Inside the FAA’s HIMS Psychiatry: One Deposition Exposes the Problem

June 2024

A recently obtained deposition of Dr. Kevin Miller—a longtime FAA psychiatric consultant—pulls back the curtain on how pilots and air traffic controllers are judged, labeled, and grounded under the FAA’s Human Intervention Motivation Study (HIMS) program.

Under oath, Dr. Miller revealed that he has reviewed approximately 300 cases of airmen over the past decade, helping the FAA decide whether pilots are “fit for duty.” Yet, his own testimony confirmed what many in our community have long suspected:

• He has no aerospace medicine certification and is unfamiliar with international aviation medical standards (ICAO).
• He is not a member of the American Medical Association or the American Psychiatric Association.
• He openly admitted his evaluations are not guided by any consistent published forensic standards, such as the AAPL Guidelines for Psychiatric Examinations.
• He was recruited through personal connections at HIMS training events, not an open, competitive process based on objective qualifications.

This deposition underscores a profound problem: The FAA’s process for determining medical fitness is built on a small circle of consultants who operate without transparent rules, independent oversight, or adherence to universally accepted psychiatric standards.

In his own words, Dr. Miller described his approach as simply applying his “skill set.” He acknowledged he could not explain when a diagnosis is truly final versus tentative, and he could not clearly define what specific medical criteria were used to decide whether a pilot or controller should lose their livelihood.

For pilots and air traffic controllers, the consequences of this system are life-changing. Careers, reputations, and financial stability hang in the balance—often on the subjective judgment of individuals with limited aviation-specific expertise.

This is exactly why Pilots for HIMS Reform exists. We believe:

• Evaluations should follow modern, published, peer-reviewed standards.
• Consultants should be selected through transparent, independent processes, not closed-door networks.
• Airmen deserve clear, objective criteria—not arbitrary opinions that can’t be reproduced or explained.

This deposition is a wake-up call for every member of the aviation community and every policymaker who cares about fairness, transparency, and aviation safety.

If you believe pilots and controllers deserve better, join us today and add your voice to this growing movement.

Together, we can demand a system built on integrity, science, and respect.