Germanwings A320 crashed in France :(

[BrabusMog]

The Hypno-Toad said:

BrabusMog said:

I can't believe he has managed to kill 150 people along with himself, why couldn't he just throw himself off a multi storey car park? Genuinely shocked by this.

Not a doctor but...

If it is the case that his girlfriend had recently split up with him then it's possible that in his mental state, he did it to punish her.

"You said you loved me now you don't care. You always knew I had a temper, I only wanted to love you, now look what you've made me do! It's all your fault!"

I've known people who when they get into the troth of depression don't just sit a corner, they lash out at people, lovers, friends, workmates or family because they believe they are making it worse or that's it their fault the person is in the fix in the first place. The police have suggested that they didn't find a note at his house but that doesn't mean someone didn't get one as he would have wanted to tell her it was all her fault.

Terrible, terrible event.

Remember. Not a doctor.

It's the most incredibly selfish act ever, if you want to die then that's fine but just take yourself out. Taking 150 people along for the ride? This was supposed to be a person in a position of trust, for someone that flies as frequently as me this has deeply unsettled me, I didn't think human beings were capable of this type of thing.

[BrabusMog]

NeMiSiS said:

BrabusMog said:

I didn't think human beings were capable of this type of thing.

Did you skip history at school?

No.

[anonymous-user]

i would class this as a freak event, i just hope people with mental illness are embraced rather than persecuted and isolated, companies need to be careful and cautious how they handle such people in the future

[BrabusMog]

It's a freak event, but this guy is pure evil, it's more than just a "mental illness".

[NicD]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

NicD said:

Justify your position all you like.
Who is missing the point?
Why was he still able to fly?

Ill justify it all day long, because as a professional ATCO who is passionate about the job, im also passionate about preserving the current (working) system from reactionary people who have no interest in actually solving the 'problem' and only in grabbing headlines or making bold statements to gain some sort of media or political traction. This is at the expense of people like me, my colleagues, and ultimately the public that we strive every day to keep safe.

You are missing the point, in its entirety.

He was still able to fly because he was an utter mental-case who was hell-bent on destruction. Again, you cant engineer this out of the system with generic protocols. The nutters, by their nature, will find a way around this.

Are you sure you are up to your job?
Missing the point, me?

He was able to fly because the medical professionals treating him were not required (perhaps even not allowed) to report him to the authorities.

You need to take off your 'its all about me and those like me' goggles.

[trashbat]

NicD said:

He was able to fly because the medical professionals treating him were not required (perhaps even not allowed) to report him to the authorities.

You need to take off your 'its all about me and those like me' goggles.

Are you here to pointlessly posture, or are you trying to understand and possibly improve something?

Newsflash for you: it is all about him, if he is or becomes the person that's going to cause a plane crash.

So at last, your proposal is to make medical staff report their patients to the authorities. What are you going to do about the side effect of these people now avoiding medical treatment for fear of the consequences?

And how does someone of pure hellbent, wilful evil end up actually getting treatment for depression in the first place, out of interest?

[BlackVanDyke]

It sounds like Lubitz would have taken that crash axe to the pilot if he hadn't 'complied' and gone to the loo when pushed. I hope this doesn't morph into people blaming the captain for going.

[NicD]

trashbat said:

NicD said:

He was able to fly because the medical professionals treating him were not required (perhaps even not allowed) to report him to the authorities.

You need to take off your 'its all about me and those like me' goggles.

Are you here to pointlessly posture, or are you trying to understand and possibly improve something?

Newsflash for you: it is all about him, if he is or becomes the person that's going to cause a plane crash.

So at last, your proposal is to make medical staff report their patients to the authorities. What are you going to do about the side effect of these people now avoiding medical treatment for fear of the consequences?

And how does someone of pure hellbent, wilful evil end up actually getting treatment for depression in the first place, out of interest?

You are you cut off from the news on this topic?
Try reading a little and then come back.

re your and others general points about people in positions of responsibility avoiding treatment and detection, well that is life, but once they have been identified, there is no excuse for them being able to cause carnage.

As for your 'posturing' - well beneath contempt.

[Driller]

NicD said:

kapiteinlangzaam said:

NicD said:

Justify your position all you like.
Who is missing the point?
Why was he still able to fly?

Ill justify it all day long, because as a professional ATCO who is passionate about the job, im also passionate about preserving the current (working) system from reactionary people who have no interest in actually solving the 'problem' and only in grabbing headlines or making bold statements to gain some sort of media or political traction. This is at the expense of people like me, my colleagues, and ultimately the public that we strive every day to keep safe.

You are missing the point, in its entirety.

He was still able to fly because he was an utter mental-case who was hell-bent on destruction. Again, you cant engineer this out of the system with generic protocols. The nutters, by their nature, will find a way around this.

Are you sure you are up to your job?
Missing the point, me?

He was able to fly because the medical professionals treating him were not required (perhaps even not allowed) to report him to the authorities.

You need to take off your 'its all about me and those like me' goggles.

Actually the doctor in question would gave been forbidden to report on the pilot's condition due to " medical confidentiality".

I watched an interview with a French pilot who explained this and when the interviewer suggested that this rule should be different for pilots etc the reply was that this would be "unconstitutional".

Can't say I agree with that.

[trashbat]

NicD said:

You are you cut off from the news on this topic?
Try reading a little and then come back.

re your and others general points about people in positions of responsibility avoiding treatment and detection, well that is life, but once they have been identified, there is no excuse for them being able to cause carnage.

As for your 'posturing' - well beneath contempt.

What do you want me to read about exactly?

"That is life"? FFS. Yeah, that will be life when even more low paid pilots develop serious problems, keep it hidden and crash their aeroplanes. Oh whatever, that is life, but at least we're punishing someone for something.

Beneath contempt indeed. I've got a fkton of contempt for you, you who can read someone's personal account about the benefits of being free to talk about mental health in the context of a role of extraordinary responsibility, and then just throw it out like it's nothing. This isn't some systemic statistical problem, this is an issue of individuals, where relevant anecdotes matter.

I read a load of st on here and suck it up like everyone else, but something about your attitude has really made me cross. I don't know what the actual spirit of your posts is, and maybe I've misjudged it, but on the face of it you should shut up for a moment, step back and look at what you're writing.

[croyde]

Come on people! This thread, as tragic as it is, has brought up some interesting insights and possible solutions so lets not bicker eh!

[bitchstewie]

trashbat said:

hat do you want me to read about exactly?

"That is life"? FFS. Yeah, that will be life when even more low paid pilots develop serious problems, keep it hidden and crash their aeroplanes. Oh whatever, that is life, but at least we're punishing someone for something.

Beneath contempt indeed. I've got a fkton of contempt for you, you who can read someone's personal account about the benefits of being free to talk about mental health in the context of a role of extraordinary responsibility, and then just throw it out like it's nothing. This isn't some systemic statistical problem, this is an issue of individuals, where relevant anecdotes matter.

I read a load of st on here and suck it up like everyone else, but something about your attitude has really made me cross. I don't know what the actual spirit of your posts is, and maybe I've misjudged it, but on the face of it you should shut up for a moment, step back and look at what you're writing.

You've been a lot more polite about it than I would have been.

Still waiting for NicD's insight on which profession should be tackled once all the rogue pilots have been dealt with.

[groucho]

Journalists.

[Driller]

Marketing executives.


Just saying

[Dr Jekyll]

Psychiatrists.

[Sheepshanks]

Driller said:

Actually the doctor in question would gave been forbidden to report on the pilot's condition due to " medical confidentiality".

I watched an interview with a French pilot who explained this and when the interviewer suggested that this rule should be different for pilots etc the reply was that this would be "unconstitutional".

Can't say I agree with that.

Yet a poster earlier is bemused by all this as it's standard practice in their country, Italy, for doctors to always send sick-notes to employers.

To be fair, I can't begin to imagine how a country like Italy can make that happen - it would be a logistical nightmare even in the UK.

Edited by Sheepshanks on Sunday 29th March 15:36

[wolves_wanderer]

NicD said:

cardigankid said:

I've almost managed an entire page of responses to my post. Not bad!

Don't know why, you made perfect sense to me.

Least surprising post ever.

[wc98]

bhstewie said:

You've been a lot more polite about it than I would have been.

Still waiting for NicD's insight on which profession should be tackled once all the rogue pilots have been dealt with.

whichever profession just another login is involved in. must be full of raving lunatics (note smiley to highlight this is a joke before i a subject to the full wrath f jali)

[Finlandia]

Driller said:

NicD said:

kapiteinlangzaam said:

NicD said:

Justify your position all you like.
Who is missing the point?
Why was he still able to fly?

Ill justify it all day long, because as a professional ATCO who is passionate about the job, im also passionate about preserving the current (working) system from reactionary people who have no interest in actually solving the 'problem' and only in grabbing headlines or making bold statements to gain some sort of media or political traction. This is at the expense of people like me, my colleagues, and ultimately the public that we strive every day to keep safe.

You are missing the point, in its entirety.

He was still able to fly because he was an utter mental-case who was hell-bent on destruction. Again, you cant engineer this out of the system with generic protocols. The nutters, by their nature, will find a way around this.

Are you sure you are up to your job?
Missing the point, me?

He was able to fly because the medical professionals treating him were not required (perhaps even not allowed) to report him to the authorities.

You need to take off your 'its all about me and those like me' goggles.

Actually the doctor in question would gave been forbidden to report on the pilot's condition due to " medical confidentiality".

I watched an interview with a French pilot who explained this and when the interviewer suggested that this rule should be different for pilots etc the reply was that this would be "unconstitutional".

Can't say I agree with that.

Lets say the condition would have been epilepsy, would the doctor still not have any requirement to inform the authorities?

[Driller]

Finlandia said:

Driller said:

NicD said:

kapiteinlangzaam said:

NicD said:

Justify your position all you like.
Who is missing the point?
Why was he still able to fly?

Ill justify it all day long, because as a professional ATCO who is passionate about the job, im also passionate about preserving the current (working) system from reactionary people who have no interest in actually solving the 'problem' and only in grabbing headlines or making bold statements to gain some sort of media or political traction. This is at the expense of people like me, my colleagues, and ultimately the public that we strive every day to keep safe.

You are missing the point, in its entirety.

He was still able to fly because he was an utter mental-case who was hell-bent on destruction. Again, you cant engineer this out of the system with generic protocols. The nutters, by their nature, will find a way around this.

Are you sure you are up to your job?
Missing the point, me?

He was able to fly because the medical professionals treating him were not required (perhaps even not allowed) to report him to the authorities.

You need to take off your 'its all about me and those like me' goggles.

Actually the doctor in question would gave been forbidden to report on the pilot's condition due to " medical confidentiality".

I watched an interview with a French pilot who explained this and when the interviewer suggested that this rule should be different for pilots etc the reply was that this would be "unconstitutional".

Can't say I agree with that.

Lets say the condition would have been epilepsy, would the doctor still not have any requirement to inform the authorities?

That is an excellent question. I'll try to find the answer.

Would be interested in a UK medical law perspective.