Isn't alcoholism considered a disease now, not a character flaw? I'm not making excuses for anyone here, but I wonder what prevents lawyers from suing airlines who fire pilots for getting caught showing up drunk (or "sick", whatever).

A person who couldn't demonstrate a pattern could get canned for irresponsibility, while a long term alcoholic might get off due to his "disease". There's no new idea under the sun, of course, so I'm wondering why this isn't considered a valid defense.

Shouldn't those diagnosed with the "disease" of alcoholism get at least a chance at treatment, no matter how they got caught/diagnosed?

The question if employees in general are covered under the ADA (American Disabilities Act) seems to be an object of a fair amount of contentious litigation all across the nation. The AMA calls alcoholism a chronic disease, so whether or not we as pilots think it's a disease is really a moot point.

It would seem that pilots may be required to "self-diagnose" their disease and seek treatment before they get caught. Interesting, because I wasn't aware that pilots were medically trained to do so. Again, not making excuses here, but you begin to see why "getting caught" might not necessarily be a career-ender.

Just speculating, though. Personally, I'm a big believer in the "no drinking on the road" policy.