|
ADHD/ASD and CASA medicals
Question for the Pprune brains trust. A friend of mine has been diagnosed with ASD/ADHD. Has anyone dealt with CASA regarding their medical? Just interested to hear if there are any issues as far as CASA are concerned? Will it effect gaining or maintaining a Class 1 medical?
|
|
Yes it is a huge issue.
We have had students who have been taking drugs for ADHD and you can expect months of delays, if it is even possible to get the medical at all. One who was a supervisor in construction working at heights and CASA said he was "Likely to take unaccceptable risks and be impulsive". Much better if people don't get a label stuck on them and other people accept them for the amazing people they are instead of saying they are "suffering" from something and filling them with pharmaceuticals and giving them a label that can cause prejudice and make doors slam in their faces for the rest of their lives. Instructors are given this form to fill in. Read it and weep. Form 420 (casa.gov.au) Anyone who has any experience with people along the spectrum (who in my experience make very good pilots indeed) will know that this really shows that the people in CASA know nothing at all about it. I have taught many students on the spectrum and IF they want to be pilots they are the complete opposite of the behaviours shown and their level of focus and attention to detail is extraordinary. However if they are being forced into flying against their will by pushy parents they may exhibit some of those behaviours, as would any student who wants to be doing something else. |
It's desperately, desperately sad to me, witnessing the inexorable medicalisation of normal and the alacrity with which bureaucracies like Avmed intervene, control, restrict and ultimately destroy in the name of some noble cause. These days, we're all just a collection of 'conditions' to be 'managed' by the medical industry.
Everyone wants to believe that pilots of aircraft are mini supermen and superwomen, and Avmed is ever-ready to make that perception happen. So many 'conditions' precipitate Avmed searches of the internet to find whatever 'evidence' can be found to cast a 'condition' in a light that gives rise to catastrophic risks justifying micro management or destruction. I'm frequently impressed by the genius of satirists who cut through all the bull**** to expose the truth. There's an episode of The Simpsons that deals with the fad of ADHD drug diagnoses sweeping through the youth of Springfield (i.e. society in the real world). When Bart's parents ask the smooth talking pharmaceutical company doctor - dressed of course in a lab coat - whether the ADHD drugs sold by the company work, she responds: "The only thing more effective is exercise". |
instead of saying they are "suffering" from something and filling them with pharmaceuticals There is a whole industry making a living with flow on effects out of categorising people into some kind of spectral disorder. Totally agree, most are absolutely warm and gentle, but occasionally there's a rough nut in the group and it's a bit of a shame they are all tarred with the same brush when they should not be. Funny thing about these professors of psychology, I once worked for a health group and one of our departments dealt with the research into human behaviours. One day one of my regular suppliers of computer equipment flipped from driving Aussie muscle cars to European sports cars and lent me his BMW M3. After fanging it around the streets in front of the premises during lunchtime I came back to work only to see these professors had turned purple in the face by trying to contain their jealousy (and misconceptions). They really are full of it, absolutely. |
Originally Posted by Clare Prop
(Post 11086056)
Instructors are given this form to fill in. Read it and weep. Form 420 (casa.gov.au)
Originally Posted by CAsA Form 420
often leaves seat in classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is expected.....May not sit still in pre-flight briefings. Hopefully does not get out of seat in flight!
My young bloke is on the spectrum, with ADHD thrown in for good measure and does indeed demonstrate many of those behaviors outside the cockpit. However, he loves his flying and I dunno how he does it, but puts them to one side and can climb at a constant IAS, hold heading and altitude without a problem and could probably fly the lateral portion of an approach within IFR tolerances - and I'd have no trouble believing he could pull of a decent landing if he could reach the rudder pedals or throttle! He is 8! I know a train driver who was diagnosed with ASD as an adult and spent 6 months off the road having to redo his medical with the Company CMO (who apart from the bare minimum, has zero psychology training it turns out). Apparently as part of the assessment she asked him to remember 5 words at the start of her assessment and he had to repeat them at the end. When it came time to, he got 1 out of 5, and she was stunned. "Don't you think that's a serious problem? I told you, you had to remember those 5 words!" His answer was along the lines of "Nope, 5 meaningless words in an interview to determine if I can do the job I've been doing for the last 13 years mean nothing to me. But I can tell you down to the milimeter the track gauge in each state of Australia, can tell you how how many volts the main alternator can put out, I can tell you the compressive or tensile force limits of our wagons and can mentally calculate how much force in tonnes I'm putting into the front coupler based on traction horsepower. For anything I need to remember I either write it down, or put it in my phone." From what he told me, she wasn't particularly impressed with his answer, but nonetheless signed him off Fit for Duty - Unconditional. His psych obviously had no problems with him doing rail safety-critical work! This is from the CASA site and I can't say I'm overly thrilled with their expectation that a CFI - who may well be an expert in all-things aviation, but is unlikely to have any medical training is being expected to provide comment on how ASD/ADHD impacts a student in their normal lives outside of aviation. Using the below, my young bloke would be denied a medical, even though he can fly pretty damn well given his age. My advice to him when he goes for a medical would be to say nothing! I think he'd be in company with an awful lot of other (mostly damn good) Australian pilots in that regard, unfortunately. I've highlighted a couple of important bits...
Originally Posted by CAsA
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Aeromedical Implications Effect of condition on aviation Premature and ill-considered actions Restlessness and excess of movement causing distraction Impaired split attention affecting multi-tasking and situational awareness Approach to medical certification Based on the condition In full remission Based on Treatment No safety-relevant medication such as stimulants Demonstrated Stability Absence of symptoms for a minimum of 6 months after treatment completed. (Reflects DSMIV diagnostic criteria) Risk assessment protocol - Information required New cases Copies of medical records from date of diagnosis to the present Copies of records from Medicare detailing consultations and prescription of medications An up to date assessment by the treating paediatrician or psychiatrist if available detailing: History of condition Precise confirmation of the diagnosis with reference to DSM-IV criteria Co-morbidities, including drug and alcohol use Requirement and response to treatment Current clinical status with respect to DSM-IV criteria Current functional status, with reference to collateral information if available from school, family, workplace etc. Completion by the paediatrician/psychiatrist and the chief flying instructor of the ADHD and autism spectrum disorder instructor’s questionnaire form 420 (PDF 617.14 KB) regarding symptoms in the context of and noting the implications to both the normal day to day life and the conduct of aviation. Attached questionnaire Copies of academic records and employment history Copies of traffic infringements and criminal records Copies of any special investigations performed such as QEEG or neuropsychological testing Follow-up plan Previous specialist reports if available Renewal May be subject to annual review by an appropriate specialist on a case by case basis. Indicative outcomes Favourable Stable off medication for at least 6 months and satisfactory reports Instructor questionnaire and annual specialist reports for 5 years following cessation of treatment. After 5 years consideration of removal of surveillance requirement. Unfavourable Recurrence of symptoms Stimulant medication |
Appalling.
|
From what he told me, she wasn't particularly impressed with his answer, but nonetheless signed him off Fit for Duty - Unconditional. A few years back the small team I worked in was "chosen" for deep HR review. The funny thing about this particular team was that we were quite deliberately dysfunctional with our interpersonal working relationships with each other but we still got the work done (think MASH 4077), so we just turned up the dysfunction level to 11 for the review. The poor HR girl didn't know what to make of it let alone what to report back, and after a few weeks the review was cancelled. |
CASA AVMED, like many of the empire’s streams could not function outside of the organisation. They simply do not understand the process of risk assessment and mitigation. Their approach is complete avoidance of any level of risk.
|
Another scenario….. Pilot has current Class 1 and flies for an aviation company. He/she goes through the testing process and is diagnosed with ADHD. Does he/she have to then inform Avmed and employer? If so what would Avmed then do?
|
Originally Posted by Alice Kiwican
(Post 11087623)
Another scenario….. Pilot has current Class 1 and flies for an aviation company. He/she goes through the testing process and is diagnosed with ADHD. Does he/she have to then inform Avmed and employer? If so what would Avmed then do?
But the answers are 1) Yes and 2) No idea. Avmed is a total mystery. |
This should be warning for many parents who might have a child that exhibits ASD tendencies but is borderline.
Do you want to give your child that baggage, permanently on his/her my health record that could cause this kind headache in the future? Get the support and social skills training needed to let them succeed, but a diagnosis won’t change them. There are a hell of a lot of highly successful folk with ASD. Some of them good pilots too. Some probably not. Just like any other humans. Some can fly, and some can’t. That form 420 is incredible. Even an attempt at humour half way down. |
Rule 1. Tell AVMED nothing!
Rule 2. See Rule 1. |
Clare Prop, very well said.
I find it more than ironic that CASA's form 420 part 'g' questions whether the student loses their toys? Has this been lifted from a child psychologists' training manual? Seems like a glaring lack of attention to detail for mine. I'd like to know the CASA personnel behind this form's creation. Hardly suited to remaining in the Forms Office and should be relocated to another department. They should be tested. Its a disgrace! But hang on, I've never actually seen a student bring toys to flight school. Oh my god! They've all got it! |
I am genuinely saddened to see that attempt at a "joke" within Form 420 - "Hopefully does not get out of seat in flight!"
That's absolutely appalling - they call themselves a professional "Authority" - this is a Form that has the potential to end someone's dream career - and they throw that in there, likes it's some kind of joke to them? The fact the form exists at all is disgraceful. Shame on them. |
Originally Posted by compressor stall
(Post 11087722)
This should be warning for many parents who might have a child that exhibits ASD tendencies but is borderline.
Do you want to give your child that baggage, permanently on his/her my health record that could cause this kind headache in the future? Get the support and social skills training needed to let them succeed, but a diagnosis won’t change them. There are a hell of a lot of highly successful folk with ASD. Some of them good pilots too. Some probably not. Just like any other humans. Some can fly, and some can’t. That form 420 is incredible. Even an attempt at humour half way down. My first thought was also that it had come from some kind of dumbed down article about the behaviour of children who are bored in school. The first person I was asked to fill it in for was a gentleman his late sixties who had been an instructor for decades and was now going to lose his medical unless someone could answer the questions, but as I had never flown with him I couldn't do it. He had been diagnosed with ADHD and had no traits remotely resembling anything on there and I had known him for years. Without people on the spectrum, we would probably still be living in caves. We certainly wouldn't be using computers connected to the internet. They are not freaks, it is not a "disorder", they are the next stage of evolution and denying them the chance to be pilots because of an arbitrary test done by unqualified people is so wrong. Importantly, these people are not risk takers, they are not going to hurt anyone, they might not want to make small talk on the flight deck but why should that exclude them? CASA would have grounded Neil Armstrong! |
The Form 420 provides a ghastly insight into the mindset of CASA Avmed. I'd prefer not to think about what the other hundreds of forms contain.
I'm not surprised at the inappropriateness of the attempted 'joke' that some arrogant arsehole put in the Form. It's 'funny' alright - in the sense of weird. Make no mistake: This stuff is the product of people with a noble cause. They consider that they must know everything that, in their opinion, is relevant to something that, in their opinion, has some consequence - any consequence - for the safety of air navigation. Make no mistake: They will come up with any excuse to demand information and tests and examinations to 'satisfy' them, and to restrict and destroy flying careers and aspirations. It's their crusade. MalcomReynolds' post above is, sadly, typical of many participants in aviation these days. (I do hope that's not your real name, as CASA will come after you for advocating for non-compliance with the law.) What worries me most is not that people are withholding information from CASA Avmed. After all, there is no causal connection between Avmed's level of knowledge or ignorance, its level of expertise or incompetence or its level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction about anything, on the one hand, and a person's objective medical fitness on the other. What worries me most is that some people may not be approaching qualified professionals when in doubt about something, for fear of what CASA Avmed will do if they find out. That is why - and I've said this publicly before - CASA Avmed is in my opinion now a force inimical to aviation safety. Be very, very, very careful before you expose yourself, or a loved one with aspirations of flying, to the risk of a 'diagnosis'. Very careful. There is almost no end to the conditions that you and your loved ones can be found to have, which conditions can be 'fixed' by some drug or therapy or gizmo or procedure that the medical industry is happy to supply and CASA Avmed will feel obliged to seize upon. CASA Avmed treat a diagnosis as an objective truth (but will reject, out of hand, the opinion of the diagnosing professional to the effect that the diagnosed condition is cured or creates insignificant risks). CASA Avmed will then search the planet for whatever evidence they can find to cast the diagnosed condition in the worst possible light and as high a risk as possible, then demand information and the most intrusive and - in some cases - risky tests and examinations as they can come up with to 'satisfy' them, notwithstanding that qualified professionals with ethical and clinical duties to their patient take a different view. I've also said this publicly before: Any idiot with access to the internet can do what Avmed does. Beware the diagnosis! |
Is everyone at CASA screened for ADHA/ASD I wonder.
|
Can anybody point me to an accident report that states the cause as the pilot having a diagnosis of ADHD or ASD?
Also, if anyone has contacts that are psychologists I would be very interested on their take on the use of this form for a layman (flying instructor) to evaluate someone for a condition that CASA consider as so dangerous that they must never be allowed to take control of an aircraft.. I also have a theory that many of the diagnoses are a form of Munchausen's by proxy, just from my own observations and coming from a family where some members would make Sheldon Cooper look neurotypical but don't have a label stuck on them. |
I listened to a fascinating conversation between Richard Fidler and Gordon Parker, the latter being the founder of the Black Dog Institute.
The whole conversation is worth listening to, but I did laugh along with them at this point (after about the 16 minute mark): So many patients get this uninformed diagnosis of major depression which is just homogenising multiple differing depressive conditions and then they then get the treatment that reflects the background discipline of the particular practitioner. So for instance, if you go to a doctor and get a diagnosis of major depression, then you’re probably going to get a drug. If you go to a psychologist with the same type of depression, you’ll probably get cognitive behaviour therapy. If you go to a counsellor you’ll get counselling and if you go to a lady wearing a kaftan you’ll get crystal therapy. And to my mind, that’s got the story the wrong way round; where the background discipline or training of a practitioner shapes the therapy. And then the therapy is a sort of one size fits all model. |
Jeez Clare,
I've just read that link in #3, and, I've just gotta say...I think I qualify....... Unless its 'Oletimers' catchin' up..... The CASA medical 'empire' has outgrown its REAL function - 'Is This Person Safe To Fly'. The 'power' has gone to its head - IMHO. |
(f) often talks excessively - May be excessively verbose or may make excessive and unnecessary radio calls = pilots.
Hard to believe this is a bona fide CASA form. |
May be excessively verbose
Well that covers a few of the posters here! :) |
I have a crew member I fly with who you could describe as “excessively verbose”. My ears almost bleed after three sectors. 🤣
|
The most recent submission to the Senate Committee inquiry into GA highlights more appalling, but sadly typical, behaviour on the part of CASA Avmed.
Dear Senator McDonald Re: Senate inquiry into General Aviation I write as a Designated Aviation Medical Examiner (DAME) for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (Cth) (CASR) 67.045. I have worked in this capacity since 2014 and am on record as being one of the busiest DAMEs in the country, currently seeing between 300 and 400 applicants annually. I am also a private (non-commercial) pilot and an aeroplane owner. In my role, I primarily see pilots (30% non-commercial, 70% commercial), but have occasionally seen cabin crew, aviation fire-fighters, parachute instructors and air traffic controllers. Once I have seen an applicant and submitted my findings, CASA will review the application and make a determination on whether the applicant is fit to hold a medical clearance. As a comparison, when a Licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (LAME) (a “motor mechanic” for aeroplanes), completes work on an aeroplane, they sign the relevant paperwork and the aircraft is available to fly. When I, as a DAME complete the relevant paperwork on a pilot, CASA then reviews my paperwork and, never having met the pilot, may overturn my recommendation, request the applicant provide more information or issue a medical clearance. For clarity, my role has been extended by Instrument Number CASA 26/18, dated 3 April 2018 (The Instrument), whereby I have been delegated CASA’s powers and functions for Class 2 (non-commercial) medical applications under CASR 67.165, 67.175, 67.180 and 67.195. This allows me to make all the relevant decisions, independent of CASA, with the exception that I cannot deny a medical clearance and if I believe that a pilot is unfit, I need to forward the application to CASA. CASA does not trust DAME’s with this decision making process, as all certificates issued under The Instrument are reviewed. I have instances of my decisions being altered without my consent, for which I do not believe there is legislation providing CASA the ability to alter the decisions. As a medical professional, it is the only area of medicine, that I am aware of, that a government regulator will review and over rule the decision of a clinician working alongside the applicant. It is worth noting that most medical officers within CASA are not pilots and have little practical experience in aviation. My issues with the Aviation Medicine section of CASA (AvMed) is the bureaucratic over-reach, with no consideration to cost, health risk and time of the applicant, for very little gain to the safety of air-navigation. Specialist opinion is disregarded by AvMed doctors underqualified in the relevant specialty, but “experts” in armchair bureaucracy. I provide two examples: Ms X Ms X at the time (2019), was a 50yo fit and healthy female, who had held a Class 2 medical for a number of years. She is an accomplished helicopter and aeroplane pilot and had made the decision to obtain a Class 1 medical so that she could instruct. As a routine part of this examination, she was required to undertake an ECG. This was sent to an eminent aviation cardiologist who reviewed an anomaly and requested a clinical review with the patient. Following some in depth investigations and review, the cardiologist provided the opinion: “This is an unusual finding…. but there is no evidence at this stage of any significant underlying cardiac disease. I do not believe that further investigation is indicated, and in my opinion, Miss X is fit for all activities, including flying”. The cardiologist made the recommendation for annual testing and cardiologist review. CASA restricted both her Class 1 and 2 medical certificates, forbidding her to fly without a qualified pilot in the aircraft and shortened her medical certificates from two to one year. In the letter advising of this, CASA stated: “Assessment of your application and specialist reports indicates that you presently fail to meet the relevant medical standard and I am satisfied that this may pose a risk to the safety of air navigation due to the risk of subtle and overt incapacitation... Your finding of rate-related left bundle branch block carries adverse prognostic significance including elevated risk of cardiac events and death”. This decision appears to be based on one medical paper, which compares Ms X, a fit and healthy young female to a 58yo female and an 80yo male, both with significant heart disease. CASA advised the removal of these restrictions would require angiography and electrophysiological studies. It is important to note that the AvMed doctor making this decision is not a cardiologist. The risks from these investigations came with an approximate 1:10,000 risk of death and a 1:2,000 risk of stroke. The case was reviewed by a cardiologist who specialises in electrophysiology, who expressed that the extra testing was not warranted and the risks far outweighed any potential benefits. It was only after very significant public pressure was applied by the original cardiologist, myself and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia (AOPA), that CASA relented, accepted a CT Scan and provided Ms X with an unrestricted, full length (two years) medical certificate. She is now too frightened to reapply for her Class 1 medical certificate and has given up on the prospect of instructing. Mr Y Mr Y was a 37yo make when he first approached me for assistance. I was not his first DAME and his first application had been refused. Following a short course of ZybanTM (bupropion) to assist with smoking cessation, Mr Y experienced an episode of psychosis. Not being involved at the time, I can’t be sure of the exact details, but this disclosure and a history of drug experimentation 15-20 years earlier, appears to have triggered a cascade of events, eventually resulting in a hair drug test. The hair drug test demonstrated the presence of methylamphetamine at 50pg/mg of hair. The report noted that the Level of Detection (LOD) was 50pg/mg of hair. Interpretation of drug testing results are complicated and require a specialist training package from, and membership with, the Australasian Medical Review Officers Association (AMROA). There is no Australian or international standard for hair testing results, however the Society of Hair Testing (SoHT) (an international organisation) describes that LOD is the sensitivity of the relevant laboratory to consistently test a specified amount of substance. In this case, the laboratory is able to consistently detect 50pg/mg of hair, ie for every mg of hair analysed, the laboratory can detect 0.00000005mg of methylamphetamine. However, the SoHT reports cutoffs for single use of methylamphetamine is 02.ng/mg of hair (or 200pg/mg of hair). Mr Y’s hair test result demonstrated 50pg/mg of hair, at the lowermost level for laboratory detection, but four-fold lower than is internationally accepted as evidence of an single event of drug use. In addition, no metabolites were present. In his defence, Mr Y reports he is employed as a luxury yacht chef, that he is constantly exposed to amphetamines and other drugs in the course of his employment, but does not use any illicit substance. The hair test for Mr Y should be reported by an AMROA member as a negative result, and CASA should have acted accordingly on that report. Mr Y saw a psychiatrist who, recognising the result as negative, made no comment on the drug test at the time of writing a report to CASA. CASA reviewed the drug test and the psychiatrist report and wrote to Mr Y refusing him a medical clearance. In the letter, CASA wrote: • “A hair test for drugs performed on 22 Aug 2018 showed a positive result for methamphetamine” • “(Your psychiatrist) did not seem to be aware that you had a hair test that was positive to methamphetamine in the report dated 22/8/2019” • “I have formed the view that you suffer from a problematic use of substances and have a significant psychiatric history, and that you therefore fail to meet the applicable Medical Standard. You are also an unreliable historian, having failed to disclose your medical history to CASA as well as your history of a positive hair drug test for methamphetamine to your psychiatrist” As can be seen above, none of these assertions are correct. Based on these conclusions, Mr Y was declined a medical certificate and barred from reapplying for 12 months. As discussed above, this all occurred prior to my involvement. He eventually approached me for assistance with a new application. At this time, I explained to CASA, in writing, my concerns with their decision and the rationale. I requested to be involved in any patient discussions held by AvMed medical staff and was declined. Mr Y has spent the best part of $20,000 trying to obtain and maintain a medical clearance, based on a CASA opinion that is inherently incorrect. I could provide many more examples! As a medical practitioner, I can accept that people make mistakes, but these cases are not mistakes, these are instances where AvMed doctors have brutalised individuals, for no particular gain, except the theoretical “safety of air navigation”, which on review, was never compromised. As much as I, and many others, enjoy acting as a pilot, we are under no illusions of the potential of a catastrophic outcome. Aviation is an inherently risky pursuit, whether in a professional or hobby capacity, but CASA needs to accept that risk should be considered against the financial and emotional burden of the decisions that have been made. There also needs to be a willingness by CASA to accept their mistakes, and to make amends to the individuals wronged. I would be happy to present to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee into General Aviation, if you so required. |
That is simply dumbfounding - thanks for posting this, Clinton.
|
No need to thank me. Thank the DAME for having the courage to call out CASA Avmed’s behaviour for what it is.
|
|
I just put my RPL on hold after 8h training
Originally Posted by Alice Kiwican
(Post 11085887)
Question for the Pprune brains trust. A friend of mine has been diagnosed with ASD/ADHD. Has anyone dealt with CASA regarding their medical? Just interested to hear if there are any issues as far as CASA are concerned? Will it effect gaining or maintaining a Class 1 medical?
This is because I don't want to risk getting my Class 2 refused, which would leave a big stain in my flying history, but also prevent me from ever going for sport licence, which don't require medicals, but cannot be granted if you've ever been denied one. So my advice is not to got for your RPL or PPL if there's a risk you wont pass your medicals as it could prevent you from flying anything ever again. |
Clinton
I have quite good knowledge of the business of general practice. There has been a chronic shortage of general practitioners for some years that, post-covid has become critical. Many General Proctices (like restaurants and other businesses) are now reducing opening hours because of a lack of staff. Ours has. Young doctors not prepared to do the hours of past generation, retiring doctors, declining income compared with specialists and reduced overseas trained doctors are all taking effect. In this environment, where any competent GP can get as much work as they want, for fees much higher than CASA pays for AVMED reviews, what does it say about the calbre of the (predominanltly) GP's that CASA gets to review pilot medicals after the DAME issues them? Separeately, This week I was aghast to recieve a letter from AVMED ordering me to get another round of tests and discussing quite intimate details about my health records signed by someone titled "Medical Assessor". I put the persons name into Google which led me to a Linkedin profile recoding that this "Medical Assseeors" last job was as an accounts payable clerk and is studying a business degree part time. I'm still struggling to understand how cutting cheques qualifies one as a medical assesor. So, following on from the author of the letter to Sen McDonald, why do we have (in my case) a suburban GP in a remote city and an ex accounts payable clerk overriding my DAME who is a senior medical specialist and held in high regard by the medical community who has passed the CASA 3 month course to become a DAME ? On paper at least the new principle medical officer - Dr Kate Manderson - looks like the most practical PMO we have had in years and certainly a change from the years when CASA apponted academics to the role. I'm hoping desperately that she makes a change. |
You’re ‘preaching to the converted’, OA.
[W]hy do we have (in my case) a suburban GP in a remote city and an ex accounts payable clerk overriding my DAME who is a senior medical specialist and held in high regard by the medical community who has passed the CASA 3 month course to become a DAME ? I’ve said it publicly before: Any idiot with access to the internet can do what CASA Avmed currently does. You’re just one of a myriad of victims of someone in CASA who’s decided - based on their googling and ‘cherry picking’ of studies - that some ‘condition’ has more significant implications than your DAME reckons it has and requires more significant ‘management’ than your DAME has decided it needs. Far more intrusive, expensive and potentially risky testing, perhaps with restrictions or ‘grounding’ in the interim? And that’s assuming that you’re ‘lucky’ enough not to be the victim of plain incompetence, like the circumstances highlighted by the DAME’s submission that I quoted earlier. I, too, hope that Dr Manderson is able to bring (back) objectivity to the PMO role, rather than let Avmed continue to be run on the basis of cognitive bias that has resulted in very harmful overreactions to the objective risks. But I’m not holding my breath. I wrote to the new CASA CEO shortly after her appointment, inviting her to deal with just one simple example of systemic unlawful behaviour of CASA Avmed – acknowledged as unlawful by CASA – and still manifested in Avmed documentation. You’d like to think that the CEO of a government agency would not want the agency to appear to be persisting with acknowledged unlawful behaviour – especially when it is so evident and easy to rectify. But no: I received some dissembling sophistry from one of her underlings and, when I invited her to review that response, Ms Spence said she had nothing to add. You see: You can’t let minor issues like CASA’s compliance with the law get in the way of a cause as noble as the safety of air navigation. Ditto your DAME’s expertise and professional judgment. CASA Avmed ‘knows’ better – they’ve done some googling and had a meeting to discuss the dire implications - and they have the power to impose their opinions on us guinea pigs. Welcome to the hutch. Unless the Senate Committee is going to bring about legislative change, its inquiry and its ultimate findings will remain of little practical relevance to CASA. Avmed doesn't apologise for the kinds of circumstances highlighted in the DAME's submission to the inquiry. It's just inevitable collateral damage in the fight for the noble cause of the safety of air navigation. |
If you look at the CASA website now (Sept 2022) you’ll see they’ve taken the form down for review and they’re asking for feedback. You can send this through directly to AvMed and they’ll send it on to the reviewer or you can email the reviewer directly at [email protected]
|
A Response
Hyperfocusing is a trait of ADHD.
How did you know certain students met criteria for being along the spectrum? To reject an individual who is medically diagnosed with a disorder with a negative trait, if left untreated, should be evaluated by employment right's expertise according to the ADA. Any serious challenges to finding employment, if otherwise capable of performing the job up to demands, will be the responsibility of the potential employer. Any one "filled with pharmaceuticals" by definition will be useless to anyone. |
Misunderstandings abound on every level and in every category. Truth be told, exercise is for some an important component in managing ADHD. According to the broad science, exercise tempers ADHD by increasing the neurotransmitters dopamine and norepinephrine-both of which play leading roles in regulating the attention system.
|
Go get a neuropsychometric exam to show that you no longer have ADD.
then you show that to CASA. |
There were a lot of problems with form 420. Not least of which that people qualified to be flying instructors were expected to do the job of a clinical psychologist and apply a questionairre written for children to adults.
It has to be the most ludicrous and discriminatory thing I have ever seen them do. Where are the accident statistics that show that ADHD is a contributing factor? I don't recall any such findings in any ATSB reports. Let's hope Form 420 will never see the light of day again and those who were deemed to have a "disorder" that made them "unsafe" will be able to try again to get a medical. |
Originally Posted by Clare Prop
(Post 11314080)
There were a lot of problems with form 420. Not least of which that people qualified to be flying instructors were expected to do the job of a clinical psychologist and apply a questionairre written for children to adults.
It has to be the most ludicrous and discriminatory thing I have ever seen them do. Where are the accident statistics that show that ADHD is a contributing factor? I don't recall any such findings in any ATSB reports. Let's hope Form 420 will never see the light of day again and those who were deemed to have a "disorder" that made them "unsafe" will be able to try again to get a medical. |
It's still ridiculous and written for children. Somebody please find me the definition of "often"? All they have done is add in some things that sound vaguely aviation related.
This is putting way too much into the hands of the instructor, for example if they don't observe the student playing games and then say "no" then there is an incident is the instructor that fills in the form responsible? THIS IS THE DOMAIN OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS NOT FLYING INSTRUCTORS |
What a ridiculous form. It honestly looks like a cut and paste job for primary school age children.
As for the medicalisation of behavioural differences? Oh gees. For sure, I'd never rule out appropriate medical interventions for acute or severe cases of depression etc but only if used in conjunction with CBT (not CBD!) and prescribed appropriate exercise once stable. I have flown with someone who is probably on the Autistic spectrum. (I say probably as I am not a clinical psychologist but I do hold a Psychology degree). He's very intelligent but gees it was hard work for the week. Once I figured out how to manage him, it became easier but it was still very tiring for me. Fortunately, the effort paid off and we could function well as a team during an abnormal departure (gear failed to retract). |
All this does is prevent pilots with underlying adhd or mental health symptoms seek treatment because of the risk of losing their jobs. Are they more of a risk by not seeking treatment to protect their livelihood?
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 19:05. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.