Need Advice

P

Pilotoo777

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Feb 17, 2026
Messages
7
Display Name
Piloto
Hi everyone, I hold an FAA medical certificate and I’m currently in training,
A couple of weeks ago, my ex and I broke up, and things are not civil at all.
Back in 2015, I tried a drug once (extacy)and had a bad reaction, including hallucinations. I sent my ex girlfriend pictures and videos while under the influence, and the next day I texted her explaining what had happened and what I felt during the hallucinations. I never went to a hospital, was never diagnosed, and was never prescribed any medication. The hallucinations gone after 2 hours
Now she’s threatening to report me to the FAA and seems to want to use those texts and the hallucinations to accuse me of having psychosis at that time . I know psychosis is disqualifying even drug induced and I’m really worried this could affect or even cause me to lose my medical . I’ve searched online but can’t find a clear answer.
Has anyone gone through something similar or knows how the FAA typically handles situations like this?
Would I end up losing my medical because I hallucinated once 10 years ago ? My medical record is clean i never had any diagnosis or medication use or even hospital visits.
 
Why do so many people these days document and immortalize when they do illegal stuff?


I’d probably find the nastiest lawyer you can and have them send a letter to her on their letterhead and all that you will be seeking maximum damages if she shares private messages, maybe a angle that you two were joking around and she knew you were not serious in the video, who knows, but if you make the juice not worth the squeeze for her, that would be your best bet.

But better do it before she hits send.
 
decalogue said:
Why do so many people these days document and immortalize when they do illegal stuff?
Click to expand...

Because they're stoned. The drugs wreck their judgement, which is sorta the core problem.


mryan75 said:
So what’s the rest of the story?
Click to expand...

Good question. Does someone usually start out with MDMA as their first drug? Or might there be other drug abuse as well, and might some be ongoing? Lots and lots of questions here.
 
Half Fast said:
Because they're stoned. The drugs wreck their judgement, which is sorta the core problem.




Good question. Does someone usually start out with MDMA as their first drug? Or might there be other drug abuse as well, and might some be ongoing? Lots and lots of questions here.
Click to expand...
Well i will answer your questions . I’m here to ask a question and hopefully get an answer. I’m not trying to hide anything. It was my first time using it, and also my last. I don’t tolerate drugs at all not even weed I don’t drink either. I have no interest in hiding anything in this post. My question is: how would the FAA react? Would they revoke my medical certificate and assume it was psychosis, or, since there’s no medical proof, would they be unable to take action?
 
Half Fast said:
Because they're stoned. The drugs wreck their judgement, which is sorta the core problem.




Good question. Does someone usually start out with MDMA as their first drug? Or might there be other drug abuse as well, and might some be ongoing? Lots and lots of questions here.
Click to expand...

Not sure about all that, Elon Musk, Ben Franklin, Steve Jobbs, etc come to mind.

I think with many of these people the easy and PC angle is to blame the drugs vs they just came OEM without the good judgement option.

It’s like IQ, unpopular fact no matter how much money you put into education you can’t override the hardware.
 
Are you in AOPA? That may be a resource that you can ask an AME a question.

Someone who has intimate information on this subject might suggest disclosure. (Or not)

BTW what kind of bad breakup has your ex threatening you at all?
 
iu
 
I'm wondering if we are crossing the rickety old bridge, or getting close to the seafood market ... o_O
 
rockyfatcat said:
Are you in AOPA? That may be a resource that you can ask an AME a question.

Someone who has intimate information on this subject might suggest disclosure. (Or not)

BTW what kind of bad breakup has your ex threatening you at all?
Click to expand...

I wouldnt trust AOPA to even get your hat size right, their legal and medical advice is useless at best

I wouldn’t get this 100yrs from a AME at this point
 
I think you are completely over thinking this... She completed her mission - to stress you out and cause drama! Now ghost her and move on!
 
Last edited:
HalfFast said:
Because they're stoned. The drugs wreck their judgement, which is sorta the core problem.
Click to expand...
And that is why the federal view is "requires evaluation"

I have one of those- he did it as a young man, in pursuit of a woman. He was ruled to have abused. He did his 4 months of negative pee, got the SI, did his two years of never touching the sh_t, and is now on a 121 flight deck. The girl eventaully called him in- guess what, he already had his SI.

The judgement that HalfFast refers to here, also can involve choice of a date. Lots of fish in the sea, my friends.
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
And that is why the federal view is "requires evaluation"

I have one of those- he did it as a young man, in pursuit of a woman. He was ruled to have abused. He did his 4 months of negative pee, got the SI, did his two years of never touching the sh_t, and is now on a 121 flight deck. The girl eventaully called him in- guess what, he already had his SI.

The judgement that HalfFast refers to here, also can involve choice of a date. Lots offish in the sea, my friends.
Click to expand...

Half of ALL modern marriages end in divorce, most of those initiated by women. Sending proof of illegal nonsense to a girlfriend (not even wife) is worse judgement than doing some e

And yes I know, all the married people who read this will say “well that’s not OUR marriage”, yet the numbers don’t lie
 
What do tornados and divorce have in common? When it’s over, somebody has lost most of their stuff
 
Half Fast said:
Then any of your multiple marriages can only end in one of two ways.

You’re finding this difficult to grasp, aren’t you?
Click to expand...

You said 50% will end in death, 50% will end in divorce. If you’re married to three women, one dies and you divorce two, 66% ended in divorce, 33% in death. Also I may be day drinking.
 
eman1200 said:
You said 50% will end in death, 50% will end in divorce. If you’re married to three women, one dies and you divorce two, 66% ended in divorce, 33% in death. Also I may be day drinking.
Click to expand...

But that’s not “all marriages,” just a very small subset.

This began with @decalogue ’s assertion that half of marriages end in divorce. If we accept his assertion as true, then the other half end in death. If you wish to assert that 2/3 end in divorce, then the remaining 1/3 must end in death.

If you’d like to argue with @decalogue about whose assertion is correct, have at it.
 
Half Fast said:
But that’s not “all marriages,” just a very small subset.

This began with @decalogue ’s assertion that half of marriages end in divorce. If we accept his assertion as true, then the other half end in death. If you wish to assert that 2/3 end in divorce, then the remaining 1/3 must end in death.

If you’d like to argue with @decalogue about whose assertion is correct, have at it.
Click to expand...

I’m just saying you’re both wrong and I’m right. No need to argue.
 
Half Fast said:
But that’s not “all marriages,” just a very small subset.

This began with @decalogue ’s assertion that half of marriages end in divorce. If we accept his assertion as true, then the other half end in death. If you wish to assert that 2/3 end in divorce, then the remaining 1/3 must end in death.
Click to expand...
I agree with Eman. Probably about 2/3 end in divorce and 2/3 end in death and the rest get frozen for eternity.
 
It is said that in most cases the married man dies first ... because he wants to! :biggrin:
 
bbchien said:
And that is why the federal view is "requires evaluation"

I have one of those- he did it as a young man, in pursuit of a woman. He was ruled to have abused. He did his 4 months of negative pee, got the SI, did his two years of never touching the sh_t, and is now on a 121 flight deck. The girl eventaully called him in- guess what, he already had his SI.

The judgement that HalfFast refers to here, also can involve choice of a date. Lots offish in the sea, my friends.
Click to expand...
I didn’t disclose it on my medical because it was a one-time event a decade ago and I didn’t think it was significant. My concern now is whether I could lose my medical if she reports me. The fact that she might claim I had drug-induced psychosis is scary, since I know psychosis is disqualifying. I dont even think the hallucinations i had was drug induced psychosis i think is just bad reaction to drug it didnt last the night .Would the FAA assume that, or would they more likely request an evaluation? As I mentioned earlier, I’ve never had any medical issues or hospital visits.
thank you for the reply
 
Last edited:
One-time reaction + no hospital visit + no diagnosis + nothing in any medical system = not much for the FAA to act on from a third-party complaint. Texts aren't medical records.
Where people get into trouble is when this stuff gets discovered during a formal review and it looks like they were hiding something. Dr. Bruce's point is key: Get in front of a HIMS AME now, before anything lands at the FAA. The pilots who fare worst are the ones who wait and get surprised.
If a full review does get triggered down the road, the neuropsychological evaluation (CogScreen-AE) would be part of it. But that's a "show your brain is fine" step, not an automatic disqualifier. One event, 11 years ago with no clinical footprint, isn't the profile that evaluation was designed to fail.
 
pilotprep said:
One-time reaction + no hospital visit + no diagnosis + nothing in any medical system = not much for the FAA to act on from a third-party complaint. Texts aren't medical records.
Where people get into trouble is when this stuff gets discovered during a formal review and it looks like they were hiding something. Dr. Bruce's point is key: Get in front of a HIMS AME now, before anything lands at the FAA. The pilots who fare worst are the ones who wait and get surprised.
If a full review does get triggered down the road, the neuropsychological evaluation (CogScreen-AE) would be part of it. But that's a "show your brain is fine" step, not an automatic disqualifier. One event, 11 years ago with no clinical footprint, isn't the profile that evaluation was designed to fail.
Click to expand...

So he should confess to something the FAA doesn’t know about and throw himself in the abyss of HIMS, while also by default confessing to hiding something from the FAA?

In general often saying less is the default best answer
 
Back
Top