'I'm planning a (heinous) act that will be remembered forever'...

[Surya Gayatri]

Last edited Sun Mar 29, 2015, 02:17 PM - Edit history (5)

ETA: 'heinous' has apparently been expunged from the original headline...

Killer pilot's ex-girlfriend says he shared chilling prophecy before Alps crash and woke up from nightmares shouting 'we're going down'.
...

Lubitz was a tormented, erratic man who was a master of hiding his darkest thoughts and would wake up from nightmares screaming ‘we’re going down’, the former partner said.
...

The 26-year-old Germanwings stewardess, known only as Maria W, revealed to a German newspaper how Lubitz ominously told her last year: ‘One day I will do something that will change the whole system, and then all will know my name and remember it.’
...

His personal problems and erratic behaviour became so severe that the flight attendant decided to call the relationship off after fearing his increasingly volatile temper.
...

She said he had 'never really' spoken to her about any illness but had told her he was getting psychiatric treatment.

She added: 'The torn up sick notes make sense now to me and were a clear sign that he did not want to admit that his big dream of flying as a captain was over.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/index.html

Other links from 'serious' outlets:

http://www.france24.com/en/20150328-germanwings-pilot-lubitz-history-name/

http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2015/03/28/crash-de-l-a320-l-ex-petite-amie-du-copilote-se-confie_4603129_3214.html
____________________

Wow, just wow. Lufthansa must be soiling their collective uniform trousers as we speak. The revelations just keep getting more and more damning.

How about that right to mental health privacy? The 'honor system' really worked a treat here!

And yet, there are still many on this forum who would contend that this guy had a complete right to medical privacy and that his mental health should not be highlighted.

Go argue that with the hundreds of grieving family members and friends.

Hundreds of lives destroyed because of this guy's twisted delusions of grandeur--delusions that were not legally bound to be reported to his employer.

ETA: further links and commentary.

[Shrike47]

1. Sadly, I guess, he will be forgotten within a year or two. The crash won't but he will.

[Surya Gayatri]

2. Well, he will have had his '15 minutes of fame', albeit

posthumously. (Credit to Andy Warhol)

[Chemisse]

3. It might have been nice if she had reported this to the airlines.

If he is too creepy to continue a relationship with, so you really want him flying a plane?

[Surya Gayatri]

4. Was she so afraid of him that she didn't dare for fear

of his vengence.

In retrospect, he appears to have been the kind to hold grudges. (just injecting a bit of humor, no disrespect)

[mnhtnbb]

5. She will regret not reporting him for the rest of her life.

It's an awful burden. I feel as badly for her as I do the families of the passengers
and other crew.

[Surya Gayatri]

9. Just too horrible to contemplate. She's been hiding

from the media at an anonymous friend's place, apparently.

[Liberal_in_LA]

16. yup

[randome]

17. He told her, supposedly, that he was getting psychiatric care.

I'm not sure what her responsibilities should have been after that. Decide on her own that his life needed more micro-management from his ex-girlfriend?

I think her inaction is understandable. She shouldn't blame herself.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[Chemisse]

18. I agree.

It would've been nice if she had reported it, but if I were her, I would have done the same. Outta my life = no longer my concern. Although if I were a flight attendant and knew who to talk to, policies and procedures, etc, perhaps I would have taken that extra step and reported it.

[randome]

21. And I agree with that. Maybe she should have been more aware of the consequences than most.

But it's all armchair quarterbacking from us.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[TeeYiYi]

30. More like hindsight quarterbacking at this point...

...since the game has already been lost.

TYY

[malaise]

29. Why didn't his parents report his problems?

His mother plays the organ in an evangelical church -his father is a banker and they are described as being in the upper part of the middle class.

[Surya Gayatri]

32. Maybe because like so many parents, they remained willfully blind...?

Not their well-behaved golden boy, surely?

[Chemisse]

53. Or unwilling to look deeper than his facade to see the illness underneath.

Parents of adults want to believe the best, because there is not much they can do to fix things anymore, and it's just so miserable when thing are going well for your kids.

If their son showed them a successful pilot, they would take it and run with it.

[Surya Gayatri]

54. My pilot, my son...unhappily, all too common.

He must surely have been their pride and joy.

[Sienna86]

6. No matter what the laws are, I would feel a personal moral and ethical duty to warn someone.

Knowing that someone could have their physical or mental health affect other's lives.....I couldn't live with myself if I didn't try. This applies is someone has a mental health issue such as clinical depression or something like epilepsy that they are hiding from superiors.

[JI7]

7. even if he had mentall illness it sounds like he was aware

Of how what he was going to do was wrong.

[Surya Gayatri]

10. Being mentally ill does not mean your perception

Last edited Mon Mar 30, 2015, 04:15 AM - Edit history (2)

of right v. wrong is necessarily suppressed.

Your judgment may be impaired, and you may dissemble that fact, but you may know perfectly well that what you're planning is wrong.

[JI7]

14. not always

[Surya Gayatri]

15. Of course, I'm generalizing for the sake of brevity.

Obviously, there are as many forms of mental disease and symptoms as there are sufferers.

[enlightenment]

22. Then why make a statement like that?

There is no need for brevity on DU; no time limits or word limits. You can write as much as is necessary to make your point, so there really is little excuse for tossing out comments that you know are incorrect.

[Surya Gayatri]

23. Didn't feel like going into a multi-§ exposé on the

myriad permutations of mental illness, that's why.

Where did I throw anything out?

[enlightenment]

33. Then perhaps you should

refrain from beating this story - and your particular take on mental illness - to death with a stick. Sometimes, topics are serious enough that they shouldn't be treated lightly.

As for tossing out a statement - you did that in your post #10. You were called on the statement because it was inaccurate and replied that you wrote it for the sake of brevity.

[Surya Gayatri]

35. In as much as this is the lead news story in every

European outlet--serious and tabloid, in all languages, I would hardly qualify bringing those reports to DU as 'beating this story to death with a stick'.

As for my particular take on mental illness, it happens to be very personal.

At various times in my life I have been in therapy for mental issues, have suffered bi-polar tendencies from adolescence, and once tried to off myself.

Hope that gives you a little more perspective on where I'm coming from.

[enlightenment]

37. Given that

most DUers do not live under rocks and are completely capable of finding the various reports themselves, I think you're taking on more responsibility than absolutely necessary. Did you do the same for the last few airline disasters or is this one just particularly fascinating?

As for your perspective? Honestly, knowing that only makes it more surprising that you seem to support a broad-brush stigmatization of people with mental illness (and before you come back with the "where have I said that" - review your own posts).

[Surya Gayatri]

61. I have mental issues, yeah. I also fly fairly frequently.

I want to know that, to the best of the airline's knowledge, the guy in the cockpit isn't plotting his imminent demise.

As for most DUers being able to find these stories themselves, that's not what I've heard from those who've expressed appreciation for them.

They're pleased to have a European perspective, from multiple sources--so they say.

[elehhhhna]

8. link?

K?

[Surya Gayatri]

11. Oh, thanks for asking. Forgot!

Here ya go:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/index.html

[ann---]

79. Isn't that a tabloid?

Not sure I believe this, then.

[Surya Gayatri]

80. There are several links in the OP to more reliable sources...

This same story is being run in every major news outlet in Europe, both serious and tabloid, in all languages. (without necessarily the same 'titillating' usage found in the Daily Mail...)

Frontpage, above the fold, top of the news cycle.

Believe or disbelieve what you will--it's frontpage news.

[oberliner]

12. The Daily Mail?

This is a notorious British tabloid.

[Surya Gayatri]

13. OK then, here's another...although the DM is often first off the mark

in breaking news situations, and political bias isn't really an issue here.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/27/germanwings-co-pilot-andreas-lubitzs-background-under-scrutiny

Germanwings co-pilot Andreas Lubitz ‘wanted to make everyone remember him’

Lubitz told his former girlfriend that he wanted to do something to ‘change the system’, Bild reports, as investigators find torn-up sick note covering the day of the crash

And another:

http://www.france24.com/en/20150328-germanwings-pilot-lubitz-history-name/

The Germanwings co-pilot who crashed his Airbus in the French Alps, killing all 150 aboard, told his ex-girlfriend that "one day everyone will know my name", according to German newspaper Bild.

______________________

FYI, Bild is a German tabloid that's being quoted by all manner of other 'serious' outlets.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. The Mail has now removed the word 'heinous' from the quote of the ex-girlfriend

of what he said to her. They now say, as the Guardian does, he said to her "One day I will do something that will change the system and everyone will then know my name and remember me".

The Mail still calls the act 'heinous' itself, but that is hindsight. What this means is that this woman did not have such an obvious clue that he thought about doing something bad.

(And it's not just political bias that you have to think about with the Mail - it's its lack of respect for accuracy. It is, as the other DUer said, a tabloid, that may be 'first with the news', but often misleading with it too).

[Surya Gayatri]

20. One would hope she wasn't aware of his 'heinous' intentions...

She says that his unstable mental state is why she broke up with him.

But, was she just glad to be quit of him--didn't want to report anything for fear of renewing contact with him, afraid of possible retribution.

After all, she works for Lufthansa, too.

Did you read that he bought 2 (not just 1) new Audis just 3 weeks ago. One of them was presumably intended to gain her affections back. Very strange behavior, IMHO.

[Surya Gayatri]

24. Agree about the DM--purposely didn't use it as a source for an OP

in LBN on the same topic that the Mods locked after 4 hours.

Used the Guardian, Le Monde, France 24, etc. but the Mods contend it's just speculation.

All of the serious outlets are running with it, with the caveat that the story has not yet been corroborated by investigators.

[pinboy3niner]

26. All are attributing to the original source, the story in Bild

Because that report was in German, what we're seeing are all the secondary English language reports

[Surya Gayatri]

28. True, and 'lost in translation' may explain why some

have qualified her remarks as 'lurid and sensational', 'melodramatic and titillating'.

That being said, French-language outlets are reporting the same interview.

[Ms. Toad]

25. She really should have reported him via the system set up

'We have at Lufthansa, a reporting system where crew can report – without being punished – their own problems, or they can report about the problems of others without any kind of punishment. All the safety nets we are all so proud of here have not worked in this case.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3013743/Germanwings-pilot-slipped-safety-net-devastating-consequences.html#ixzz3VhAtUVuk
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

So not only did the "honor system" not work, providing a mechanism for other employees to report didn't either.

I wonder if there is punishment for not reporting what you know - if so, I suspect this stewardess is about to find out about it.

[Surya Gayatri]

27. Failure to report in France can be prosecuted under

the statute that they call:
"Failure to come to the aid of persons in danger".

I don't know about Germany, but as you say, it is tragically obvious that failure of the "voluntary honor system" costs 150 people their lives.

[DFW]

74. "Unerlassene Hilfeleistung"

Literally, "neglecting to help out," is a crime in Germany as well.

I can't fault the former girlfriend, though. It is a huge leap from not being able to live with your boyfriend's quirks to thinking they were a credible indication the guy was planning on a mass murder/suicide.

On German TV yesterday, some more info came out: the area where he crashed the plane was an area he was familiar with. His family had vacationed there in the past, and they had a school for gliders and offered them as leisure activity.

A little over 20 years ago, a good friend of mine who was a former Belgian Air Force pilot and an enthusiastic hobby glider pilot nevertheless got killed when he misjudged the gusts in the mountains north of Provence in southern France, and smashed against the side of one of them. He had been a good friend for 20 years before that, and his son and I are still good friends.

But gliders in tricky winds are dangerous to even the most experienced pilots. An A-320 in perfect flying weather is not.

I don't have time to translate every article and newscast I see here in Germany, but I read lots of them.

I will be taking German Wings down to Barcelona from Düsseldorf tomorrow. For me, this is not a casual topic nor a theoretical one. What happened last week, could have just easily have happened with me in that plane. The mental health records of an accountant or a travel agent are their own business. The mental health records of a guy in a position to do what this pilot did? It is his employer's DUTY to know them, and stop him from being a pilot if they see a danger.

[Surya Gayatri]

75. Preach it, brother..."The mental health records?...It is his employer's DUTY to know them!"

Last edited Sun Mar 29, 2015, 10:36 AM - Edit history (1)

No, the girlfriend should not be vilified for failing to report. She works for Lufthansa, too, and probably just wanted to avoid him in the work place and forget an unhappy relationship.

Did you see my reaction when it suddenly occured to me just what this event must mean to you?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141051790#post33

[DFW]

76. Yes, I saw that

You can imagine how many times my phone rang that morning when it was announced what airline and what route. The first was my younger daughter who works in Frankfurt. As soon as I saw who was calling, I knew why. I picked up the phone and said, "no I wasn't on that plane." She was more than a little relieved.

[Surya Gayatri]

83. OMG, the panic...did you get calls from the States, too?

[DFW]

86. Of course-but later

The crash occurred at about 11:00 AM our time, and since we weren't on summer time yet, that was about 6 AM Eastern time in the States, 5AM in Dallas. Those calls came later, as people turned on the morning news. As soon as it was announced here in Europe that it was a plane flying between Barcelona and Düsseldorf, most people who know me here in Europe were on the phone fairly quickly.

[Surya Gayatri]

92. Yes, know the time-lag problem well. Can never just

pick up the phone and call over there spontaneously. Have to count back to figure out whether I'll be waking somebody up in the middle of the night.

Calling CA is especially dicey.

[ann---]

78. I agree

If what she said is true, then she is an accessory to his crime.
As is the doctor who found him unfit but did not notify his
employer.

[Surya Gayatri]

84. But, that's precisely what's at issue here. German doctors

are prevented by stringent German privacy laws from reporting even serious health findings to employers.

There was a 'voluntary, on-your-honor reporting system' in the internal procedures manual at Lufthansa.

Tragically, it was circumvented and subverted in this case.

Thus, the argument for 'mandatory monitoring and reporting' as opposed to 'voluntary'.

[kcr]

31. How about that right to mental health privacy?

Reading this makes it clear he was a mass murderer with intentions to do so. Your bigotry is shameful.

[Surya Gayatri]

34. No, not bigotted, just in the real world, where

as someone said in another thread:

'Your right to privacy ends where my right to live begins'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141051549#post3

[kcr]

62. The real world filled with mass murderers around every corner?

Or the real world where that very, very rarely ever happens? The overwhelmingly vast majority of people with mental illness aren't mass murderers. Those unfortunate souls on that plane won the one in a billion lottery you don't want to win. Your fear mongering insistence that monitoring mentally ill people need to be watched for our safety is based on nothing more than a knee jerk irrational reaction to a horrible incident in the news.

[Surya Gayatri]

64. A real world where hundreds of thousands of flyers

need to be reassured, to the best of the airlines' knowledge, that the guy in the cockpit isn't plotting his imminent demise.

That when they board a plane, they can reasonably expect not to be murdered by their pilot.

And just so you know, I am not by nature a 'fear-mongerer'. In general, I tend to be rather the opposite. Often go where others fear to tread.

And, I also firmly believe that 'safety-sensitive' professions need special safeguards, and that mandatory health reporting should be the norm.

I believe we'll just have to agree to disagree...

[kcr]

71. Nothing wrong with reassurance

But thoughtless knee jerk reaction based on bigoted notions can have unintended consequences. Like locking cockpit doors from the outside after events like 9/11. Which then means a pilot is locked out when a mass murdering co-pilot decides he wants to take down a whole plane. Spreading the notion that mentally ill people are dangerous in order to "reassure" means they don't get help. That actually doesn't make anyone safe.

[Surya Gayatri]

72. On the professional pilot forum I sometimes read, opinion is very divided

Last edited Sun Mar 29, 2015, 10:47 AM - Edit history (1)

on the locked-door issue.

Some contend that attempted hijackings have dropped off since 9/11 as a result, and that lives have been saved.

Others say it was a well-meaning mistake, with unintended consequences--a disaster waiting to happen.

FYI: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/558654-airbus-a320-crashed-southern-france.html

[kcr]

81. Opinion is divided on a forum? Unheard of!

If the pilot had been able to get back in the cockpit, he may have been able to save that flight, whatever the opinions of various people on a forum are.

[Surya Gayatri]

82. Yeah, who knew? A divergence of views! LOL!

Once he realized what was going on, he tried his damndest right up to impact.

Whether he could have pulled it out in the last seconds is a question for the professionals.

[kcr]

93. No way to know for certain what would have happened since it already happened

But my point is policies and rules set based on reassuring fears isn't the way to go, but too often that's how things are handled. I know that part of what makes these events so horrible is it pushes those buttons that make us want to regain sense of control. If only we could do X than it would prevent horrible Y from happening. It's hard to face the reality that sometimes horrible things can happen no matter what we do. But it's also reality that these types of events that can't really be controlled for are incredibly rare.

[Surya Gayatri]

94. Yes, this issue is at the crux of 'open and free' societies...

personal liberty vs. the greater public good.

Often that 'good' involves the 'perception' of safety, and not necessarily measurable parameters.

The public requires some guarantees, not watertight, but as far reaching as humanly possible, that the people to whom they entrust the lives of themselves and their loved-ones are physically viable and mentally stable.

Should those less-than-perfect guarantees include mandatory monitoring and reporting in 'sensitive' industries? That is the debate raging right now in airline boardrooms, legislatures and think tanks.

[kcr]

95. I'm not arguing from a personal liberty POV

I don't think matters of personal liberty are absolute and out weight matters of public safety every time. My argument isn't coming from a personal liberty POV per se. My point is the public already has a measure of guarantee already built in. It is the fact that this is incredibly rare. There is no way for anyone to guarantee that this won't happen. In fact, yours and others' suggestions don't actually guarantee anything either, really. They only serve to make life harder for a lot of people who were never going to commit mass murder anyway, and those who are inclined to do so will find a way, so it doesn't decrease the incredibly slim odds for anyone for becoming a victim.

[Surya Gayatri]

96. True that 'if they really want to kill you, they will'...

as any anti-terrorism expert will attest.

But, the 'perception' of competence and stability--the 'feeling' of being safe in someone's hands--is of utmost importance, especially in the airline industry. Airlines that are perceived as lacking in these areas do not get bums in seats.

Just look at Luthansa's vain attempts to regain public confidence in the aftermath. (Not to mention their tumbling stock price...)

[kcr]

97. I'm sure it is important to the airline industry and their bottom line

But I don't care. That's not a reason to make life miserable for people for no good reason.

[Surya Gayatri]

98. Rather shortsighted POV, if I may say so. If nobody will

dare to buy tickets or get on planes out of safety concerns, the airlines will have to close up shop.

In my personal case at least, that would not be the desired outcome. I'd be left high and dry here in Europe with no way back to the States, unless they recommissioned the Queen Mary.

[kcr]

99. It wouldn't be the desired outcome. Which is why I don't think everyone will just stop flying.

People need to travel. They'll feel uneasy about it for awhile after the media milks these tragedies for the ratings, but life returns to normal, especially after days, weeks, months go by and another plane hasn't fallen out of the sky.

[Surya Gayatri]

100. There are serveral anxious flyers just in my immediate entourage. After such a catastrophe,

they avoid flying whenever possible.

They'll jump through any hoops to stay off a plane, and certainly eliminate all discretionary flying.

Not good for the industry's long-term viability.

[kcr]

101. Flying produces a lot of anxiety in some people and always has.

Nothing new and somehow the industry manages. As it has even though flying has become much more unpleasant with all the security since 9/11. I used to love to fly before then. Now it is a massive PITA. If anything induces people to fly less it is the security that makes flying such a hassle.

[Surya Gayatri]

103. True, back in the day, flying used to be a fairly pleasant experience...

That was also back when a majority of pilots were recruited from military ranks, where they had already been thoroughly vetted and the seriously mentally-unfit weeded out.

Now, any wide-eyed kid with his parent's bank account behind him/her, can pursue the dream, however unsuited they may be.

Lubitz being the most egregious recent example of the phenomenon.

The pros have some interesting perspectives on this if you care to peruse their blog.

[uppityperson]

36. We are at our worst when we judge and demonize based on fears

I argue that there should be well reasoned reaction to this tragedy, not emotion based over reactions like happened after 9/11.

Being out of control is difficult (passenger on a metal tube thousands of feet in the air), dying at the hands of a mass murderer in an incident like this is awful.

But to claim that people who have or have had mental health issues, which is most of the population, should lose their medical privacy because of this act of this man is wrong.

You claim "there are still many on this forum who would contend that this guy had a complete right to medical privacy and that his mental health should not be highlighted". I would love to see what you mean as I have not read that. I have read what I wrote above in various other forms. It seems disingenuous to me to see such claims made.

[Surya Gayatri]

38. Certainly do not wish to appear to be 'disingenuous', UP...

My remarks are in connection with this thread and a couple of others):
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141050533

In response to my contention that people in 'safety sensitive' professions must be willing to forego their right to medical privacy, I was accused of:

1) Equating mental illness with violence;

2) Implying that all mental health sufferers are
potential murderers.

Here's what I wote about medical privacy in one of those threads:

'Where high-speed, instantaneous decisions are called for, the need (for mandatory disclosure) is greater. The higher the speed, the more people's lives directly at risk, the greater the need.

That said, yes, commercial trucking companies, high-risk public works concerns, etc. should be able to access the psych and physical health status of their employees.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141050533

Nowhere have I argued in favor of universal mandatory health disclosure or suppression of health privacy.

[uppityperson]

43. Did you see the latest on his vision problems?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026428443

[Surya Gayatri]

47. Yes, his vision problems and probable consultations were mentioned in the BBC article...

There seems to be some question as to whether his vision problems caused his 'severe psychosomatic disease' or vice versa.

[KMOD]

55. sleep aids cause vision problems

his psychosomatic disease may have been a sleeping disorder.

[Surya Gayatri]

56. Did not know that...thanks.

[arely staircase]

39. what about bus drivers? teachers?

Lots of people are put in positions of great trust. Making everyone who has the ability to do harm turn over their medical records would be crazy. Or, like I said, bus drivers should surely be subjected to the same.

[Surya Gayatri]

48. Definitely, anyone operating potentially deadly machinery

where lots of other humans are on-board or in the vicinity should be willing to have their medical privacy rights waived.

Give us the info or you don't get the job.

Teachers (even those predisposed to pedophilia) are not in a position to maim or kill hundreds.

Nobody is arguing for universal mandatory health record reporting. Get real...

Just keep the crazies out of the cockpit and driver's cab, and off that 20-storey high crane, in as far as humanly possible.

[arely staircase]

49. ok

Sounds reasonable, I guess.

[cwydro]

40. I had a feeling that

he had a twisted sick reason for taking all those innocents with him.

[Surya Gayatri]

42. So did I, the moment they said his breathing in the cockpit

was slow and even. He'd made his decision that if he was going down, it would be in a blaze of self-deluded 'glory'.

[cwydro]

41. I see that you're taking flak in this thread

for supposedly talking about this incident too much.

If I remember, you live in France, where I imagine it is even a larger story than here.

I appreciate you posting updates, and I hope you don't let others intimidate you into not doing so.

I always love it when DUers tell other DUers what they should or shouldn't post.

[Surya Gayatri]

44. Thank you for understanding...it's at the top of every

news cycle here--print and electronic.

I wake up to it on BBC World in the morning and go to sleep with it on France 24 TV in the evening.

Everybody's talking about nothing else in the streets and shops--IT'S A BIG DEAL HERE!

[cwydro]

46. It's all over CNN here non-stop.

I like hearing news from Europe because I think they are reporting more information.

Have you heard that he had some sort of vision problem? I just saw that on the scroll.

[Surya Gayatri]

51. Yes, he'd been consulting doctors about it, apparently...

Still very unclear whether the vision problems triggered his 'serious psycho-somatic disease' or vice versa.

All will be revealed, but those poor 149 souls are still just as dead.

[malaise]

50. There are some good reports on Der Spiegel

and it is a big deal.

[Surya Gayatri]

57. It's frontpage news in every European media outlet, serious and otherwise...

Frontpage, above the fold and top of the news hour.

[Eleanors38]

45. Mass murder is part of the E! entertainment culture...

The demand for celebrity has outstripped MSM, and social media works to atomize notoriety; what's a sociopath to do?

[Surya Gayatri]

52. Well said...LOL! What's a sociopath to do!

He'll get his 15 minutes of fame alright, just from beyond the pale.

[frylock]

58. feel free to post your protected health information here when you get a chance

[Surya Gayatri]

59. How silly...why would I do that on an open forum?

I would, however, readily provide said info if required by a prospective employer and in order to get clearance for a "safety-sensitive" job.

FWIW, I have openly spoken here on DU (in general terms) of my personal struggles with mental health issues.

[mopinko]

63. just because you are THEORETICALLY willing to hand over your private life

to get/keep a job doesnt mean that everybody should. or even that YOU would. since you arent in the position of having to make that choice, you can only guess what you would do.

maybe you feel you have nothing to hide. bully for you.
suppose your therapist's files held something like childhood sexual abuse, rape, abortion, or an eating disorder or ocd. do those things make someone likely to commit mass murder?

the person who fell down here was the therapist. they neglected their duty to report someone that they probably should have known was dangerous. that is a decision for a professional to make. one case at a time.
turning everyone's records over to people who have no way to evaluate the future through those tea leaves is just plain stupid.

please get off it. you are insulting a whole lot of people here. you are yanking a lot of chains. there are lots of people here who count on the confidentiality of those records. they are entitled to their privacy. ENTITLED.
and for good reason. therapy is useless without the protection of privacy.
the world you are dreaming of is not going to be nice and spotless. it is going to full of people who should be getting meaningful therapy, but arent. because they cannot trust their therapist, and the privacy of therapy.

you are not thinking it through.

now, try to find a sturdier soapbox if you must run off at the mouth.

[Surya Gayatri]

65. An entire safety-sensitive industry cannot be monitored on a case by case basis, relying

solely on the good offices and good will of somebody's shrink.

Have you not grasped yet that the therapist or MD in this case didn't report because THEY WERE NOT MANDATED BY LAW OR INTERNAL REGULATIONS TO DO SO?

Germany's stringent privacy laws actually prevented them from doing so.

Mandatory monitoring and reporting must become the norm in all safety-sensitive industries, IMO. And you won't change my mind, however egregious your insults.

Wow, who's running off at the mouth? I wonder...

[mopinko]

68. and no matter how many members here tell you that you are being

insensitive, and that you are wrong, you wont change your mind.

so, maybe it is time you listened enough to just drop it.
this is not idle conversation. this is real people with real lives and real reasons that their privacy should be respected. real members here.

how about this, we just make mental health care more available, and more effective, and just leave everyone's private life private.
there is much that could be done to make mental health care more effective. it is starting to happen with brain researchers and neurologists who are tearing down the wall that has separated them for too long.
and there actually are quite a few treatable roots of "mental illness", but they are rarely explored. like sleep problems.
for all we know this guys problem was actually a brain tumor that was affecting his "mental" wherever that may be in the anatomy. there have been a couple shooters who had this problem. neuro-pyche testing should be the norm for people this distressed.

then what is next? all diabetics have to report themselves, because they might blank out at the wheel of the bus? how about epileptics? (they are required to prove themselves seizure from for many things already. but my daughter was just fired when her boss found out that she has it. she was endangering exactly no one.) how about menstruating women? how much pms can you have until you start making mistakes?

you dont seem to have much of a clue as the the volume of this can of worms you insist must be opened.
perhaps you should try listening.

[Surya Gayatri]

69. Once again, I repeat my contention that mandatory

mental health monitoring and reporting should be the norm in safety-sensitive industries.

And yes, if you work in one of said industries, this mandate would concern you. It would equally concern anyone else on this board who has a job of a safety-sensitive nature.

Parse it as you will, that's my position.
No sense twisting my arm--it won't budge.

FWIW, you and a couple of others are the only ones refusing categorically to consider the greater good of the public over an individual's right to privacy.

You are the brave few who have been vociferously revealing your individual-centered mindset.

Good evening, it's bedtime in France.

Over and out.

[cwydro]

85. Posters are allowed to have differing opinions.

So if one poster is told by many that their opinion is "wrong," the poster must immediately revise his/her opinion?

Groupthink, coming to a forum near you.

Goodness.

[Surya Gayatri]

87. Hey, cwydro, thanks for getting my back.

Last edited Sun Mar 29, 2015, 11:54 AM - Edit history (1)

Have been feeling a bit under 'thought' police' siege.

[cwydro]

88. I hate when DUers try to tell others

what to feel and what to post.

Annoys the crap out of me. This is a DISCUSSION board, but some seem to think everyone should have the same opinions.

Ridiculous.

[Surya Gayatri]

89. Couldn't agree more...reveals a disturbing authoritarian bent, IMHO...

[cwydro]

91. True dat.

[moondust]

60. '...in infamy.' n/t

[Initech]

66. Shit just got real.

[Surya Gayatri]

67. Yeah, Lufthansa's legal crew is burning the midnight oil

to find a way out of this without having to put 'Germanwings' into receivership.

[Initech]

70. I can imagine.

Especially after reading everything that we know about this crash so far, it's not just a mere crash, it's murder.

[Surya Gayatri]

73. Pure and simple...

[ann---]

77. Why didn't she say something to

the Airline or at least to one of his colleagues so that s/he could warn
the Airline that he was not fit to fly a plane.

[Surya Gayatri]

90. Very personal issue...maybe she was just so glad

to be out of a bad relationship that she didn't want to think about him anymore.

She also works for Lufthansa and might not have wanted to mix her personal life with her professional duties.

Or, maybe she didn't want to have to get involved in any internal investigation for fear of retribution from him?

Chose one...

[ann---]

109. Her mistake

[valerief]

102. He had the makings of a successful CEO. A true sociopath. nt

[Surya Gayatri]

104. Sadly, yes, he missed his calling. Tragically bad career orientation...

[MADem]

105. There is no "right to mental health privacy" once a person is dead, and especially after they've

killed a hundred and fifty odd people. His mental health is part/parcel of the forensic analysis of the crash.

It doesn't matter what "people on this forum" might say. They aren't part of the crash scene investigation team.

And this guy's issues were a bit more than "delusions of grandeur." Ted Cruz has those. This guy was full-blown psychotic. And likely poorly or un-medicated.

Had this young man not killed all those people, no one would know diddly-shit about his health issues. But he did kill those people, and that's the only reason why we know. I suppose the lesson here is "If you don't want every aspect of your life examined, from your personal connections to your drug/alcohol use to your medical issues, don't commit mass murder, and no one will ever know a thing about you unless you volunteer it."

[Surya Gayatri]

106. No 'right to mental health privacy' indeed. It's becoming

tragically evident that Lufthansa's so-called
'voluntary honor-bound health reporting' can easily be circumvented and subverted.

One can only suppose that all other such 'voluntary' systems are just as easy to sabotage.

Which begs the question of 'mandatory health monitoring and reporting' in such safety-sensitive industries, IMHO.

That 'firewall' or 'garde-fou' as the French call it, seems a must in an increasingly complicated world, where the skies are ever more congested, and the planes ever more complex.

[MADem]

107. I suspect that this "accident" (and I put it in quotes for a reason--as it was a mass murder) will

accelerate the day when pilots are deemed superflous to safe and efficient flight operations. In our lifetimes, I would guess that we'll see aircraft controlled by remote drone operators at a centralized facility, with a pilot/copilot on the flight deck "just in case."

[Surya Gayatri]

108. Lots of discussion about just this professional threat

on pro pilot blogs.

With increasing complexity in the public transport, public works, trucking industries, etc. the risk of human error or criminal activity is just too great.

[MADem]

111. Once we get past a bit of a bumpy period--and they'll probably roll it out with cargo aircraft, to

start, and work out the bugs that way--I expect that will be the paradigm. The training for the pilots on the flight deck would have to consist of a lot of time in simulators, going over every emergency possible, over and over and over again.

Next, they need to figure out a way to put a damn parachute on the tops of planes, that don't make the whole weight/fuel ratio un-economical. If the shit hits the fan, the parachute deploys~! They have these for small planes but they take up a lot of room and weigh too much, apparently.

There will come a day when it's a difficult proposition to die in a plane crash. Can't happen soon enough, IMO!

[Surya Gayatri]

112. Parachutes for planes? Who knew...I'd certainly never

considered that scenario!

Really, small planes can already be equipped with them?

Wonders never cease...

And, 'amen' that it can't come too soon.

[MADem]

113. Yeah, they exist--and one manufacturer says they 'might' have saved the Germanwings pax.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2015/03/28/time-for-jetliners-equipped-with-airframe-parachutes/

Airframe Parachutes Might Have Prevented The Germanwings Crash

The founder of an aerospace company dedicated to manufacturing airframe parachutes for general aviation and legacy aircraft says that eventually such technology could even guard against sabotage — virtually preventing catastrophes like this week’s Germanwings A320 crash.

Even though IATA, the global trade association for the airline industry, reassured a jittery flying public that air remains the safest way to travel, perhaps it’s time to take a hard look at airframe parachutes for commercial aircraft. That is, not for passengers buckled into the fuselage, but the aircraft itself.

“The sky is going to get more and more crowded and there are going to be even more and more accidents,” Boris Popov, Founder and CEO of Minneapolis-based BRS Aerospace, told Forbes. At some point, he says, major airframe manufacturers will be forced to include them as standard operating equipment to mitigate situations including: pilot incapacitation; mid-air collisions; mechanical failure; bird strikes; structural failure; pilot error; and even sabotage.

Since 1993, Popov’s company has been providing general aviation and a few aircraft legacy manufacturers with options for airframe parachutes. BRS notes that FAA-certified tests have shown that full parachute inflation could occur at altitudes as low as 260 feet and, thus far, notes that aircraft using his system have saved well over three hundred lives.....

A recent BRS airframe parachute deployment during an airshow in Argentina. The pilot walked away unhurt. Credit: BRS Aerospace

I think it's something they need to move towards, I've felt this way for some time--maybe this will be the impetus to get cracking.

[Surya Gayatri]

114. Hey, thanks for bringing this! Astonishing...

This solution might be qualified as the definitive 'garde-fou' or 'crazy firewall'...

[MADem]

115. That's what I've always thought, myself.

You will hear from fuddy-duddies who will claim that the weight/space (storage) issues "can't" be overcome, but I say horseshit to that kind of naysaying. There was a time when auto manufacturers didn't want to install seat belts or air bags because of cost issues, but they got over that pretty quick.

I really think it's time to revisit this technology for more than the wealthy private pilots -- it needs to come into the commercial aviation venues. It will give a huge boost to the industry, certainly.

Check out these videos of the assembly deploying on private a/c:

[Surya Gayatri]

116. Thanks...I'd never thought of this in my wildest imagination!

[Surya Gayatri]

110. This from the continuous coverage in the German press...

http://www.dw.de/leading-german-figures-urge-media-restraint-on-alps-plane-crash/a-18347927

German state prosecutors and police spokespeople have said there will be no official statements on the case before Monday, and a chief French investigator, General Jean-Pierre Michel, told French media on Saturday that other hypotheses on the cause of the crash must also be examined.

"[We] have no right today to rule out other hypotheses, including mechanical hypotheses, as long as we haven't proved that the plane had no (mechanical) problem," he said.