📖 Pilot Stories

✨ Featured Stories

• “Nightmare in the HIMS Program: Captain Michael Danford”
  A respected Delta Air Lines captain, Michael Danford voluntarily entered the HIMS Program after a single DUI—despite no diagnosis of alcohol dependence. He complied with every requirement, yet when he questioned inconsistencies in test results and raised concerns about flawed procedures, his AME withdrew support. The FAA revoked his medical certificate, and Delta terminated his employment. Arbitration exposed deep systemic flaws: a pilot punished not for relapse, but for speaking up. Read arbitration decision.
• “The Curious Case of Pilot Andrea Ratfield”
  What began as a successful aviation career turned into a cautionary tale of FAA overreach. Pilot Andrea Ratfield voluntarily disclosed past alcohol use from over a decade prior—yet she was forced into the HIMS Program, diagnosed without a live exam, and placed under the care of a psychiatrist who publicly promoted extreme, punitive monitoring. When she questioned the process and sought due process, she faced retaliation, biased rulings, and ultimately lost her job. Read full story.
• “Whistleblower Victory: Captain Karlene Petitt”
  After reporting serious safety concerns at Delta Air Lines, Captain Karlene Petitt was subjected to a retaliatory psychiatric evaluation that falsely diagnosed her with bipolar disorder. A panel of nine Mayo Clinic doctors unanimously refuted the diagnosis, and a judge ruled in her favor. Delta was ordered to reinstate her, pay $500,000 in damages, and the psychiatrist involved forfeited his license. Read full article.
• “Trapped in the Program: A Captain’s Anonymous Testimony”
  After years of flying with distinction, one captain entered the HIMS Program in good faith—trusting that honesty and compliance would lead to restoration. Instead, they encountered a system where moving the goalposts was the norm. Despite years of documented sobriety, endless testing, and full cooperation, the captain was arbitrarily pushed backward in the process without explanation. Even after senior FAA officials acknowledged the case as over-monitored, the captain remains trapped in a conditional status with no clear path forward.
• “Navigating the HIMS Maze: A Pilot’s Journey”
  After a DUI conviction 24 years ago and a dismissed arrest over a decade later, one pilot sought to return to the skies. Despite no current diagnosis of substance use disorder, the FAA's stringent criteria led to a HIMS program requirement. The pilot undertook extensive measures: engaging in AA and SMART Recovery meetings, completing an Intensive Outpatient Program, and undergoing multiple evaluations—all indicating no present disorder. Yet, the FAA introduced additional hurdles, including a CogScreen assessment and further psychiatric evaluations. Their experience highlights the emotional toll and bureaucracy that many pilots face while attempting to demonstrate recovery and readiness to return. View discussion.
• “The HIMS Nightmare: A Pilot’s Guide to Surviving Substance Abuse Re-Education”
  In this candid reflection, one pilot describes the harrowing emotional and professional toll of being ensnared in the HIMS program. Despite genuine efforts to recover and comply, they were met with rigid protocols and a lack of transparency. Their story serves as a warning to others and a call for systemic reform across aviation medicine. Read full story.
• “Buried Under Bureaucracy: A Pilot's Eight-Year Sentence”
  After a DUI in 2016 with a high BAC, this pilot took immediate responsibility and complied with every FAA request. Multiple professional evaluations found no pattern of abuse or dependency, yet the FAA labeled the pilot “Substance Dependent” based solely on internal BAC thresholds—ignoring clinical standards. That designation triggered mandatory HIMS enrollment. The pilot completed outpatient and aftercare treatment, underwent years of monitoring, submitted supporting letters, and never once tested positive. Even so, a Special Issuance was delayed nearly three years. Once granted, the expiration date was repeatedly extended—2025, 2027, 2028, now 2030—with no explanation. Oversight included a HIMS psychiatrist later convicted of child sexual abuse. Complaints about this and other abuses couldn’t be raised safely, because those responsible also controlled the pilot’s future. At a 2024 HIMS seminar, the pilot learned that the program isn’t officially run by the FAA—it’s an industry-managed system the FAA accepts. Compliance isn’t always enough; subjective demands and distrust override facts. And no consistent standards exist from one case to the next. Now, nearly a decade later, this pilot remains under monitoring—sober, compliant, and still waiting for freedom.
• “Grounded Without Cause: A Combat Veteran’s FAA Struggle”
  After years of combat service and over a decade of safe flying as a civilian medevac pilot, one veteran self-reported his VA disability benefits to the FAA—only to be blindsided by outdated and inaccurate records. Diagnosed without testing, stripped from the skies, and forced through the HIMS Program despite no clinical findings, he and his family have spent over $30,000 fighting for reinstatement. Read full story.
• “Released — But Not Forgotten: Anonymous Pilot’s Account”
  After receiving an alcohol-related driving citation, this pilot responsibly reported it to the FAA and consulted a highly respected HIMS AME. Both a substance abuse professional (SAP) and the AME concluded there was no abuse or dependence. Despite submitting this report to the FAA, the agency ignored the findings and demanded an evaluation by a HIMS psychiatrist. The pilot, skeptical of the FAA’s disregard for independent evaluations, hired an experienced FAA attorney and filed a FOIA request—uncovering internal FAA notes filled with baseless assumptions. At the advice of legal counsel and the AME, the pilot completed a thorough psychiatric evaluation, including blood tests and interviews with colleagues, family, and friends. Again, the results confirmed no substance abuse or dependency. The FAA rejected those findings and still mandated participation in the HIMS Program. After full compliance and passing every requirement, the pilot’s attorney submitted a release request—which was finally granted. This pilot concludes: "In my view, the process was punitive, not medical. If the FAA intends to further penalize driving infractions, they should be transparent and not mask it as a medical issue."