The crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 - Essay Example

Case Analysis: Germanwings Flight 9525 Name Institution Abstract The crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 in March 2015 raised questions as regards whether airlines and regulators have done enough to detect mentally ill pilots. The crash was as a result of the co-pilot’s premeditated action to commit suicide. The procedures for medical certification of pilots had also failed avert the co-pilot’s suicidal action, even after being determined to be suffering from a mental illness. The airlines should be made by the air authorities to develop criteria they can use for analysis of in-flight incapacitation. The airlines should have requirements that demand that when a medical certificate is issue to the pilot or airline crew with a history of psychological disorder. The airline operators should also be encouraged to implement peer support groups for the staff. Table of Contents Abstract 2 Table of Contents 3 Introduction 4 History 4 Causes of the accident 5 Recommendations 7 Conclusion 10 References 10 Introduction The aviation agencies across Europe at one time prohibited all pilots who had made disclosure of their mental illness from flying airplanes. However, during the recent years, because of advancements made in scientific research and a growth of public awareness that certain mental illnesses, such as depression, can be treated, the regulatory bodies relaxed such restrictions, as a result permitting pilots with mild mental illnesses to use certain antidepressants (Goode & Mouwad, 2015). The objective was to encourage pilots with mental disorders to step forward and seek treatment. However, the crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 in March 2015 raised questions as regards whether airlines and regulators have done enough to detect mentally ill pilots (Goode & Mouwad, 2015). This paper examines a case of the crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 to discuss how airlines should deal with such situations. It provides recommendations on what could be done to avoid a similar scenario in future. History On 24 March 2015, the Germanwings Airbus A320 crashed near Prads-Haute-Bléone, France, lead to the death of 150 passengers onboard. The plane had left Barcelona, Spain at 10:00 hours local time to Dusseldorf, Germany. At 10:27 hours, it had reached a cruising altitude of FL380. At 10:30 hours, the captain left the cockpit. Immediately afterwards, the co-pilot shifted the altitude on the Flight Control Unit (FCU) to 100 feet from 38,000 feet. The airplane then descended when the co-pilot adjusted a descent speed he selected. However, he neglected calls from air traffic control, and locked out the captain from the cockpit. At 10:41 hrs, the aircraft collided with a rocky terrain. Investigations into the accident by the Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety (BEA) disclosed that the co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, had been advised by a doctor two weeks earlier to seek psychiatric treatment two. According to the doctor, the co-pilot had been suffering from a mental illness with psychotic symptoms. As established from the doctor’s claims, the co-pilot was anxious about a developing impaired vision that he believed could bring his career to an end (Kulish & Eddy, 2015). Despite the anxiety, eye specialists later established that his eyes had no problems and that he actually had been suffering from psychosomatic disorder and was prescribed drugs like Mirtazapine. Causes of the accident The airplane’s collision with the rocky terrain was as a result of the co-pilot’s premeditated action to commit suicide. On the other hand, the procedures for medical certification of pilots, such as the processes of self-reporting in the event of the pilot’s diminished medical fitness, failed to succeed in averting the co-pilot’s intended actions, who had been determined to be suffering from a mental illness with psychotic symptoms, such as benefitting from the privilege of a licence (Ranter, 2016). Several factors have been identified as having, possibly, contributed to the breakdown of the principle: The first argument is that the co-pilot was probably living in fear of losing his capability to fly as a professional pilot in case he had reported to the airline authorities his diminished medical fitness. Further investigations into the co-pilot’s home provided proof that he had been taking prescription drugs intended to treat psychosomatic illness. Searches in his tablet computer also indicated he had search on "ways to commit suicide" as well as the designs for cockpit doors in addition to their security provisions. Further investigation by the BEA showed that Lubitz had been undergoing treatment for suicidal tendencies before he trained as a commercial pilot, and that he had been provisionally denied a United States pilot's license due to a treatment for depression he had been undergoing. It was also established that for close to five years, the co-pilot had not been able to sleep frequently, as he had complained of being depressed by vision problems (Ranter, 2016). Second, the likely financial outcomes that a lack of particular insurance that covered the risks associated with of loss of income the event of loss of job after the abrupt end of the co-pilot’s profession may as well have contributed to the incident. The BEA made a conclusion that Lubitz had intentionally crashed the airplane after setting the autopilot to descend to 100 feet before further accelerating the speed of the descent (BEA, 2015). Third, some quarters have also asserted that the German regulations lacked clear guidelines on issues where the public safety requirements should supersede the requirements of medical confidentiality. This may have led to doctor to keep the information on the co-pilot’s situation confidential. It has also been argued that the German security requirements contributed to the cockpit doors being designed in a way that could resist forced intrusion by unauthorized persons (Ranter, 2016). However, this made it difficult for the captain to enter the flight compartment after he had been locked out by the co-pilot. While it was further established by news reports that the co-pilot had been suspected by his workmates to be hiding an illness from his employer, the German law provided him with privacy protections, as it does not permit employers to access the medical records of employers. Hence, the medical secrecy requirements under the German law prevented the doctor from notifying Germanwings of the co-pilot’s medical condition. Recommendations The airlines should have requirements that demand that when a medical certificate is issue to the pilot or airline crew with a history of psychological disorder, then follow-up investigations should be conducted to establish their fitness psychologically. Under such situations, there should as well be restrictions on the duration of the medical certificate in addition to other operational restrictions. Aguirre et al. (2013) also recommend a need for to undertake psychiatric reassessments regularly to revalidate the medical fitness of the staff in order to establish their preparedness to perform certain duties. Donley (2015) also highlighted the rationale for mental health risk assessment, as critical for identifying individuals at risk of patients, specifically as suicide is increasingly becoming a global problem. In his view, for each suicide attempt, there probably have been many other suicide attempts or even acts indicated intentional self-harm. Risk assessment is crucial as it prevents the mental health risks of having employees who are in the acute phase of psychological disorder, and who require specialised treatment (Ranter, 2016). The airlines should also undertake a regular monitoring and evaluation of in-flight incapacitation, by requiring that reference the psychological capacity of the pilots are analysed, evaluated, and monitored. This will be instrumental in improving the mitigation of risks associated with in-flight incapacitation, as the numerical date established can be used to validate the safety of an airline by the public (Schmitz et al., 2012). The airline operators also need to come up with measures capable of mitigating socio-economic risks linked to loss of licence by their pilots because of medical fitness issues. This would make it easy to replace easily pilots suspected to be incubating an illness, or a hiding a medical condition that can put the safety of medical staff under threat (BEA, 2015). The criteria for defining the basis under which pilots can be declared unfit when they take anti-depressant medication without or without medical supervision should be defined by the airport authorities (BEA, 2015). The concern health and airports authorities should come up with guidelines that assist them to define the rules requiring health service providers to furnish the necessary authorities with implicit information of the patients psychological capacity, general health, when certain patient’s health is capable of impacting public safety. For instance, this should be the case when the patient has refused to consent to inform the employer. In such situations, although the health service provides should make efforts to protect the private data of the patient from undue disclosure by only addressing the necessary authorities, they should be provided with no legal risks to encourage them to take the initiative (Ranter, 2016). However, the rules should only consider specificities of the airline staff, as the fear of the risk of their medical certificate being revoked or suspended, might prevent them from seeking the necessary health intervention. Suarez reasons that in situations where the public safety and patient’s confidentiality are to be balance, the health service provides often face dilemmas. According to Suarez (2012, because the public may be susceptibilities to certain conditions, timely disclosure of the test results to those at risk is crucial. On the other hand, patients may refuse to authorize disclosure of the test results due to privacy or fear of stigmatisation (Overton & Medina, 2008). Under such situations, Suarez (2012) observed that there would be conflict between protecting the patient‘s confidentiality and the duty to protect the health of the public. He further advised that the contemporary laws should provide a situation where a new duty of a third party (in this case the government) is created, where precedence is given to the law to promote public safety over breach of patient’s confidentiality. Therefore, there should also be guidelines that remind the health providers of the likelihood of breaching medical the patient’s confidentiality when they report to the wrong authorities or parties, as well as where the medical condition has no likelihood of putting the public’s health at risk. For this reasons, there has to be a clear definition of ‘risk to public safety’ and ‘imminent hazard’ when addressing the issues linked to airline staff, like the pilots. At any rate, to encourage the health care providers to be at ease with notifying the authorities, the legal consequence linked to breaching medical confidentiality should be limited, when done to promote public safety as well as when done in good faith (Ranter, 2016). The airline operators should also be encouraged to implement peer support groups for the staff. Such groups would provide a platform for pilots with psychology disorder, or even their friends and family to report and converse freely on issues touching on their mental or personal health conditions. However, in these peer groups, there should as well be guidelines requires that information disclosed during the discussions be kept in confidence. This will allow pilots with psychological disorders to seek for support as well as to be provided with guidance. This will allow them to return to their flight duties while feeling confident of upholding flight safety. According to Bett (2013), peer counselling refers to an interactive relationship in people of the same age group, or who show certain common characteristics, intended to influence positive behaviour change. Bett (2013) further explains that the rationale for peer counselling is rooted in the theory that individuals who share the same characteristics and age tend to influence each other’s behaviours substantially, as it can help provide answers to some trivial questions that puts on under pressure during an emotional crisis. It also encourages emotional growth and acceptance. Conclusion The airplane’s collision with the rocky terrain was as a result of the co-pilot’s premeditated action to commit suicide. On the other hand, the procedures for medical certification of pilots had failed avert the co-pilot’s suicidal action, even after being determined to be suffering from a mental illness. The co-pilot may also have been living in fear of losing his capability to fly as a professional pilot in case he had reported to the airline authorities his diminished medical fitness. The airlines should be made by the air authorities to develop a criteria they can use for analysis of in-flight incapacitation, where they place emphasis on issues like psychiatric or psychological capacity of their staff. Additionally, there should be a constant and period analysis and evaluation criteria for analysis of in-flight incapacitation.. In addition, the airlines should be encouraged to collect data periodically in order to validate the efficiency of these criteria. The airlines should have requirements that demand that when a medical certificate is issue to the pilot or airline crew with a history of psychological disorder, then follow-up investigations should be conducted to establish their fitness psychologically. The airline operators should also be encouraged to implement peer support groups for the staff. References Aguirre, M., Greenberg, N, Sharpket, J. Simpso , R & Wall, C. (2013). A pilot study of an enhanced mental health assessment during routine and discharge medicals in the British armed forces. Army Med Corps, 2013;0:1–5 BEA. (2015). Final Report: Accident on 24 March 2015 at Prads-Haute-Bléone (Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, France). Retrieved from: Bett, J. (2013). The importance of promoting the value and the role of peer counseling among students in secondary schools. International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 2(6), 477-484 Donley, E. (2015). Psychiatric assessment in the emergency department: preliminary data from consumers about risk assessment following a suicide attempt or deliberate self-harm. Emergency Medicine & Health Care 2(1), 1-8 Goode, E. & Mouwad, J. (2015). Germanwings Crash Raises Questions About Shifting Ideas of Pilot Fitness." New York Times. Retrieved: Kulish, N. & Eddy, M. (2015). Germanwings Co-Pilot Was Treated for ‘Suicidal Tendencies,’ Authorities Say." New York Times, Overton, S. & Medina, S. (2008). The stigma of mental illness. Journal of Counseling & Development, 86(1), 143-151 Ranter, H. (2016). Final investigation report released into Germanwings flight 4U9525 pilot suicide accident. Retrieved: Schmitz, W., Allens, M, Feld,am, B., Gutin, M, Jahn, D., Kleespies, P., Quinnest, P. & Simpson, S. (2012). Preventing suicide through improved training in suicide risk assessment and care: An American association of suicidology task force report addressing serious gaps in U.S. Mental Health Training/ Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 1(1), 1-9 Suarez, R. (2012). Breaching doctor-patient confidentiality: confusion among physicians about involuntary disclosure of genetic information. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 21(1), 491-519 Read More