Depression/Anxiety Fast Track Doc

  • Thread starter Thread starter New Protocol?
  • Start date Start date
N

New Protocol?

Guest
At the risk of opening a new thread for arguments and eventual thread lock…

I seem to recall recently reading a document that was posted here, perhaps by Doc B, that was about a change to protocol for issuance of a medical without OKC for certain instances of anxiety/depression where there were no meds (or none in the past two years?).

I don’t think I imagined it, but can not seem to find it. If it exists, could someone repost it? If I imagined it, well…I may have bigger issues.

Please, please, please - do not hijack this thread with your personal rant about how the FAA or medical process should be administered.
Thanks
 
If the diagnosis isn't Major depressive disorder, and
if he's been demonstrably off all meds for the past 2 years....
if there is no recurrency in any of the notes (either diagnosis, duration .=5 years, or actually it did recurr off meds)
If there is no suicidality in any of the notes, and
if the AME is good a documenting everything, it can be done in the office (there are some other "ifs"....like never on dual simultaneous drugs for the condition.....)
 
Thank you. Sounds like it is a pretty narrow path. One more question, if I may. You mention ‘if the AME is good at documenting everything’. Would it be correct to interpret that the AME is not making the determination, but rather submitting to OKC for a decision? What I am trying to figure out is to what degree a ‘consult’ could de-risk this path. Could a person do a consult, have they and the AME think there can be an issuance, only for OKC to defer? Could the AME issue, and then OKC override?
Don’t want to do anything that puts Sport Pilot at risk.
Thanks
 
New Protocol? said:
Thank you. Sounds like it is a pretty narrow path. One more question, if I may. You mention ‘if the AME is good at documenting everything’. Would it be correct to interpret that the AME is not making the determination, but rather submitting to OKC for a decision? What I am trying to figure out is to what degree a ‘consult’ could de-risk this path. Could a person do a consult, have they and the AME think there can be an issuance, only for OKC to defer? Could the AME issue, and then OKC override?
Don’t want to do anything that puts Sport Pilot at risk.
Thanks
Click to expand...
I’d strongly advise sticking to sport pilot/LSA given MOSAIC, unless you absolutely have a mission that falls outside of those privileges.
 
New Protocol? said:
Thank you. Sounds like it is a pretty narrow path. One more question, if I may. You mention ‘if the AME is good at documenting everything’. Would it be correct to interpret that the AME is not making the determination, but rather submitting to OKC for a decision? What I am trying to figure out is to what degree a ‘consult’ could de-risk this path. Could a person do a consult, have they and the AME think there can be an issuance, only for OKC to defer? Could the AME issue, and then OKC override?
Don’t want to do anything that puts Sport Pilot at risk.
Thanks
Click to expand...

OKC can always take a second look and overrule and/or ask for additional information. If you’re going to try this path, Doc Bruce is the guy to consult with. Whatever you do, don’t give him (or any AME) the MedXpress confirmation number until that AME can tell you whether or not your history is certifiable by the agency and what it will take to get it certified.
 
New Protocol? said:
Thank you. Sounds like it is a pretty narrow path. One more question, if I may. You mention ‘if the AME is good at documenting everything’. Would it be correct to interpret that the AME is not making the determination, but rather submitting to OKC for a decision? What I am trying to figure out is to what degree a ‘consult’ could de-risk this path. Could a person do a consult, have they and the AME think there can be an issuance, only for OKC to defer? Could the AME issue, and then OKC override?
Don’t want to do anything that puts Sport Pilot at risk.
Thanks
Click to expand...
No. The AME is going to issue and then has to be certain that his defense of the issuance will be upheld.

If you are risking sport pilot best to retain the AME before hand, have him gather all the information PRIOR to commitment for an issuance. I chose my words very very carefully in the prior post. Your AME has to be "good at it" before any exam or you get a denial, eventually.

Every one of these gets reviewed by the FAA psychiatrist.
 
Last edited:
Not really. If the stuff is all there, he issues. If he doesn’t think it’s all there…….no application.

You have to “get over” paying for expertise….
 
Hi Doc
Thanks, i know you see all types. No reluctance at all to pay for expertise.

Under this updated approach, think I am issuable in office. Went sport years ago because of all of the horror stories.

I want to get my instrument rating. I believe it contributes greatly to safety. I know I don’t need a medical to train with a CFII. But, as we know skills and knowledge atrophy very quickly if not exercised regularly. An option I’ve considered is doing an hour or two monthly (or some cadence) with a CFII to stay proficient.

My (perhaps greatly oversized) fear is that the AME believes everything “is there” in a consult, the application is made, the FAA over-rules it, sport is gone and I am forever grounded. Flying just means too much to me.

I’m proceeding with a consult, I just want to try to separate fact/fiction/extensive negative lore of FAA as I go in to it.

Thanks again for all you contribute.
 
and if the OP ever checks in again, I have one of these that I'm going to issue this Wednesday. It will be accompanied with about 800 pages of submission.
 
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