero chance of metastasizing or causing you any impairment for many years, like some forms of skin cancer or chronic leukemia. Or you might be diagnosed with something like COPD or IBD. With the possible exception of basal cell skin carcinoma, those diagnoses require an SI. You're supposed to - at least - consult an AME before flying again as PIC, and in most cases you will need to be cleared by OKC, particularly if you have an SI for anything else, since you will have a letter that says that you must self ground in case of any "adverse change" in your medical condition.

Anyway, that is what I meant. A pilot operating under an FAA medical certificate is held to a HIGHER standard than a sport pilot or PP operating under BasicMed, not a lower standard.
 
If you're interested in commercial aviation (ie. a career) then this is useless babble, but otherwise you've got tons of non-medical options: Part 103 aircraft, balloons, gliders and perhaps light sport.

A quick note on medicals as relates to the ballooning world. It used to be that no one (student, private, commercial) required a medical... things are changing due to the idiotic balloonist in TX that killed over a dozen passengers in 2016. Interestingly enough, it's not as much the NTSB or FAA that is mandating changes (though they probably will at some point in the coming future), it's the insurance companies (of which there are only a few who cover ballooning operations). My agency came out with a memo last year that starting in 2018, commercial pilots will require a second class medical and ALL pilots flying a balloon of 140,000 cubic feet or greater (6-10 passenger and above) will need at least a third class medical regardless of commercial ops or not. This is a rare example of literally one person's F-up changing an entire industry. The FAA knows little about ballooning so the BFA (Balloon Federation of America) jumped on them and the NTSB to 'work together' before stuff gets too out-of-hand, regulatory speaking.
 
uns4 said:
I am a high school senior and one of the career paths I am entertaining is becoming a pilot. My boyfriend however discouraged me from becoming one because he knows I have psychosis and that generally individuals with psychosis cannot become pilots. I am medicated and my medication works very well, I rarely experience any psychotic symptoms. Because my symptoms are so well managed would I be cleared to become a pilot? Thank you to all who reply.
Click to expand...
No. Read the rest of the replies if you want, but no is the answer.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top