Why Pilots Hide Depression: The Cost of FAA Mental-Health Rules
Wednesday, December 3, 2025. This is for Brad and the Sky Pilot.
Before you ever get to the Utah mountains where Brian Wittke died, you have to understand a quieter geography: the map of his nervous system.
He was a commercial airline pilot, a father of three, and by all accounts a conscientious professional.
He also lived inside an industry where admitting to depression feels, for many pilots, like handing over your wings.
According to his mother, he worried that seeking treatment would cost him his license and his livelihood, a fear echoed by dozens of pilots interviewed in recent reporting on aviation and mental health.
On June 14, 2022, he disappeared.
His mother texted and watched his location data vanish, then reappear—too late. By the time his phone told the truth about where he was, he had died by suicide in the Utah mountains.
A trauma-informed lens does not ask, “Why did he do this?” as if it were an isolated, inscrutable decision. It asks:
What chronic pressures was he carrying?
What did his body and brain have to absorb to keep flying?
And what did the system do—or fail to do—with that load?
Because trauma isn’t just what happens to you. It’s also what happens inside you when you are trapped between competing threats: lose your career or lose your mind.
Pilots are not just stressed.
They occupy a textbook high-risk environment for cumulative trauma, moral injury, and chronic hyperarousal. But the way aviation handles mental health often adds trauma instead of relieving it.
Let’s unpack that.
Trauma, By the Book: What We’re Really Talking About
In trauma-informed work, we typically distinguish:
Acute Trauma: a single event that overwhelms coping.
Chronic or Complex Trauma: repeated or enduring stressors that keep the nervous system in survival mode.
Moral Injury: psychological and spiritual distress when you are forced to act against your values or feel betrayed by the institutions that should protect you.
A pilot in 2025 can face all three.
Research on high-stakes occupations shows that repeated exposure to life-and-death responsibility, combined with limited control over systemic constraints, is highly correlated with moral injury, depression, anxiety, and elevated suicide risk.
Aviation is a high-reliability system that treats human beings as if they are hardware: inspected, documented, certified. But trauma lives in the software—how the system feels from the inside.
What Flying Does to a Nervous System
You can’t talk about pilot mental health without talking about bodies under chronic strain.
Studies of airline pilots and remotely piloted aircraft operators show elevated rates of sleep disturbance, fatigue, and stress-related symptoms, all of which are tightly associated with depression and anxiety.
An anonymous web-based survey of 1,837 airline pilots found that about 12–13% met criteria for depression, and around 4% reported suicidal thoughts in the prior two weeks—while still actively flying.
That is not a fringe number. That is hundreds of human beings at any given time.
From a trauma perspective, the job description itself is an ongoing stress test:
Chronic circadian disruption.
Hypervigilance to threat and error.
Repeated exposure to near-misses, turbulence, emergencies, and passenger distress.
Responsibility for hundreds of lives while often feeling replaceable in the eyes of the system.
Research on secondary traumatic stress and occupational PTSD in first responders and safety-critical workers shows familiar patterns:
Fatigue, sleep problems, intrusive imagery, irritability, hopelessness, and numbing.
You don’t have to watch a crash to be traumatized by this work. You just have to spend years in a body that is never fully off duty.
When the System Becomes a Source of Trauma
Now take that vulnerable physiology and bolt it to a regulatory structure that says:
“If you tell us anything serious about your mental health, we may take away your license for months or longer. We may require thousands of dollars in specialty evaluations. We may not tell you how long it will take.”
That’s not just “stigma.” That is institutionalized threat.
A national cross-sectional survey of Canadian pilots (n ≈ 1,400) found that 72% had worried about seeking medical care because of the impact on their certificate, and nearly half had actually delayed or avoided care for a symptom.
A larger study of 5,170 pilots in the U.S. and Canada found that more than half reported healthcare-avoidance behaviors due to fear of losing flying status. Financial
That “If you aren’t lying, you aren’t flying” line isn’t just dark humor.
It’s a nervous system rule: tell the truth and you may lose your identity, income, and community.
From a trauma-informed perspective, this is a double bind:
Trauma science tells us that early intervention, stabilization, and ongoing support reduce risk, including suicide risk.
Regulatory practice teaches pilots that early disclosure is dangerous for their livelihoods.
This is how you manufacture chronic, institutional betrayal: ask people to keep everyone safe while signaling that if they seek safety for themselves, they may be punished.
Moral Injury at 30,000 Feet
Moral injury isn’t just for combat veterans and ICU nurses. It fits pilots uncomfortably well.
Moral injury is the lasting distress that emerges when you violate your own values or feel betrayed by trusted authorities, especially in life-and-death contexts. Research links moral injury to higher rates of PTSD, depression, substance use, functional impairment, and suicide risk.
Consider the typical internal narrative of a conscientious pilot:
“I am responsible for hundreds of souls.”
“I am trained to self-monitor and self-report impairing conditions.”
“If I report honestly, I may lose my ability to support my family.”
“If I stay silent and something happens, it is my fault.”
That is moral injury by intentional design.
Now add high-profile incidents like Germanwings Flight 9525, where a co-pilot with severe depression deliberately crashed an Airbus, killing 150 people. European regulators responded with mandatory peer-support programs and tighter oversight of aeromedical examiners.
The intent was safety. The unintended message to many pilots was:
“If you have depression, you are a potential disaster awaiting clearance for departure.”
For pilots already carrying shame and fear, this kind of cultural narrative deepens self-stigma and reinforces the sense that they are dangerous if they seek care.
What do trauma researchers call this?
A perfect environment for internalized blame, secrecy, and isolation—all strong predictors of suicidal ideation.
PTSD, Near Misses, and the Things No One Talks About
Formal PTSD diagnoses appear rarely in aviation-accident databases, but that doesn’t mean pilots are magically protected.
A review of U.S. fatal aviation accidents between 2000 and 2015 identified only a small fraction of pilots with documented PTSD history, but the authors point out that under-recognition and under-reporting are likely, and that more systematic follow-up after aviation-related traumatic events is urgently needed.
Meanwhile, research in analogous high-stakes roles—first responders, military personnel, healthcare workers—shows that exposure to potentially traumatic events and morally injurious situations is common, and that many individuals meet criteria for clinically significant PTSD symptoms even when they remain in their roles.
Pilots:
Watch passengers panic during severe turbulence.
Experience engine failures, aborted takeoffs, smoke in the cabin.
Lose colleagues in crashes.
Endure internal investigations when something goes wrong, often under intense scrutiny.
In a trauma-informed system, each of these would be treated as a potentially traumatic event, with structured follow-up, screening, and support—not just a debrief and a line in an incident report.
Instead, many pilots learn to metabolize these events alone, because any sign that they are affected may be used against them.
“Help” That Hurts: When Treatment Access Is Traumatic
Let’s also be fair. To be clear: the FAA has made some progress. Since 2010, it has allowed pilots to fly under special issuance while taking certain SSRIs, and it has gradually expanded the list of permitted antidepressants and related medications.
But look at the system through a trauma lens:
The use of most psychotropic medications is still considered disqualifying without special issuance. Federal Aviation Administration
Authorization is made case-by-case, with significant documentation and monitoring. Federal Aviation Administration
Major reforms recommended by an FAA mental-health rulemaking committee—including clearer pathways for PTSD and faster, more transparent decisions—are still in various stages of implementation.
Pilots who do step forward can face:
Long delays in recertification.
Costly neuropsychological and psychiatric evaluations not fully covered by insurance.
Income loss while grounded.
The gnawing feeling that every word in their therapist’s notes may be interpreted through a “risk” lens rather than a healing lens.
From a trauma-informed perspective, these are structural retraumatizers.
The process of seeking help reproduces the core feelings trauma survivors already struggle with: loss of control, exposure, powerlessness, and fear of being judged unsafe.
For someone like Wittke—already worried about his family’s financial stability, identity as a pilot, and self-worth—this creates the worst possible context: help exists, but it feels as dangerous as the symptoms.
What Trauma-Informed Aviation Policy Might Actually Look Like
Trauma-informed care, as articulated by SAMHSA and related frameworks, rests on six guiding principles: safety; trustworthiness and transparency; peer support; collaboration and mutuality; empowerment, voice, and choice; and attention to cultural, historical, and gender issues. What if we applied those principles to pilots?
Safety (For Pilots, Not Just Passengers)
Right now, “safety” in aviation is almost entirely framed as passenger safety. Trauma-informed safety asks:
Does the system itself feel physically and psychologically safe for pilots?
That would mean:
Clear, public, time-bound timelines for mental-health related reviews (e.g., 30–45 days, not “sometime in the next year”).
Guaranteed income protections during medically recommended grounding periods, so families are not financially punished for honest disclosure.
Confidential, non-punitive pathways for early consultation and triage, where pilots can ask, “Is what I’m experiencing a problem?” without automatically triggering a certification crisis.
Safety isn’t just “the plane doesn’t crash.” It’s also “I can tell the truth about my distress without losing my livelihood.”
Trustworthiness and Transparency
A trauma-informed system tells people how decisions are made, on what timeline, and with what criteria. Right now, many pilots describe the aeromedical process as opaque and arbitrary, especially around mental health.
A trauma-informed aviation authority would:
Publish clear, accessible guidelines about what diagnoses and medications are acceptable, and under what conditions.
Publicize data on average review times and approval rates.
Provide written rationales for decisions in plain language, not just coded aeromedical jargon.
Transparency lowers the nervous system’s constant suspicion of “What if they’re looking for a reason to end my career?”
Peer Support That’s Embedded, Not Cosmetic
Evidence from European and international programs shows that structured pilot peer-support systems—where trained volunteer pilots provide confidential listening and referral—are effective in identifying distress and promoting help-seeking, especially post-Germanwings.
Trauma-informed peer support would mean:
Programs designed with input from pilots, clinicians, and regulators.
Legal and regulatory protections so participation cannot be used punitively.
Training in recognizing trauma symptoms, moral injury, and suicidal ideation—not just “stress” in general.
Peer support only works when the system doesn’t quietly punish those who use it.
Collaboration and Mutuality
Right now, the relationship between pilots and regulators is often adversarial: “We’re watching you; you might be a risk.” Trauma-informed practice reframes this as shared responsibility:
We are all responsible for safety, including your psychological safety.
In practice, that could mean:
Joint task forces with pilots, unions, clinicians, and regulators to co-design mental-health pathways.
Pilots participating in the development of screening tools and follow-up protocols after critical incidents.
Ongoing evaluation of policies to see whether they are actually reducing risk or simply increasing avoidance.
When pilots feel like partners instead of suspects, their nervous systems settle. They are more honest. The data improves.
Empowerment, Voice, and Choice
Trauma disempowers. Trauma-informed systems try to give power back.
Pilots could be offered:
Options for types of therapy (e.g., trauma-focused CBT, EMDR, somatic approaches) with clinicians who understand aviation culture.
Choice around how to disclose (e.g., anonymous consults that transition into formal processes when necessary).
The ability to appeal or request second opinions in a structured, timely way.
Critically, the message has to change from “We’re letting you fly despite your mental-health history” to “Your willingness to address your mental health makes you a safer pilot.”
Cultural, Historical, and Gender Context
A trauma-informed approach also asks who is being left out.
Historically male, stoic pilot culture continues to stigmatize vulnerability and emotions.
Women and pilots from marginalized backgrounds may face additional scrutiny or stereotyping around competence and emotional stability.
Acknowledging this context means training examiners, supervisors, and peer-support volunteers to recognize how bias intersects with mental-health evaluation and to counteract it, rather than pretending the cockpit exists outside culture.
For Therapists and Families: What This Looks Like in the Room
If you are sitting with a commercial pilot (or a pilot’s spouse) in therapy, a trauma-informed stance looks like this:
You treat the regulatory environment itself as a source of chronic stress and potential trauma, not just background noise.
You recognize moral injury language: “If I tell the truth, I’m dangerous. If I hide it, I’m a fraud.”
You normalize the body’s responses: sleep disruption, hypervigilance, numbing, irritability, and emotional blunting as understandable adaptations to structural conditions. You help partners understand that the pilot’s emotional distance may be an occupational survival strategy, not indifference.
When appropriate and safe, you help pilots plan steps toward support that minimize retraumatization—choosing clinicians familiar with aviation, anticipating documentation issues, and pacing disclosures.
You are not just treating “depression” or “anxiety.”
You are treating a person whose nervous system has been drafted into a safety-critical role while the organization has under-funded their emotional protection.
FAQ: Trauma-Informed Care and Pilots
Isn’t all this just about being “softer” on pilots? What about safety?
Trauma-informed care is not leniency. It is precision engineering for human systems. The data suggest untreated depression, healthcare avoidance, and secrecy are bigger threats to safety than transparent, well-supported treatment.
If very few crashes are linked to mental health, why focus here?
Because aviation has already dramatically reduced mechanical and operational errors. The remaining risks often live in human factors—fatigue, cognitive overload, and untreated psychological distress. Even if mental-health-linked crashes remain rare, the everyday meaningless suffering and silent suicidality among pilots are themselves compelling reasons to act.
Is there evidence that peer support and trauma-informed approaches actually work?
Early evaluations of structured pilot peer-support programs in Europe and elsewhere suggest they increase help-seeking and early problem detection without compromising safety. And in parallel high-risk fields (healthcare, first response, military), trauma-informed policies are associated with reductions in burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and moral injury over time.
Final Thoughts
Brian Wittke’s death is not just a family tragedy or a sad anecdote about one man who could not ask for help. It is a visible crack in a system that demands perfection from pilots while treating their emotional lives as an inconvenience.
From a trauma-informed perspective, the question is not, “Why did this pilot die by suicide?”
The question is, “Why was the system built in a way that made help feel more dangerous than despair?”
Pilots spend their careers managing risk.
They are trained to anticipate failure points, build redundancies, and brief worst-case scenarios.
A trauma-informed aviation culture would treat mental health the same way: as a predictable, manageable part of human functioning—not a shameful exception.
You do not protect passengers by frightening pilots away from care.
You protect passengers by designing a system that understands trauma, respects the nervous system, and treats early intervention as a sign of professionalism, not weakness.
The industry already knows how to build redundant safety systems for machinery.
It is time to build one for the souls flying our commercial airplanes.
Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Brennan, C. J., Magli, R., Knowles, M., & Greenberg, N. (2024). Prevalence of occupational moral injury and post‐traumatic embitterment disorder: A meta‐analysis. BMJ Open, 14(2), e071776. BMJ Open
Greinacher, A., Derezza‐Greeven, C., Herzog, W., & Nikendei, C. (2019). Secondary traumatization in first responders: A systematic review. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 10(1), 1562840. PMC
Jovarauskaite, L., Murphy, D., Karatzias, T., & Shevlin, M. (2022). Associations between moral injury and ICD‐11 posttraumatic stress disorder and complex posttraumatic stress disorder in treatment‐seeking veterans. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 13(1), 2062999. PMC
Melin, M., et al. (2024). Are peer support programs effective in the detection and prevention of mental health issues among pilots? Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 14(1), 3–14. Taylor & Francis Online
Patel, P. K., Hoffman, K. A., & colleagues. (2023). Health care avoidance among Canadian pilots due to fear of medical certificate loss: A national cross‐sectional survey study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 65(9), 739–747. PubMed+1
Pasha, T., & Stokes, P. (2018). Reflecting on the Germanwings disaster: A new era for aviation mental health? BJPsych Bulletin, 42(6), 254–257. PMC
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2014). SAMHSA’s concept of trauma and guidance for a trauma‐informed approach. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. New York State Department of Health
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2024). Trauma‐informed approaches and programs. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. SAMHSA
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. (2024). Mental Health Aviation Rulemaking Committee: Final report. Federal Aviation Administration+1
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. (2024). Pilot mental fitness. Federal Aviation Administration
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. (2024). Pharmaceuticals (therapeutic medications): Antidepressants. Federal Aviation Administration
Vuorio, A., Laukkala, T., & Sajantila, A. (2025). Assessment policy of post‐traumatic stress disorder in pilot fatalities: A review of NTSB data. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 79(4), 217–225. PMC+1
Wu, A. C., Donnelly‐Miceli, A., et al. (2016). Airplane pilot mental health and suicidal thoughts: A cross‐sectional descriptive study via anonymous web‐based survey. Environmental Health, 15, 121.