What if you omitted on a past medical, but want to come clean?

U

Unregistered

Guest
What happens if you omitted something on a past medical because it would have been a pain to deal with, but ultimately not disqualifying?

Is there any way to come clean on a later application, and deal with any SI issues, or are you in a catch 22, in which admission will generate an automatic revocation?
 
One route is to retain legal counsel to approach the FAA on behalf the pilot without identifying the client and negotiate an agreement not to take enforcement action in return for "coming clean." That's not the cheapest route, but it does guarantee that if the FAA won't make a deal, the pilot remains anonymous (attorney/client privilege). Bruce may have additional ideas that don't involve an attorney.
 
Actually, it depends on the item omitted.

The key is when you come clean, however, that it should be completely obvious that you are currently COMPLETELY by FAA standards (not by the "But I'm JUST FINE!" standard) able to exercise privileges of PIC. Look up 67.113, 67.213, and 67.313 to see the fix you have created for yourself.

IF willful omisison isn't plain and you satisfy 67.X13 currently and KNOW (and can document) that you do, I have never had a record correction go to the Inspector General.

It's all "cases" and circumstances. I have advised attornies in other cases, but the disadvantage there is, the moment contact is made, the conversation is lawyer to lawyer, and no longer doctor to doctor.

I once got a chief pilot for a MAJOR 121 carrier off the hook- he had neglected to report a condition for 27 years. It was not endangering, but he had knowingly failed to do so. Trouble was, his spouse knoew and was suing him for divorce. The opposing counsel had just FOIA'd his medical record at CAMI (3 weeks before going to court) and he came to see if I could correct the mess.

The inspector took my report: "Inadvertently discovered condition(?)" says he. "How inadvertent?". I explained that he had gone to a clincial trial at a major medical center for it, and the med was prohibited, and I got him off the trial and onto a standard, permissible med. The letters were already on file. The current status letter never mentioned how long he had been followed for the condition. The inspector said, "I see. We will issue the SI authorization, issue him for a year". And, he put his name on the chart.

Bottom line: The medical examiners in OKC, barring FLAGRANT omisison, if a case can be made for inadvertency, would rather simply have you current, qualified, and with the approrpiate followup demanded (SI) or issued as "eligibile" (no followup demanded, but warned off of 61.53 for that condition).
 
Last edited:
you never want the first contact over an issue like this to be lawyer to lawyer - like doc says.

And - from a strictly legal perspective it needs to be a) something not grounding for a time period in which you had a medical certificate and b) you can prove that when you did fly you met the requirements for a certificate. . . .

The 'Have you EVER' language did not exist on the form at one point in time as well - so there may be an out there.

It also depends, like Doc says - do you have Type I diabetes?? Kind of hard to 'forget' about that - an arrest at Mardi gras for public intoxication in 1967 [did that even happen back then?] and you first apply for a medical in 2002 - and you have zero alcohol related events since? And you 'remembered' the arrest after a friend of yours tells the story 40 years later- ok - thats plausible.

An intentional effort to conceal is going get a lot worse review and be held to a higher standard than a forgotten dental surgery in 1984 . .
 
"19. Vists to Health Professional within last 3 years"
I think Dental surgeons are health professionals....ya think?

This is not usually an aeromedical qual. item, but sure is handy for dental records....
 
bbchien said:
Actually, it depends on the item omitted.

The key is when you come clean, however, that it should be completely obvious that you are currently COMPLETELY by FAA standards (not by the "But I'm JUST FINE!" standard) able to exercise privileges of PIC. Look up 67.113, 67.213, and 67.313 to see the fix you have created for yourself.

IF willful omisison isn't plain and you satisfy 67.X13 currently and KNOW (and can document) that you do, I have never had a record correction go to the Inspector General.

It's all "cases" and circumstances. I have advised attornies in other cases, but the disadvantage there is, the moment contact is made, the conversation is lawyer to lawyer, and no longer doctor to doctor.

I once got a chief pilot for a MAJOR 121 carrier off the hook- he had neglected to report a condition for 27 years. It was not endangering, but he had knowingly failed to do so. Trouble was, his spouse knoew and was suing him for divorce. The opposing counsel had just FOIA'd his medical record at CAMI (3 weeks before going to court) and he came to see if I could correct the mess.

The inspector took my report: "Inadvertently discovered condition(?)" says he. "How inadvertent?". I explained that he had gone to a clincial trial at a major medical center for it, and the med was prohibited, and I got him off the trial and onto a standard, permissible med. The letters were already on file. The current status letter never mentioned how long he had been followed for the condition. The inspector said, "I see. We will issue the SI authorization, issue him for a year". And, he put his name on the chart.

Bottom line: The medical examiners in OKC, barring FLAGRANT omisison, if a case can be made for inadvertency, would rather simply have you current, qualified, and with the approrpiate followup demanded (SI) or issued as "eligibile" (no followup demanded, but warned off of 61.53 for that condition).
Click to expand...

Okay, for example (imaginary, but indicative), let's say you have a pain in your chest. Being conservative and having heard radio ads about not ignoring chest pain symptoms, you go to the ER, everything checks out fine, and they suspect the spagetti sauce and sour cherries you had that night before laying down in bed was the cause of the heartburn. They send you for a cardiovascular workup and everything checks out fine. There is recurance for a number of years. You didn't report it. What are the steps and likely outcome from admitting that on your next class 3 medical?

By the way, thank you for all the time that you devote to this forum. I've been fishing through the archives and am astounded with how generous you are with your time and knowledge.
 
Whoops, mistyped:

Okay, for example (imaginary, but indicative), let's say you have a pain in your chest. Being conservative and having heard radio ads about not ignoring chest pain symptoms, you go to the ER, everything checks out fine, and they suspect the spagetti sauce and sour cherries you had that night before laying down in bed was the cause of the heartburn. They send you for a cardiovascular workup and everything checks out fine. There is *NO* recurance for a number of years. You didn't report it. What are the steps and likely outcome from admitting that on your next class 3 medical?

By the way, thank you for all the time that you devote to this forum. I've been fishing through the archives and am astounded with how generous you are with your time and knowledge.
 
If this is really what it's about you really need a consult. Chest pain is in the words of medicine, a "Class A" complaint. There are many levels of "it was just heartburn". It ranges from the ER doc being confident enought to sign you out as "Clearly GERD" (Gastroesophageal reflux disease), vs signing you out as chest pain NOS ("not otherwise specified"). The billing codes also have to match the text.

I had one of those recently- a SWA pilot who on vaca in Cal was taken to the ER. The ER doc POSITIVELY signed him out as GERD. The familiy doc back home about 20 miles from here, agreed. During my site visit the analysts picked ten charts and asked if I had the documentation for my issuing him as "GERD". Two reams of paper later (laser printer) I bundled them up and handed them to her. She said, "what's this?" I said, "they're for you, you requested them".

Nice lady, but she learned a lesson: I don't issue unless I have the defensible documentation. I have never heard from her since.

But it is clear, that chest discomfort in a male has to have the i-s dotted and t's crossed in orer to survive inspection. Anything less than the documentation I had and it would have been off to the treadmill before issuing. And actually, that may not be a bad thing for a middle aged airman.....
 
bbchien said:
But it is clear, that chest discomfort in a male has to have the i-s dotted and t's crossed in orer to survive inspection. Anything less than the documentation I had and it would have been off to the treadmill before issuing. And actually, that may not be a bad thing for a middle aged airman.....
Click to expand...
In my case, years ago, the ER doc didn't send me home until after I'd done a treadmill stress test, along with God only knows what else. In fact, he didn't send me home - the cardiologist did in the morning. They were taking no chances. After the cardiologist looked at all the test results I asked him if I was going to die or not... his response: "Well, I can't tell you for sure, but I can tell you for sure it won't be from a heart problem any time soon."

Prevacid is a wonderful thing, and so is changing your diet to exclude the foods and combinations of foods that give you problems.
 
bbchien said:
If this is really what it's about you really need a consult. Chest pain is in the words of medicine, a "Class A" complaint. There are many levels of "it was just heartburn". It ranges from the ER doc being confident enought to sign you out as "Clearly GERD" (Gastroesophageal reflux disease), vs signing you out as chest pain NOS ("not otherwise specified"). The billing codes also have to match the text.

I had one of those recently- a SWA pilot who on vaca in Cal was taken to the ER. The ER doc POSITIVELY signed him out as GERD. The familiy doc back home about 20 miles from here, agreed. During my site visit the analysts picked ten charts and asked if I had the documentation for my issuing him as "GERD". Two reams of paper later (laser printer) I bundled them up and handed them to her. She said, "what's this?" I said, "they're for you, you requested them".

Nice lady, but she learned a lesson: I don't issue unless I have the defensible documentation. I have never heard from her since.

But it is clear, that chest discomfort in a male has to have the i-s dotted and t's crossed in orer to survive inspection. Anything less than the documentation I had and it would have been off to the treadmill before issuing. And actually, that may not be a bad thing for a middle aged airman.....
Click to expand...

Thanks. The key question here, though, is whether the omission of a visit for chest pain on one medical application, even if there was immediate treadmill testing and far more which resulted in an unequivocal opinion by the cardiologist that it was not a cardiovascular issue would result in revocation or non-issuance of a medical on a subsequent application, if admitted, or if there is a possibility for issuance with this visit included in the medical record.
 
Unregistered said:
Thanks. The key question here, though, is whether the omission of a visit for chest pain on one medical application, even if there was immediate treadmill testing and far more which resulted in an unequivocal opinion by the cardiologist that it was not a cardiovascular issue would result in revocation or non-issuance of a medical on a subsequent application, if admitted, or if there is a possibility for issuance with this visit included in the medical record.
Click to expand...
Huge run on sentence with too many clauses to make sense of this. ARe you the original unreg or a new one? Of course I can't tell.

Generally, imaginary omission of a report of chest pain is a high level offense and gets imaginarily noticed. The data submitted when admitted to, need be "complete and massively convincing", and will result in a written warning fom the Director at AAM 300, but result in no discipline if the data are "complete and massively convincing", meaning to FAA's standards, imaginarily of course.
 
Last edited:
Hello -

I'm grateful for the advice I've found on this thread, as I've just run into a similar sticky situation. Since it seems this kind of thing is case by case, I thought I'd describe what I've run into and see what people say.

I've recently completed some counseling on family relationship-based issues, which I initially thought wasn't reportable. However, through various channels I've discovered that this depends on the "diagnosis." And, as it turns out, in order to make an insurance claim, which providers will always do if they can to help you out financially, they HAVE to make a diagnosis. And, the minimum claimable diagnosis is "Adjustment disorder with ___ " where the blank includes something like "anxiety", or "depression", etc. All the while, I thought I was just going along to talk with somebody!!

So it turns out what I've been through IS reportable, and not only that, my AME has requested all my charts, and informed me that I'll probably have to undergo a cogscreen psych test! Holy ____! Ok, ok, I'll do what I have to do, and I've been w/out a medical for a few months while I finish this up.

But, the problem, and the question I have, relates to the fact that it dawned on me recently after getting my head around this, that there were other counseling sessions in the past, that I equally thought weren't reportable, which in hindsight probably were.

If I were to have held a medical during that time, and I wanted to sort all this stuff out, where would I start? With my AME? I hear the comments about lawyers and so forth, and want to know where people think I should begin.
 
This happened to me. Sleep APNEA isn't on the medical form, I had it for 10 years before my first aviation medical and really didn't think of the CPAP as a "prescription, " but it is. The AME never asked about it either.

I had my private pilot's license when a coworker that had has lost his for APNEA mentioned it.

I stopped acting as PIC and kept flying dual as a student working on my commercial. I took all the info to a local AME a lot of the airline pilots use here in town (there are many pilots that have APNEA flying with special issuances).

The FAA did send me a 3rd class medical SI with a bunch of warnings on it. It's been renewed once and so far no problems.

I do pay a lot better attention to weight control, try to swim 3 miles a week, and use my CPAP device religiously.

People did occasionally accuse me of being lying scum. So it goes. I think a lot of modern medicine is institutionalized fraud.
 
Unregistered said:
Hello -

I'm grateful for the advice I've found on this thread, as I've just run into a similar sticky situation. Since it seems this kind of thing is case by case, I thought I'd describe what I've run into and see what people say.

I've recently completed some counseling on family relationship-based issues, which I initially thought wasn't reportable. However, through various channels I've discovered that this depends on the "diagnosis." And, as it turns out, in order to make an insurance claim, which providers will always do if they can to help you out financially, they HAVE to make a diagnosis. And, the minimum claimable diagnosis is "Adjustment disorder with ___ " where the blank includes something like "anxiety", or "depression", etc. All the while, I thought I was just going along to talk with somebody!!

So it turns out what I've been through IS reportable, and not only that, my AME has requested all my charts, and informed me that I'll probably have to undergo a cogscreen psych test! Holy ____! Ok, ok, I'll do what I have to do, and I've been w/out a medical for a few months while I finish this up.

But, the problem, and the question I have, relates to the fact that it dawned on me recently after getting my head around this, that there were other counseling sessions in the past, that I equally thought weren't reportable, which in hindsight probably were.

If I were to have held a medical during that time, and I wanted to sort all this stuff out, where would I start? With my AME? I hear the comments about lawyers and so forth, and want to know where people think I should begin.
Click to expand...
Hey, if you're the same unreg asking about "cognitive screen", it's much simpler than that. I am assuming you have been off all meds for at least 60 days: Get thee to a psychiatrist and if the psych, notes that "axis 1: resolved" then you are done. I'm just guessing as we have had no real communication. If you are more than one year from any meds, not even a special issuance- a normal one.

late ed, contact made, this a/m really does need the cogscreen.....
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Hey, if you're the same unreg asking about "cognitive screen", it's much simpler than that. I am assuming you have been off all meds for at least 60 days: Get thee to a psychiatrist and if the psych, notes that "axis 1: resolved" then you are done. I'm just guessing as we have had no real communication. If you are more than one year from any meds, not even a special issuance- a normal one.
Click to expand...

Nope. Different pilot. And never been on any psych meds. Mainly just talk therapy. Thank you for the response - seems like this part of my case at least should be straightforward.
 
A friend dropped dead of a heart attack to the bundle of his - surrounded by medical personnel. He had passed stress tests.

I got a radioactive stress test the next month instead of my usual physical's stress test.
 
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