Support Group for HIMS

K

Kcars409

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
4
Display Name
Display name:
KiloNiner
I was wondering if anyone had heard of a support group for HIMS patients, or would be interested in starting one (or multiple, since there are different reasons for HIMS placement).

Particularly after reading "Resigning from HIMS", I think many people in the HIMS program feel the same as I do: completely out to sea.



PS - I must apologize for my errant previous post; I couldn't figure out how to delete it.
 
Kcars409 said:
I was wondering if anyone had heard of a support group for HIMS patients, or would be interested in starting one (or multiple, since there are different reasons for HIMS placement).

Particularly after reading "Resigning from HIMS", I think many people in the HIMS program feel the same as I do: completely out to sea.



PS - I must apologize for my errant previous post; I couldn't figure out how to delete it.
Click to expand...
A Facebook group might be a possible space for this idea.
 
Personally, I'd put up a private forum rather than use a Facebook group. There are plenty of people who want nothing to do with FecesBook, and not without good reasons.

In your particular case, because confidential information would be discussed, Facebook would be the absolute last venue I'd suggest. Their privacy policies and security history are utterly abysmal. They also don't allow pseudonymous accounts. If there's anyplace where you absolutely do not want to discuss things like this, that place would be Facebook.

You can buy a domain name, get shared hosting, get an SSL certificate, and put up a forum in about an hour and at a start-up cost of less than $25.00. Almost all hosting providers offer scripts to automatically install free, open-source forum software. No, they're not perfect security-wise; but even a free forum like phpBB is a damn site better than FecesBook, whose business model is based on selling their users to the highest bidders.

Most hosting providers also offer free SSL certs that are good enough for a non-eCommerce site where all you need is encryption and domain validation. cPanel, Virtualmin, Plesk, and most other hosting panels install certs from Let's Encrypt or other recognized certificate authorities by default as part of the setup routine. They're typically working within minutes of setting up the account.

Another possibility would be to ask the POA Management Council if they can set up a closed, opt-in sub-forum wherein such things can be discussed. It would be invisible to the general public and to POA members who choose not to opt in. The forum software supports it, so it wouldn't hurt to ask.

In short, almost any option would be better than FecesBook for a need such as you express. I urge you to consider them.

Rich
 
Another alternative would be a MeWe group. They have much better respect for privacy and freedom of speech than FB. I am one of those who no longer comments there for those reasons.
 
RJM62 said:
They also don't allow pseudonymous accounts.
Click to expand...

Funny that about half of the names on my friends list (nobody is on there that I do not personally know) are not real names...
 
smv said:
Funny that about half of the names on my friends list (nobody is on there that I do not personally know) are not real names...
Click to expand...

If they're scamming FecesBook, good for them. I'm okay with anyone who screws with their data mining. The more, the better.

But it's still not allowed.

Rich
 
I’m for a support group. Following this thread.

Also, Just heard today the faa may be trying to instate a new lifetime “grandfather” HIMs program for people with substance abuse. Anyone that’s been in the HIMs program may only be issued a medical by a HIMs AME for the duration of their career even after successful monitoring of the 3-5 year program. After you’ve been released from monitoring, you will be subject to random testing by your HIMs AME for the duration of your medical. Apparently the NTSB has been pushing this for quite sometime and the FAA is starting to acknowledge. Just passing along info from my HIMs Psych.
 
illprepar3d said:
I’m for a support group. Following this thread.

Also, Just heard today the faa may be trying to instate a new lifetime “grandfather” HIMs program for people with substance abuse. Anyone that’s been in the HIMs program may only be issued a medical by a HIMs AME for the duration of their career even after successful monitoring of the 3-5 year program. After you’ve been released from monitoring, you will be subject to random testing by your HIMs AME for the duration of your medical. Apparently the NTSB has been pushing this for quite sometime and the FAA is starting to acknowledge. Just passing along info from my HIMs Psych.
Click to expand...

As of now that has already been in effect. Once in the HIMS program you are in for life. Granted, it will be a modified version and less intense ie you won’t have to go to aftercare forever. Maybe this will change maybe not.
 
jstone said:
As of now that has already been in effect. Once in the HIMS program you are in for life. Granted, it will be a modified version and less intense ie you won’t have to go to aftercare forever. Maybe this will change maybe not.
Click to expand...

I've heard it is a case by case scenario...less severe cases such as abuse and pilots are generally out of the program within 2-3 years. Can anyone confirm?

Someone said which makes more sense..those with a dependency diagnosis must see a HIMS AME whenever their medical is to be renewed, even after monitoring. During the exam the HIMS AME can test for any substance including alcohol. Does this sound more accurate?
 
Last edited:
RJM62 said:
If they're scamming FecesBook, good for them. I'm okay with anyone who screws with their data mining. The more, the better.

But it's still not allowed.

Rich
Click to expand...
There doesn't appear to be any way for Facebook to enforce their real-name policy if someone uses a fake but real-sounding name.
 
While I certainly understand the security concerns about Facebook, its wide adoption still makes it a very easy solution. I think if any personally identifiable information were conveyed over other media like zoom, or some other encrypted video conferencing app, it could work.
 
illprepar3d said:
I’m for a support group. Following this thread.

Also, Just heard today the faa may be trying to instate a new lifetime “grandfather” HIMs program for people with substance abuse. Anyone that’s been in the HIMs program may only be issued a medical by a HIMs AME for the duration of their career even after successful monitoring of the 3-5 year program. After you’ve been released from monitoring, you will be subject to random testing by your HIMs AME for the duration of your medical. Apparently the NTSB has been pushing this for quite sometime and the FAA is starting to acknowledge. Just passing along info from my HIMs Psych.
Click to expand...
Got it almost correct. For Substance dependence, yes, for Substance abuse, no.
 
Keithlewis1900 said:
I've heard it is a case by case scenario...less severe cases such as abuse and pilots are generally out of the program within 2-3 years. Can anyone confirm?

Someone said which makes more sense..those with a dependency diagnosis must see a HIMS AME whenever their medical is to be renewed, even after monitoring. During the exam the HIMS AME can test for any substance including alcohol. Does this sound more accurate?
Click to expand...


Dr Bruce has already answered it but here is a link to a good article I found in AOPA about it.

https://pilot-protection-services.a...m=email&utm_campaign=content&utm_content=july

Substance Dependence is apparently an SI for life (of your flying career).
 
There is a support group. Hims-victims at freeforums dot net...
 
Not finding the forum. Could you post the url? I attend a zoom BOAF meeting that is too AA and not enough HIMS support.
 
It’s password protected, you have to register, and someone will contact you...
 
And really, there is NO HIMS support. It’s all shut up and put up... Administered and run by amateurs. The “pros” are doctors who must know the truth, but are too greedy to do the right thing. There are a few exceptions...

The HIMS Nightmare book is the first real attempt at honest support.

I don’t really point any fingers. This whole mess is a classic mishap. A LONG series of events, like links in a chain, that all transpired for various reasons not so sinister, that hung compulsive traited pilots out to dry. The root cause is an irrational fear of flying, IMO.

A core flaw is this new paradigm that you can “leverage” pilots and licensed professionals. All REAL addiction philosophy agrees, you can’t scare an addict. The end game is death, but true addicts go down that path anyway, knowing that. You simply cannot scare an addict. Ask one!

You can scare a NON ADDICT forced into this program. This program is full of people who DO NOT MEET any rational definition of an addict, merely a definition that satiates an irrational fear of flying...

Tools
 
The fault for all these problems lies squarely on the shoulders of addicts and substance abusers who eventually spiral and kill themselves and/or other people. I don't want to share the skies with you if you have a substance problem you can't stop. Period.

I'm amazed that the FAA has a program to allow addicts, or more appropriately reformed addicts, to fly. Instead of complaining about it, clam up, and do what is required. Then, fly safely, if there is a relapse, STOP FLYING.

Unfortunately there are many examples of addicts, thinking they are immune from their addiction, making bad decisions and screwing up in very public ways. They need to be stopped. The program in place may not be perfect, but it's better than a hard no for abstaining addicts. Remember that and don't F it up.
 
PaulS said:
I'm amazed that the FAA has a program to allow addicts, or more appropriately reformed addicts, to fly. Instead of complaining about it, clam up, and do what is required. Then, fly safely, if there is a relapse, STOP FLYING.

Unfortunately there are many examples of addicts, thinking they are immune from their addiction, making bad decisions and screwing up in very public ways. They need to be stopped. The program in place may not be perfect, but it's better than a hard no for abstaining addicts. Remember that and don't F it up.
Click to expand...

HIMS is actually better than a hard no for aviation safety. It's unlikely that simple rejection/suspension will eliminate addicts. Some percentage of the population will have this issue sometime in their lifespan, no to mention people working in stressful environments. FAA created HIMS to give people a chance to get out of their living hell, instead of making them "smart addicts".

Also, don't forget HIMS service people with mental disorders too.
 
smv said:
"Victims"? o_O
Click to expand...
Yup, victims. Unfortunately there are some HIMS AME’s that lie to airmen in order to make as much profit as possible. Sometimes it’s just to take as much money from the airman or the doctor thinks it’s ok to just completely lie. In the 121 world some airlines have weaponized the use of mental health diagnoses to get rid of pilots that management does not like. It happened to Karlene Pettit who is a delta pilot. She was out of work for 1-2 years because management paid off a psychiatrist to diagnose her with bi polar disorder. The other case was of a pilot who flew part 135. Luckily, in these 2 cases the pilots were able to be reinstated and get back to flying. There are numerous pilots that were fired or had their medical revoked from unscrupulous HIMS AME’s and or management from the airline they worked for and did absolutely nothing wrong. The FAA is also Part of the problem because they make it impossible for airman to report these scumbag HIMS AMEs. Not saying all HIMS Ames are bad but there are quite a few that should have their status as an AME revoked.
 
We are not sure yet... no real indications of a look back fortunately.

the more debated question is whether those about done are gonna get released... doesn’t look good, but not a lot of empirical data.

the appeal is gonna be on the basis of the unfairness of governing by policy over regulation.

time will tell if that works.
 
Airmen that completed the typical 2 year HIMS program before this policy was adopted, but had yet to receive a release letter, received letters stating ongoing short duration special issuance medicals that must be issued by their HIMS AME and HIMS AME oversight of ongoing drug/alcohol monitoring. They cannot utilize the services of any other AME to obtain a medical under the SI authorization. They were not grandfathered for entering or "completing" HIMS before the new policy was quietly adopted. The letter includes no indication that the new policy has been enacted, and the only way the airman would be aware of the policy is through their own research.

Pilots begin the HIMS program with the expectation that it may be possible for them to demonstrate "proof of recovery satisfactory to the federal air surgeon" (14 CFR 67.307(a)(4)) and receive an unrestricted medical. There are no promises or guarantees, just that each individual will be evaluated by the unique aspects of their medical history and quality of recovery. The federal air surgeon adopted an unwritten policy that there is no such thing as satisfactory proof of recovery for substance dependence. This is for all classes, not just the pros.

The alternative is that the pilot receives the special issuance and then opts for BasicMed. The catch is that if the pilot ever develops one of the other BasicMed disqualifying conditions, he/she will have to establish medical qualification for the new disqualifying condition AND RE-establish medical qualification with regard to the substance dependence. Keep in mind the initial special issuance for substance dependence most likely required years of recovery activities and well over $10k before the pilot was allowed back in the cockpit.

Regardless of how you feel about substance abuse/dependence and the possibility of true recovery, this should concern everyone flying. It's constructive modification of the FARs without undergoing the rule making process required by the Administrative Procedure Act. The only way to play by the rules is if we all have knowledge of what the actual rules are. There's also the issue of just how much authority CAMI should be able to delegate to an AME.

What's the point in publishing written regulations if the agency can choose to ignore them by policy?

It's hard enough to get people to admit they need help. How many substance dependent/abusive pilots are going to come forward and get help when they realize that help will almost definitely brand them as irredeemable for the rest of their flying lives?

Do you really want CAMI to be able to delegate open ended authority to your AME to conduct drug/alcohol tests whenever and by whatever method the AME wants while you hold a medical? Hows your relationship with your AME? Do you trust him/her/the lab with your career or the huge investment you've made in aviation? Ever had a medical exam where you thought the AME was overstepping their authority or misinterpreting the regs?

HIMS AMEs are rated based on the success of airmen they sponsor. Is if fair to bind a HIMS AME to a pilot's actions for the rest of that pilot's flying career? How many AMEs do you think are going to want to accept that level of risk and participate in HIMS? Over the course of an HIMS AME's career how many pilot do you think they'll have under monitoring if every dependence case is for a lifetime?

All rhetorical questions.
 
ThatOtherGuy said:
The federal air surgeon adopted an unwritten policy that there is no such thing as satisfactory proof of recovery for substance dependence. This is for all classes, not just the pros.
Click to expand...
This proves what many people have thought all along. The federal air surgeon aka Michael B is a complete piece of ****.
ThatOtherGuy said:
Regardless of how you feel about substance abuse/dependence and the possibility of true recovery, this should concern everyone flying. It's constructive modification of the FARs without undergoing the rule making process required by the Administrative Procedure Act. The only way to play by the rules is if we all have knowledge of what the actual rules are. There's also the issue of just how much authority CAMI should be able to delegate to an AME.
Click to expand...
And I bet no one will ever be able to contest this type of bureaucratic ******** without having to involve members of Congress or having to spend thousands of dollars to get an attorney involved. The morons at the faa have now made the sky a less safe place. The FAS and the other upper management of the faa medical branch can go **** themselves.

hopefully there will be a class action in the near future to fix this type of BS and if we’re really lucky maybe the fas and his cronies will lose their jobs.
 
The real unfortunate part about this is the courts give major deference to the FAS as the subject matter expert concerning medical fitness to fly. A true legal challenge would have to go to the courts (NTSB won't even touch it), be very expensive, and the outcome would be questionable. Additionally there's not a long line of people interested in standing up for allowing people with a substance dependence diagnosis to fly an airplane. That's not a very career enhancing public position to adopt. My personal non-lawyer opinion is that the best option would be to approach from a violation of the APA, but CAMI's been doing that for years and there's plenty of precedent for allowing it.

If you want evidence of this take a look at what' AOPA did when they found out about it. I give them credit for publishing the information openly, but it's not a fight they're willing to engage in. A PPS lawyer published a blog post and they moved on.
 
ThatOtherGuy said:
If you want evidence of this take a look at what' AOPA did when they found out about it. I give them credit for publishing the information openly, but it's not a fight they're willing to engage in. A PPS lawyer published a blog post and they moved on.
Click to expand...

Wanted to post a correction to this above statement as it may be misleading or inaccurate. AOPA is engaging in more advocacy activities to address the issue. I just read an article that they're reconvening their medical expert panel. They specifically call out the new lifetime substance dependence monitoring policy as an issue they plan to address with the FAA. Depending on the level of engagement this may be the best avenue to get the issue addressed.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...nes-medical-expert-panel-to-press-faa-reforms
 
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