Substance abuse and flying

[MedicineMan]

I want to weigh in on the subject of alcohol and drug use, and how it relates to flying OR driving.

Yes, I am the guy that posted last year about a 26 year old DUI, and what I have to say is not gonna make "happy feelings" for some folks.
I have dealt with these problems as a medical professional, and have worked under DOT rules as a professional driver.

That said, if you cannot handle common sense talk or the truth, stop reading now and go to next topic.

-----------

So, I am seeing a LOT of posts about alcohol use, DUI's, and POT smoking.
Well.... here is the straight talk ...

"GROW UP !!!"

I will reserve pot smoking and address alcohol first.
If you are drinking to excess (BAC high enough to get a DUI), then there are only 3 reasons;
1) you are addicted/alcoholic.
2) you have a mental problem that you are self-medicating and you need psychiatric help.
3) you are immature and believe that large quantities of alcohol is the key to having a good time.

ANY of the above is a good and valid reason why you should not be flying (or driving).

Drugs (illegal not pot)....
If you are doing any non-prescribed or illegal drugs, then you need to stay out of airplanes and vehicles.
We will wave to you, and call the coroner or ambulance when we find you laid out on the ground.
Nuff said.

POT .....
This one SEEMS complicated because of the States that have "legalized" it.
But it is real simple.
Marijuana is ILLEGAL in ALL 50 States by Federal Statute.
Your Pilot license and/or CDL is a FEDERALLY CONTROLLED license, and everything about it falls under Federal Jurisdiction.
So no matter what your pothead friends or legislators say, you need to ditch the weed if you wanna fly.

NOBODY wants a bunch of smoked up pilots with bloodshot eyes and silly grins flying around at 25kts and 50ft looking paranoidly for "the man".

If you are now mad, then this was for YOU.
But it is the TRUTH.
If you cannot live "clean & sober", then take up golf or tennis and leave flying and driving to the mature grownups.

We the mature adults, are tired of having to live our lives under rules that were written because of, and for, the immature and ignorant percentile of our society.

 

[mscard88]

Wow didn't see that coming.

 

[Joshuajayg]

Thank you. Well said.

 

[Tim Allison]

Good post Medicine man. Maturity and living Clean and sober one day at a time is the key to safe flight.

 

[SaltH2OHokie]

I work a job that requires abstinence from most fun things...

But I would have to say I disagree. My off the record opinion of what I have to enforce on people who work under me is this: if you want to smoke weed on your own time, get so drunk you don't know which way is up, etc... I'm fine with that. You show up to work clean and sober and give me 8-16hrs, and I'm happy. What you do on your own time is exactly that, your own time.

So if January 1st you smoked enough weed to make Cheech Marin jealous, and you flew on January 10th... More power to you.

To answer your post... Not mad, but don't necessarily agree with the binary tone. Life is seldom black and white, yes and no. Plenty of shades of grey.

 

[Ravioli]

Not sure what inspired your sermon. Your thoughts may have served YOU better 26 years ago.

If someone drinks to a BAC greater than .08 in there own home, and does not operate a motor vehicle, are they responsibly using a legal intoxicant or are they one of your 3 judgmental depictions? If same said person drinks with a designated driver, where do they fall on your scale? You also leave out walking (even stumbling) home, taxis, and Uber.

Pot is, of course, out of the question for pilots.

Prescription drugs (prescribed or otherwise) are clearly addressed in regulations.

 

[SkyDog58]

 

[Joshuajayg]

What is socially acceptable is not necessarily a good idea or responsible. It is the OP's opinion and some others' (mine) too that these attitudes and actions are bad for pilots. But then they are only opinions; we are all entitled to have our own opinions no matter how wrong they are

 

[geneseib]

I want to weigh in on the subject of alcohol and drug use, and how it relates to flying OR driving.

We the mature adults, are tired of having to live our lives under rules that were written because of, and for, the immature and ignorant percentile of our society.

Agree

 

[Velocity173]

I guess I've known a lot of "immature" military pilots in my time because #3 is pretty common...except for me of course.

 

[lbfjrmd]

if you want to smoke weed on your own time, get so drunk you don't know which way is up, etc... I'm fine with that. You show up to work clean and sober and give me 8-16hrs, and I'm happy. What you do on your own time is exactly that, your own time.

I would not be happy if MY life were in Your hands!

 

[mulligan]

Maybe I am misreading this. Are you stating your opinion that if I enjoy a few glasses of wine at dinner or a few beers on the golf course I have no place in the cockpit?

I have seen alcohol and drugs ruin lives of friends and family. In fact I have lost my father to alcohol and my cousin to drugs. By the fact that I can get a .08 at dinner with friends and take uber home for some reason just does not translate to my capabilities sober in a cockpit.

 

[SkyDog58]

Maybe I am misreading this. Are you stating your opinion that if I enjoy a few glasses of wine at dinner or a few few beers on the golf course I have no place in the cockpit?

Sounds that way to me. I guess since I had a beer last night watching a ball game that I need to surrender my certificates. Well, at least I don't have a DUI on my record.

 

[N659HB]

Straight and narrow. The only way to fly.

Like Superman.

 

[SaltH2OHokie]

I would not be happy if MY life were in Your hands!

I don't follow... Your life isn't in my hands, nor do I do the things you quoted... My point is that if one uses drugs or alcohol in a manner that doesn't affect anyone else, who's business is that? Don't fly drunk/stoned/hungover/etc... But beyond that I don't care what you do. I don't smoke pot, nor have I ever had a DUI or any other alcohol related issues.

I think we could all agree that a drunk, stoned, or otherwise altered pilot, truck driver, etc is not a good idea. But the OP seemingly asserted that having a 2nd or 3rd glass of wine with dinner on Saturday night (hit the magic 0.08 bac) makes one incapable of safe flight two weeks later.

I'm not buying that.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Have reviewed the hard-line stance on most such topics through the decades; have decided that the adage "all things in moderation" covers it best for me (with the addendum of not being under the influence when operating power equipment).

 

[James331]

I want to weigh in on the subject of alcohol and drug use, and how it relates to flying OR driving.

Yes, I am the guy that posted last year about a 26 year old DUI, and what I have to say is not gonna make "happy feelings" for some folks.
I have dealt with these problems as a medical professional, and have worked under DOT rules as a professional driver.

That said, if you cannot handle common sense talk or the truth, stop reading now and go to next topic.

-----------

So, I am seeing a LOT of posts about alcohol use, DUI's, and POT smoking.
Well.... here is the straight talk ...

"GROW UP !!!"

I will reserve pot smoking and address alcohol first.
If you are drinking to excess (BAC high enough to get a DUI), then there are only 3 reasons;
1) you are addicted/alcoholic.
2) you have a mental problem that you are self-medicating and you need psychiatric help.
3) you are immature and believe that large quantities of alcohol is the key to having a good time.

ANY of the above is a good and valid reason why you should not be flying (or driving).

Drugs (illegal not pot)....
If you are doing any non-prescribed or illegal drugs, then you need to stay out of airplanes and vehicles.
We will wave to you, and call the coroner or ambulance when we find you laid out on the ground.
Nuff said.

POT .....
This one SEEMS complicated because of the States that have "legalized" it.
But it is real simple.
Marijuana is ILLEGAL in ALL 50 States by Federal Statute.
Your Pilot license and/or CDL is a FEDERALLY CONTROLLED license, and everything about it falls under Federal Jurisdiction.
So no matter what your pothead friends or legislators say, you need to ditch the weed if you wanna fly.

NOBODY wants a bunch of smoked up pilots with bloodshot eyes and silly grins flying around at 25kts and 50ft looking paranoidly for "the man".

If you are now mad, then this was for YOU.
But it is the TRUTH.
If you cannot live "clean & sober", then take up golf or tennis and leave flying and driving to the mature grownups.

We the mature adults, are tired of having to live our lives under rules that were written because of, and for, the immature and ignorant percentile of our society.

Kinda sounds like you're one of those crazy puritanical nut jobs, you know the type, the ones who feel the need to run others personal lives.

Here's the deal, don't be under the influence of ANYTHING while driving or flying or practicing medicine, etc.

If what you're doing doesn't, and isn't going to hurt anyone, you're golden.

What you do in the privacy of your own home, or drinking at a bar with friends with a cab on speed dial, that's no ones damn business, and I fear the folks who want to make it their business almost more than the guy under the influence of something.

If you're not putting others in direct risk (not driving or whatever), then others need to worry about their own lives.

 

[bbchien]

I don't follow... Your life isn't in my hands, nor do I do the things you quoted... My point is that if one uses drugs or alcohol in a manner that doesn't affect anyone else, who's business is that? Don't fly drunk/stoned/hungover/etc... But beyond that I don't care what you do. I don't smoke pot, nor have I ever had a DUI or any other alcohol related issues.

I think we could all agree that a drunk, stoned, or otherwise altered pilot, truck driver, etc is not a good idea. But the OP seemingly asserted that having a 2nd or 3rd glass of wine with dinner on Saturday night (hit the magic 0.08 bac) makes one incapable of safe flight two weeks later.

I'm not buying that.

You don't know what to buy. A 0.08 doesn't make you incapable two weeks later. And you don't get an immediate challenge based on two weeks since. What you do get is a systemic investigation between the offense and your next medical (or if you get suspended, starting at 60 days) of whether or not you should continue as a pilot. A certain former admin. of the FAA was relieved of his credentials for a 0.07. But I have had a 0.165 who was given the blessing. It all depends.

 

[SaltH2OHokie]

He didn't say actually getting a DUI...he said:

"GROW UP !!!"

I will reserve pot smoking and address alcohol first.
If you are drinking to excess (BAC high enough to get a DUI), then there are only 3 reasons;
1) you are addicted/alcoholic.
2) you have a mental problem that you are self-medicating and you need psychiatric help.
3) you are immature and believe that large quantities of alcohol is the key to having a good time.

ANY of the above is a good and valid reason why you should not be flying (or driving).

Which says to me, and maybe I'm misreading, that if you have 3 glasses of wine while hosting a dinner party, in your own home and at some point get over a 0.08BAC, then it is for one of the 3 reasons he listed, and all 3 are "good and valid reasons not be flying". So our hypothetical dinner party host is tipsy in his own home, but its either because he's an alcoholic, has a mental problem, or is immature.

That's what I'm not buying. Getting a DUI, yep, that's probably indicative of a problem. That's not what he brought as the topic of his post...merely drinking to the BAC that qualifies you for a DUI.

 

[bbchien]

He didn't say actually getting a DUI...he said:

Which says to me, and maybe I'm misreading, that if you have 3 glasses of wine while hosting a dinner party, in your own home and at some point get over a 0.08BAC, then it is for one of the 3 reasons he listed, and all 3 are "good and valid reasons not be flying". So our hypothetical dinner party host is tipsy in his own home, but its either because he's an alcoholic, has a mental problem, or is immature.

That's what I'm not buying. Getting a DUI, yep, that's probably indicative of a problem. That's not what he brought as the topic of his post...merely drinking to the BAC that qualifies you for a DUI.

After surviving a year by year special issuance for 4 years (urine testing, meetings, sponsorship in a third class airman) and being released, the following sentence is NOT present in the "eligibility" (release) letter: "Continued airman medical certification remains contingent upon your total abstinence from the use of alcohol". Bu in EVERY revenue grade (1st, 2nd) class eligibility, that sentence is present. And I have seen MANY.

So if you are a revenue grade airman, the FAA does indeed care. After release, If you are a 3rd class aviator and were judged to have a dependency issue, you can indeed drink in your own home so long as you don't have any further reports of alcohol use in a situation which might create a danger. I have one revenue airman who was in his home, created such a danger, and got a wet disorderly conduct, and is back to flying with HIMS. And he really, really did need HIMS. And he says so, and knows so.

So the answer to YOUR question is, both Yes, and No. It's much more complex than for which you give them credit. Got it?

 

[James331]

After surviving a year by year special issuance for 4 years (urine testing, meetings, sponsorship in a third class airman) and being released, the following sentence is NOT present in the "eligibility" (release) letter: "Continued airman medical certification remains contingent upon your total abstinence from the use of alcohol". Bu in EVERY revenue grade (1st, 2nd) class eligibility, that sentence is present. And I have seen MANY.

So if you are a revenue grade airman, the FAA does indeed care. After release, If you are a 3rd class aviator and were judged to have a dependency issue, you can indeed drink in your own home so long as you don't have any further reports of alcohol use in a situation which might create a danger. I have one revenue airman who was in his home, created a danger, and got a wet disorderly conduct, and is back to flying with HIMS. And he really, really did need HIMS. And he says so.

So the answer to YOUR question is, both Yes, and No. It's much more complex than for which you give them credit. Got it?

Assuming facts not in evidence?


So the FAA would give me a special issuance and a "sentence" for hosting a party at my house, as a law abiding person, enjoying some wine to over a .08 point, BUT never driving, flying, or breaking any law??

 

[MedicineMan]

Maybe I am misreading this. Are you stating your opinion that if I enjoy a few glasses of wine at dinner or a few beers on the golf course I have no place in the cockpit?

No.
Not even.

 

[bbchien]

James, IF you were in recovery
IF you had succeeded in a special issuance
AND
You are an upper class medical certificate (revenue operator 2nd or 1st class).
IF and ONLY IF....
Then you will get taken down if FAA gets wind of it.
*****

IF you are a 3rd class
IF you had succeeded in a special issuance and had been subsequently ruled eligible

You can drink to your heart's content in your home so long as no wet reckless is called (public record of creating a danger).

Please, Re-read this several times before posting from a reaction. You have over-reacted without full comprehension.

 

[MedicineMan]

Not sure what inspired your sermon. Your thoughts may have served YOU better 26 years ago.

Inspired by many many people stating they are "legal in my state" and complaining about failing drug screen or being disqualified due to use or arrest.

And yes, I was young and stupid. I too wish I had known then what I know now.

 

[James331]

Doc, I ain't disagreeing with you.

But all the ifs...

The point I took issue with was the original post, that stated basically ever getting drunk, even if you do it legally and put no one at risk, means you're immature, crazy or some type of degenerate and should never fly, that's just puritanical BS.

 

[bbchien]

I am responding to your umbrage about getting plotzed in your own home. Yes, there are conditions where you cannot do that. I laid them out.

John Denver did it while he was still on enforced sobriety, (prior to being let off after three years of monitoring). He dodged certified mail revocation x 2 but then subsequently made FAA repossesion of his certificates....unnecessary.

 

[Ravioli]

Inspired by many many people stating they are "legal in my state" and complaining about failing drug screen or being disqualified due to use or arrest.

Shall we insert our general disdain for reckless driving, fatty foods, gambling, porn (non-airplane porn of course), dust mites, and body odor here?

You were preaching to the choir when you said don't use substances and fly. And then you offended the choir with your phenomenally myopic 3 reasons people do that which you disapprove of. Said disapproval seemingly only as a result of being caught doing that which you disapprove of.

Perhaps a follow-up thread is in order. "When did you stop beating your wife?"

 

[James331]

Agreed doc

But for the MAJORITY of airmen, who are not on forced sobriety, this all does not apply.

 

[bbchien]

Agreed doc

But for the MAJORITY of airmen, who are not on forced sobriety, this all does not apply.

Correct. But this post:

So the FAA would give me a special issuance and a "sentence" for hosting a party at my house, as a law abiding person, enjoying some wine to over a .08 point, BUT never driving, flying, or breaking any law??

....is not quite accurate. If you are still on the special issuance, yes. But if you are on a 3rd class and have "graduated", no.

 

[mulligan]

Can we all just get together and discuss this over a drink?

 

[James331]

I'll buy a round if y'all get the good doc to come

 

[Rushie]

If you are drinking to excess (BAC high enough to get a DUI), then there are only 3 reasons;
1) you are addicted/alcoholic.
2) you have a mental problem that you are self-medicating and you need psychiatric help.
3) you are immature and believe that large quantities of alcohol is the key to having a good time.

Just seems like a misunderstanding of the words. Where he says: "If you are drinking to excess......" I take that to mean regularly doing this. If you have a Christmas party once a year and get blasted, but avoid alcohol all the rest of the time, that's quite a different animal than someone who attains a DUI-worthy BAC nightly, or even just weekly, whether in the privacy of their home or not. Now some people, recovering addicts especially, might feel a zero tolerance policy is the only acceptable way, because for them, that one Christmas party will lead to disaster. On the other hand, other people, who haven't been down that path yet, might feel getting plastered every weekend shouldn't be a problem as long as they honor bottle to throttle time. In my opinion both extremes are wrong, as general advice. The complete teetotler is only required if you're an addict or because of genetics or whatever feel you are at greater risk. On the other extreme, drinking a lot every weekend will MAKE you one sooner or later. So I agree with this:

Have reviewed the hard-line stance on most such topics through the decades; have decided that the adage "all things in moderation" covers it best for me (with the addendum of not being under the influence when operating power equipment).

Whenever someone has been around long enough to have reviewed things for decades, and then declares "all things in moderation", like my Mom, I've got to go with that.

 

[lbfjrmd]

for example if u drink daily but adhere to 8 hr rule ... u may have a problem.

 

[James331]

for example if u drink daily but adhere to 8 hr rule ... u may have a problem.

So having a glass of wine with dinner means you have a problem?

Guess most high income people, and most of civilized Europe, have a problem.

I'd say it's the one who choose to judge the personal lives of people who drink but follow the rules, those are the ones with the problem.

 

[deonb]

Just seems like a misunderstanding of the words. Where he says: "If you are drinking to excess......" I take that to mean regularly doing this.

Then you're taking it to mean something other than what the OP actually says. I think you can get anybody to agree that "drinking to excess" is bad if you just keep changing the definition of excess.

The OP's clear and unambiguous definition however was:
"BAC high enough to get a DUI"

which is a pretty fringe POV.

 

[Rushie]

Then you're taking it to mean something other than what the OP actually says. I think you can get anybody to agree that "drinking to excess" is bad if you just keep changing the definition of excess.

The OP's clear and unambiguous definition however was:
"BAC high enough to get a DUI"

which is a pretty fringe POV.

Well I agree that changing the definition of excess is a problem. I find the trend to continually lower the BAC to qualify for a DUI annoying. Like most things there's probably a spectrum of statistical likelihood that the alcohol in your system is responsible for the crash you just had that killed the children. If it's .1 maybe the likelihood is 9.99/10. If it is .000001 maybe the likelihood is 1/5000. But you will always be able to get the public to demand that if there is one chance in 5000 a child will be hurt then you'd better make the law. When you get it down to 1/500,000 you will again be able to make the law.

 

[Stewartb]

Around here for anyone with a CDL the max limit is .04, even when driving their own vehicles on their own time. I don't know how that fits the holier-than-thou original statement regarding "excess".

 

[bbchien]

Well I agree that changing the definition of excess is a problem. I find the trend to continually lower the BAC to qualify for a DUI annoying. Like most things there's probably a spectrum of statistical likelihood that the alcohol in your system is responsible for the crash you just had that killed the children. If it's .1 maybe the likelihood is 9.99/10. If it is .000001 maybe the likelihood is 1/5000. But you will always be able to get the public to demand that if there is one chance in 5000 a child will be hurt then you'd better make the law. When you get it down to 1/500,000 you will again be able to make the law.

Well, Rush if the administration decides that a human life is = 18 Million, then BAC will have to be <0.01 and there will be no aviation at all. (Current DHS value - 12 million). This all affects the "cost" vs "Cost per life saved" analysis.

 

[Rushie]

So having a glass of wine with dinner means you have a problem?

Guess most high income people, and most of civilized Europe, have a problem.

I'd say it's the one who choose to judge the personal lives of people who drink but follow the rules, those are the ones with the problem.

One glass of wine with dinner may or may not be a problem. Any amount of substance that rearranges your brain's chemical neurotransmitters taken on a daily basis will result in permanent physical adjustments in your brain. Whether or not that change results in detectable cognitive dysfunction is another matter and I believe varies with the individual depending on genetics and environmental factors. And maybe simply, how long have you been doing it?

Translate into English: yes, one glass of wine with dinner might mean you're an alcoholic for some individuals. For others, it might not, and never result in any impairment in the next day's functioning. Or at least in any degree of detectable impairment.

Now the question of whether there's a small undetectable impairment that might have contributed to the incident, now we're back to the spectrum of likelihood. No, we can never prove that your one glass of wine with dinner was a factor the next day when you augered in but neither can we prove that it wasn't. The truth is that many things impact our performance including age. When the impact of that one drink is less than the effect of simply being 60 with your slightly slower old brain, it would be more logical to deny anyone 60 years old a certification than to worry about someone who has a glass of wine with dinner.

The truth as I see it: these things are cumulative. You're going to decline with age. You're probably already declining with subclinical pre-pre-diabetes if you eat the U.S. diet, and there's always the effects of mood, fatigue, get-thereitis, and so on. Why add one more thing to the pile?

 

[bbchien]

for example if u drink daily but adhere to 8 hr rule ... u may have a problem.

We both, I am sure, have had HIMS airmen who "thought they could control it" for years before they were detected .

That is NOT to say that everyone who does that has the problem. But quite a few, do, or eventually will.

James I could do with that beer- but I'd have to wait to fly myself home.....