OSHKOSH, Wis. — One year after publicly offering to meet with Pilots for HIMS Reform, Federal Air Surgeon Dr. Susan Northrup still did not provide a direct answer when confronted about the unfulfilled commitment during Tuesday's FAA Aeromedical Forum at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh.

Captain Mike Danford, co-founder of Pilots for HIMS Reform, attended the forum and addressed Dr. Northrup during the public question-and-answer period following her presentation on mental health, medical certification, early intervention, and changes within the FAA's Office of Aerospace Medicine.

According to Captain Danford's account of the exchange, he began by reminding Dr. Northrup of the commitment made in the same room one year earlier:

Dr. Northrup responded by referring to ongoing NTSB proceedings involving individuals who had sought to meet with her:

Captain Danford immediately clarified:

Dr. Northrup then stated that she had permitted members of her staff to meet with pilots:

Captain Danford responded that the issue was not whether FAA staff members were available. The commitment made the previous year was for Dr. Northrup herself to engage directly with the organization.

Dr. Northrup directed Captain Danford to submit a request.

Captain Danford responded:

The exchange is significant because Pilots for HIMS Reform, as an organization, is not a party to an NTSB appeal or other litigation. The organization's request has consistently been for a policy-level discussion concerning FAA medical certification, transparency, oversight, and reform—not the discussion of any individual pilot's pending case.

The FAA's apparent reliance on the individual legal proceedings of certain pilots as a reason to avoid meeting with an independent nonprofit advocacy organization raises concerns about whether participation in lawful appeals is being used to restrict broader stakeholder engagement.

---

Questions About AME Accountability

Captain Danford then attempted to ask about the reported revocation of Dr. Tom Faulkner's Aviation Medical Examiner designation:

Before Dr. Northrup provided a substantive answer, someone near Captain Danford interjected:

Captain Danford then raised the larger issue of how pilots are expected to evaluate the physicians responsible for guiding them through the FAA medical-certification process when the FAA does not make meaningful performance or disciplinary information available.

He continued with an aviation analogy, questioning how pilots can responsibly preflight their medical-certification process when they lack a transparent way to evaluate an AME's record, qualifications, disciplinary history, or performance.

The point was straightforward: pilots are expected to carefully preflight the aircraft they operate, yet they often have little reliable information available when choosing the physician who may influence their medical certification, career, and livelihood.

Captain Danford was then instructed to sit down.

The entire exchange lasted approximately one minute following a presentation of roughly one hour.

---

Transparency Was a Central Theme of the FAA's Presentation

The interaction was particularly notable because Dr. Northrup had emphasized transparency near the beginning of her presentation.

She also discussed the FAA's efforts to make previously internal medical guidance available to pilots and Aviation Medical Examiners, including the agency's disposition guidance and medication policies.

Yet when presented with direct questions regarding the FAA's refusal to meet with a pilot advocacy organization and the lack of publicly available information by which pilots can evaluate AMEs, the answers were incomplete and the questioning was ended.

Transparency cannot be limited to publishing selected documents or describing internal modernization efforts. It also requires meaningful engagement with the people affected by the system, direct responses to reasonable questions, and a willingness to explain how important decisions are made.

---

Early Intervention Requires Trust

A major theme of Dr. Northrup's presentation was the importance of early mental-health intervention.

Dr. Northrup also acknowledged that pilots may delay seeking help because aviation is closely connected to their identities and livelihoods.

Pilots for HIMS Reform agrees that early intervention can save careers and lives. However, early intervention also depends on trust.

That message is difficult to reconcile with a system in which pilots remain concerned that seeking treatment, questioning an FAA determination, participating in an appeal, or joining an advocacy organization may restrict their ability to communicate directly with agency leadership.

Trust is built through transparency, accountability, predictable standards, meaningful due process, and open communication between regulators and the pilots they serve.

If pilots are encouraged to come forward early, the system must also demonstrate that those pilots will be treated fairly, consistently, and according to standards that can be understood and independently evaluated.

---

Claims of Success Require Supporting Data

During the presentation, Dr. Northrup characterized HIMS as a successful program.

Captain Danford intended to ask what objective data supports the FAA's characterization of HIMS as its leading or most successful program and whether the agency would make that information publicly available. He was not given the opportunity to pose that question before being directed to sit down.

Pilots for HIMS Reform believes that claims regarding the effectiveness of HIMS should be supported by transparent, independently reviewable data, including:

• Program completion and failure rates;
• Relapse and recurrence statistics;
• Differences in outcomes among substance-use, mental-health, and other diagnostic categories;
• Average duration and cost of monitoring;
• Rates of unrestricted medical certification;
• Adverse employment and financial outcomes;
• Appeals, reversals, and disputed diagnoses;
• Serious adverse outcomes occurring during or following participation; and
• The methodology used to define and measure “success.”

Without access to such data, pilots and the public cannot independently evaluate whether the program is effective, proportionate, consistently administered, or deserving of the claims made on its behalf.

A program may be widely used and still require reform. It may produce positive outcomes for some participants while imposing unnecessary burdens, prolonged monitoring, inconsistent standards, or avoidable harm on others. Those questions cannot be resolved through broad claims alone.

Transparent data would allow the FAA, pilots, physicians, lawmakers, and the public to evaluate what is working, what is not working, and where reforms are needed.

---

The Meeting Request Remains Open

Pilots for HIMS Reform continues to request a direct, professional meeting with Dr. Northrup and appropriate FAA leadership.

The organization is not requesting discussion of any individual pilot's pending case. It seeks a policy-level conversation about transparency, medical-certification standards, HIMS oversight, AME accountability, mental-health reform, due process, and the experiences of pilots navigating the system.

One year after the original public commitment, Pilots for HIMS Reform is still seeking a direct meeting with FAA leadership.

Pilots for HIMS Reform remains prepared to meet at any time. The organization again invites Dr. Northrup to honor the commitment made publicly to the pilot community and participate in an open discussion about meaningful aeromedical reform.

The goal is not confrontation. The goal is a fairer, more transparent, more accountable medical-certification system that protects aviation safety while treating pilots with dignity and due process.