Few things are certain in life but I’d make book on this: Joe Emerson will never take magic mushrooms again and board an aircraft. I’m also willing to wager that his mental health is a lot better now than it was when he was captaining an Alaska 737 around the West a few years ago. So, statistically, it seems to me that he might be a safer pilot than many others strapping in every day carrying around the normal mental baggage that gets us all down from time to time. We’ll never know, of course, because Emerson will never fly an airplane again as part of his plea deal with prosecutors over the most significant pilot mental health case in recent memory.
Emerson, you will recall, was the Alaska captain who tried to pull the engine cutoff handles on an Embraer 175 regional jet while deadheading in the jump seat from Everett, Washington, to San Francisco in October of 2023. The on-duty crew intervened in time and got him off the flight deck with no real harm done, but I’m also well aware of the what-if scenarios. Clearly it’s behavior that must be discouraged but is it a criminal act or an expression of a health issue that we’ve always known is pervasive and becomes especially dangerous when its victims are forced to hide it by not getting treatment? Emerson was struggling with the loss of his closest friend and was on his way home from a weekend with friends held in memory of their mutual buddy. Emerson, for the first time in his life, took some hallucinogenic mushrooms and that might have had something to do with his actions on the plane, although the psilocybin would have cleared his system long before he buckled into the jump seat.
It would appear that authorities have determined, and Emerson has at least decided to accept, that there was an element of criminality to his actions because prosecutors are suggesting a 12-month jail term. I suspect Emerson actually profoundly rejects the criminal part and is just trying to get this episode in his past as soon as possible. He seems like a smart, reasonable sort with a lot of family and friend support so I’m sure he’ll find something to do where he’s as valuable as he was to aviation in what was a bright and blossoming career.
But is his loss our loss, too?
For a time, Emerson’s case shone a light on a problem virtually everyone in aviation has been politely ignoring, and it would seem that’s what we have decided to continue to do. He’ll mow lawns or wash dishes at a minimum-security prison while thousands of pilots continue to fight their inner demons with no possibility of getting help if they want to continue flying. It seems like a golden opportunity lost for an industry that needs to address a critical safety issue. So, forgive me if I indulge in some fantasizing about how this might have turned out to more benefit than sharpening Emerson’s potato-peeling skills.
How about if he was sentenced to community service in the form of attending pilot meetings at the major carriers to talk about his experience bluntly in the way pilots do when they occasionally get serious with one another. He would go in knowing that a significant percentage of his audience harbored the same sort of pain, uncertainty and loss he endured in the weeks and months leading up to the shocking incident over Oregon. Not one of them will say a word about it during that meeting or even to their closest family and friends, but they will have heard it themselves from a fellow human and pilot who has already lost what they hope to salvage with their silence.
A few might even decide the pain isn’t worth it and instead of acting out at 35,000 feet or self-medicating themselves to death they’ll seek, and potentially get, the help they need. If there are enough of them, the industry will have to take notice because it will cost a fortune to lose these people and chances are they’ll give some of their compatriots the same idea. I don’t know what the critical mass will be that will make it more profitable to address the issue rather than toss it behind bars for a year or, heaven forbid, suffer the kind of loss Emerson’s actions could have precipitated if things had gone differently in cramped flight deck of the E175.
If any of that comes to pass, it will be a step toward meaningful change in the way we expect pilots to perform. We still treat them as heroes for doing their jobs and we do it a lot. That’s a lot of pressure for those who are not feeling very heroic at the best of times. But it’s only the first half of the job ahead. The only way Part 1 gains any traction is if Part 2 includes a pathway back to the flight deck. That means accepting mental health issues are either temporary, treatable or curable to the point where, for at least some of those afflicted, they don’t pose an abnormal risk to themselves and the people who depend on them for their safety.
Maybe in that world Emerson could be allowed to lead the way in that regard. By all accounts he was an up-and-comer at Alaska serving in a safety role (I know, the irony) and likely tapped for greater things in the 20 or so years he had left. Could it be that there’s no need to waste the experience and knowledge he’d gained to that point in October of 2023 and that he could carefully and practically return to flying?
Unfortunately for Emerson, that is indeed a fantasy, thanks to that plea deal. Adding that indignity to the criminality and financial impact of all this was more than the politically motivated slap in the face that was the only purpose it served. It proved that there is no intention of treating cases like Emerson’s as the medical issues they are, and it shows the pilot population what faces them if they let their guard down where their mental health is concerned. It will just drive them deeper underground
It also virtually ensures that more mental health crises will manifest in unpleasant and potentially tragic ways and more pilots will go to jail to perpetuate a tragically ineffective system that is supposed to protect public safety but is probably doing the exact opposite.
Wasn’t the German Wings pilot who committed murder-suicide with an RJ in the Alps a while back covertly receiving psychiatric counseling?
It was an A320 and I believe he had been in therapy but was not at the time of the .incident. The facts of that case have also been disputed.
Considering that even having an episode of medication-induced depression, that resolves as the dosage is reduced, is enough to get a third class tanked for an unknown duration with a crapshoot on tests required, yeah this was a wasted opportunity to meaningfully improve safety over decades.
A lost opportunity indeed. Mental Health America (MHA) in its 2022 Adult Data statistics indicates that 19.86% of all American adults are experiencing some form of Any Mental Illness (AMI). This is the equivalent of nearly 50 million Americans having a diagnosable mental, behavioral, or emotional disorder other than those diagnosed from developmental or substance-use disorders. Presumably, those additions would drive the numbers higher. Of the 19.86%, 4.91% are classified as severe cases of AMI. Using data from the FAA’s 2023 Active Civil Airmen Statistics, there are some 806,940 active pilots and 749,618 active non-pilots participating as airmen. it would be irresponsible to assume almost 5% of all active pilots are affected by AMI, but a number does exist. Historical screening processes and critical medical thresholds are both conservative and punitive in the effort to “find the right stuff.” It is also the primary reason “self-evaluation” leads to the notional “see something, say nothing.”
Thanks for the correction above Russ. I think the problem here in the U.S..with HIIPA law and background checks for firearms purchase presents a similar problem. You want to respect individual rights, but if an individual has psychological problems, can you trust them to check that box on the application to purchase a firearm? Society needs some expectation that folks with serious behavioral issues shouldn’t be piloting commercial flights or owning deadly weapons. Such a complex and difficult problem. Great job with AvBrief. Keep it up!
> He seems like a smart reasonable sort…
Reasonable? I get that this person was suffering, but what he did was by no means reasonable.
> Adding that indignity to the criminality and financial impact of all this was more than the politically motivated slap in the face that was the only purpose it served. It proved that there is no intention of treating cases like Emerson’s as the medical issues they are, and it shows the pilot population what faces them if they let their guard down where their mental health is concerned.
I don’t get why keeping Mr. Emerson off the flight deck is political. Nor do I understand how this event proves authorities have no intention of treating cases like Mr. Emerson’s as medical issues. As far as I know, Mr. Emerson made no effort to obtain help for his mental health problem before attempting suicide by crashing a plane full of people. I could see your point if he had sought help and permanently lost his medical, but that’s not what happened. I get that this may pose a Catch 22 for pilots suffering a mental illness, but that reality doesn’t make what Mr. Emerson did “reasonable,” nor authority’s response to it “political.”
I think most people believe that all criminal acts include an element of mental illness. How else does one come to a conclusion that harming others for your own benefit is ok? But unless a person can no longer distinguish right from wrong, we don’t ignore the harm a person can do just because they may be suffering a mental illness. A criminal defense based on a “not guilty by reason of insanity” plea requires whatever mental illness the person is suffering prevents them understanding the wrongfulness of their act. Clearly, Mr. Emerson doesn’t believe that’s the case in this instance, or he would not have accepted the plea deal.
I’m all for improving mental health services–the current system is woefully inadequate. I also understand the overwhelming majority of people suffering from mental health disorders are not violent. But I think it’s eminently reasonable when someone “acts out” in a way that endangers others for authorities to limit their access to the means of harming others. For example, people who’ve been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility are no longer able to own firearms. How is taking away Mr. Emerson’s ATP any different?
“Mr. Emerson made no effort to obtain help for his mental health problem before attempting suicide by crashing a plane full of people. I could see your point if he had sought help and permanently lost his medical, but that’s not what happened.”
It is precisely because he would have lost his medical that he (and likely hundreds of other pilots) choose to keep it under wraps and try to work it out on their own.
Yes, I get that–I said I understand the Catch 22 faced by pilots suffering from mental illness. That doesn’t excuse Mr. Emerson’s act. If you want to protest the way the FAA deals with mental health issues you can’t start with a criminal act.
Thank you Russ for this well written, timely article and for choosing to address the issue. Your having done so was not without some risk taking on your part. Pivotal in this conversation are the two questions you asked.
“is it a criminal act or an expression of a health issue that we’ve always known is pervasive and becomes especially dangerous when its victims are forced to hide it by not getting treatment? “is his loss our loss, too?”
How we collectively arrive at answers to these questions will of course be crucial to the outcome, and as you say, the plea deal is an indicator that society’s reply has already been made. “It proved that there is no intention of treating cases like Emerson’s as the medical issues they are, and it shows the pilot population what faces them if they let their guard down where their mental health is concerned. It will just drive them deeper underground.”
Adding to this dismal outlook is the current increasingly war mongering atmosphere in which we now struggle for oxygen. National leadership is all about conducting performative attacks on symptoms, have no interest in dealing with root causes, and do so to distract from embarrassing and worse truth about themselves.
The FAA is very proud of themselves for “solving” the issue of pilot mental health by reminding pilots that they are strictly prohibited from ever being sad, but if they are, they should definitely report it to the FAA, at which point they’re grounded for (at least) six months and get to spend thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars proving that they aren’t a danger to everything in the sky and on the ground.
Given that the FAA stubbornly refuses to make meaningful changes to their mental health standards, I think it’ll probably end up taking something that kills a lot of people (or a couple of famous ones) to force substantial changes to those policies, and even then, there’s a decent chance the FAA will react by simply doubling down on “Being sad is illegal!” as the pinnacle of mental health treatment.
Dave S summed it up for me. Thanks!
Aviation suffers the same effects as any other business does when it comes to having to deal with the human condition. Physicians, truck drivers, police, pilots all have the opportunity to harm others through their behavior.
The fantasy posed “if he was sentenced to community service in the form of attending pilot meetings at the major carriers to talk about his experience bluntly in the way pilots do when they occasionally get serious with one another” is excellent and the right solution. And to add, what is preventing the carriers or employers from doing it on their own. Not a worthwhile investment, even monetarily?
Woefully, our terminal delusion of consistently equating punishment with responsibility continues unabated. Great piece, Russ.
Good writeup Russ, no hype, just facts.. I’m with Dave M, Gary B., and John Kliewer that we need open talk and real change, not more punishment. Depression stays taboo, and trying to tough it out alone usually backfires. Much like PTSD.
I am amazed that the US is not willing to learn from abroad.
In Europe we have considarably changed our approach to pilots mental health after Andreas Lubitz murdered 149 people on that fateful GermanWings flight.
The biggest threat to safety -any form of aviaition safety for that matter- is when an individual cannot speak up without fear of negative repercussions.
But then; the biggest problem of any aviation safety department is that you cannot account for the mony saved on the accident that didn’t happen…
So – is it the FAA or is it the airlines?
Excellent point. The world’s bean counters have yet to derive a set of tangible accident-free metrics that is pleasing to company leaders. But the one big no-no in any safety organization is that you never broadcast mishap-free data for the fear of breeding complacency and/or angering the karma gods.
If Emerson had throttled back in his own airplane and crashed to his death, maybe on finding the throttle at idle the NTSB would have concluded it was his intention to do so, maybe not. If he had a passenger in his own airplane, maybe that passenger could have altered the outcome and Emerson could have gotten help. But Emerson took the worst course of action by attempting to address his own temporary (because depression is treatable, yes?) problem with a permanent solution while flying an airliner full of other, non-involved human beings who would have been involuntary victims in his drama. Of course the FAA had to appear to be pro-active which included a deterrent/discouragement factor in its ruling. Not everything is political no matter who makes that claim nor how loudly it is made. The FAA’s ruling may have been somewhat different if he had confined his intention to self-harm and not included innocent victims.
Just because psilocybin (sp. Russ) has flushed from a person’s physical system does not mean a psychological residue does not persist afterwards, sometimes for a very long time, even a lifetime. Having been in the music biz since the 60s I’ve seen it happen within a cultural subset that claimed then that psilocybin and other hallucinogens are harmless, as is cannabis. This claim is being made now as The Current Thing. For some people this may be true. For others, these substances are not harmless. They precipitate a nightmare that can be set off by even a single instance of use. I saw the lingering aftereffects happen in the 60s and 70s and I’ve seen them happen to some acquaintances within the past few years as they explored the recently-trending “plant medicine”. I’m not an expertist like some of the opiners on here, I’m not a Health Care Professional so I can’t diagnose psychosis, the instances I’ve seen are “anecdotes” at best, but anyone doubting this can freely explore the well-covered experience of the late Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys as an example.
Nothing is stopping Emerson from creating a lecture circuit persona which could draw necessary startup funding from any number of mental health-associated foundations etc. It does not have to be the task of the FAA to facilitate. If his presentations are beneficial, he’ll be able to pursue it as a career path. I hope he can resolve his issues and find internal peace and freedom.
“Nothing is stopping Emerson from creating a lecture circuit persona which could draw necessary startup funding from any number of mental health-associated foundations etc. It does not have to be the task of the FAA to facilitate. If his presentations are beneficial, he’ll be able to pursue it as a career path. I hope he can resolve his issues and find internal peace and freedom”. Great idea, this could be a win-win situation for everyone!
We can pilots into two camps: the GA pilot who flies for pleasure and personal travel, or the professional pilot who makes a living as a commercial pilot or ATP. I would say the FAA is over zealous on psychological issues for GA pilots. Nothing like going fly to push away the blues. And, most pilots are very good about using IMSAFE and not fly. But when it comes to the professional pilot, there is way too little support for their mental health and professional flying is a very stressful job. The FAA needs to recognize the two paths for pilots and develop better mental programs and medical knowledge for the two situations. A good example of a GA pilot who has been unnecessarily grounded is Xyla Foxlin
Thanks, Russ for your article.
Watching the major uptick in student pilot traffic in my area makes we wonder if we’ll see more issues of pilot depression rather than less. It’s palpable seeing the students walking the tarmac unsmiling, unwilling to engage with other GA pilots, with heads down buried in their cellphones, just grinding away at their 1,500 hours pursuing a job.
Ultimately years of training and high costs to get to the big leagues may not prove to be all it’s cracked up to be.
Plenty of happy young fans of GA at Oshkosh every year but to my eye that excitement doesn’t translate to what’s on the grounds of my airport.
The Japan Airlines story in this AvBrief issue belongs in this excellent discussion as well. Alcohol-related incidents, like having a hit or two before climbing in the left seat, should be treated as mental health issues. Instead we focus on not drinking too close to departure time, such as 8 hours from bottle to throttle.
Thanks for this commentary Russ. This could be a much larger issue than the FAA perceives, as you point out in your commentary. Ignoring opportunities like you offered, perhaps because the FAA want’s to maintain a perception that it’s a very limited problem (which is somewhat understandable), only opens the door to yet another accident. The recommendation you offered for Mr. Emerson was used in during my time in the Air Force. An accident that resulted from pilot fatigue really hit home with the other pilots when the accident pilot shared his experience and highlighted how he overlooked the subtle warning signs. Also, isn’t there some speculation that mental heath played a roll in the Air India 787 accident, as well as a number of other international accidents over that past 20 years?
Retired center controller here. A fellow controller who was going through a terrible divorce/custody battle was prescribed medicine for his resulting depression. He consequently lost his medical. He asked me one day “Why is it that if I am on medication that makes me feel good and puts the world in balance again that I cannot do my job, but it is ok to work without the medicine and feel like I want to drive my car into a bridge abutment?”
He eventually got his medical back after his legal problems were settled, and he got off of the meds.
Look at how many current youth are pharmaceutically treated for depression and other disorders and tell me just how exactly the future is supposed to look.
I’ve repeated this for two decades. Most all of the aviation medical standards are entirely outdated and unsustainable and completely ignore the fact, that passing a Class I Medical will not prevent (any desired) catastrophic medical issues from surfacing at will.
Ask anyone who has spent more than 2 hours with severely depressed people and learn just how short the pop is between “I can handle…” to “F… this”….
Not all psychoactive drugs cause dizziness or drowsiness.
Not all depressed people are suicidal. Asking for help should result in help, not a career-stopping end all. And thats exactly what it does.
Years ago in the business world it was said, “No one ever got fired for buying IBM.” It was the SAFEST option, and safe means you keep your job.
In aviation, no government official ever got fired for saying NO. A DPE who denies most flight test applicants will face little risk of being sued by people who were killed by a pilot she/he passed. Denying a medical to anyone who was ever sad (Great comment, Dave S!) is much safer for the examiner than making a judgment call in a pilot’s favor.
How to remove cowardice from government officials of every party is really where this conversation needs to begin. Until then, I am afraid we will see many more denials – on both sides – than acceptances.
Well said Russ. As I suspect we all know, one tricky thing about mental illness is that when the noggin gyros finally tumble, to the rest of us the resulting actions often seems totally out of place, irrational, extreme, etc. Well duh… So, using conventional punishment for the transgression seems almost equally irrational.
The approach should be safety and treatment. The pilot is barred from flying until sufficient diagnosis and treatment are implemented rendering the pilot again fit to fly. For professional pilots, their employers need to put them on “injured reserve”, with sufficient pay, and with perhaps other non-flying duties until again fit to fly (after some reasonable time). After all, the the professional sports teams manage to do this to a reasonable degree.
Obviously nothing like this will happen without appropriate regulation. Funny how we decry regulation until events push us in that direction. It’s that “written in blood” thing again.
There is no upside for the FAA to taking any risk with a pilot who has strayed from the orthodoxy created to protect the FAA even if it diminished protections to the traveling public. In the apparent view of the FAA, a grounded pilot is the lowest risk to them, so there’s no incentive to get them back in the air. As long as this perception remains, the FAA will keep its reputation for being both untrustworthy and combative.
From training to operations to maintenance, as long as the FAA refuses to change and adapt from its 1950s roots because it’s insecure in doing something different even when it’s demonstrably better, we all will suffer.