My husband was a flight instructor for many years, but quit flying about 10 years ago when it just didn’t pay the bills anymore. He’s struggling with depression and anxiety and the doctor has prescribed him cymbalta, the expectation is that he’ll stay on it for about a year. If he were to decide to fly again - let’s say two - three years from now (for enjoyment, not for work) would having previously been on this medication prevent him from doing so? In other words - would former use of medication- assuming several years have passed and he has a clean bill of physical and mental health - prevent him from being cleared to fly medically??
Antidepressants
- Thread starter K.T.
- Start date
Are there any letters of interpretation or adjudicated cases regarding this yet? (I know Basic Med is rather new, but it seems like Congress was quite explicit about the mental health conditions requiring an SI in 68.9).
68.1 says Ҥ 68.1 Applicability.
This part prescribes the medical education and examination requirements for operating an aircraft under § 61.113(i) of this chapter without holding a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter.”
That would seem to imply that 68.9 is what is required, and that the normal requirements of part 67 do not apply.
If the PBOR was written in 2009, well before BasicMed, it strikes me that a colorable argument can be made that any such determinations from that time do not apply to BasicMed, since they pre-dated Congress’ specific language.
I would not be surprised to see this boil down to a fight between medical certification and the standards office within the FAA which @Brad Z mentions.
68.1 says Ҥ 68.1 Applicability.
This part prescribes the medical education and examination requirements for operating an aircraft under § 61.113(i) of this chapter without holding a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter.”
That would seem to imply that 68.9 is what is required, and that the normal requirements of part 67 do not apply.
If the PBOR was written in 2009, well before BasicMed, it strikes me that a colorable argument can be made that any such determinations from that time do not apply to BasicMed, since they pre-dated Congress’ specific language.
I would not be surprised to see this boil down to a fight between medical certification and the standards office within the FAA which @Brad Z mentions.
In terms of the OPs question, it did not sound like the husband had received a denial letter from the FAA.
In terms of whether having a condition that would normally require an SI if one makes a medical application requires that one not use BasicMed when one has valid prior medical and has not received a denial letter and has a doctor that will approve the application, it sounds to me like this will not finally be decided until the FAA decides to violate someone who has gone the BasicMed route under those conditions and it has been adjudicated. By which I mean worked its way up through the administrative law court to the appellate court. I say that because it seems like an issue where the aeromedical division will have one interpretation and Congress and the courts may have another.
But for the OP, I suppose best to consult an aviation attorney before making a decision about it.
In terms of whether having a condition that would normally require an SI if one makes a medical application requires that one not use BasicMed when one has valid prior medical and has not received a denial letter and has a doctor that will approve the application, it sounds to me like this will not finally be decided until the FAA decides to violate someone who has gone the BasicMed route under those conditions and it has been adjudicated. By which I mean worked its way up through the administrative law court to the appellate court. I say that because it seems like an issue where the aeromedical division will have one interpretation and Congress and the courts may have another.
But for the OP, I suppose best to consult an aviation attorney before making a decision about it.
Strikes me as an excellent analysis of where the guidance which includes reference for the physician to the AME guide creates a conundrum. I was just looking through Public Law 114, section 2307, part c, which specifies what the physician must do for Basic Med.
From what I read there this troublesome language was not part of the legislation. I assume it was inserted by someone at the FAA as wrote this set of instructions.
From what I read there this troublesome language was not part of the legislation. I assume it was inserted by someone at the FAA as wrote this set of instructions.