Massachusetts Considers Mandatory Counseling For Troops

All Headline News ^ | August 16, 2005 | Douglas Maher

[johnny7]

Boston, Massachusetts (AHN) - The Massachusetts state legislature is considering mandatory mental health counseling for National Guardsmen returning from Iraq.

Currently, the uniform regulation for mental health screenings apply only for career military members and is usually done by questionaire. The state wants to screen the Guardsmen for Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome, a mental health disorder that commonly affects people who have been subject to life altering events. Symptoms include nightmares, flashbacks, depression and estrangement.

[Gunrunner2]

>>>> Adolf Hitler is a classic example of a PTSD sufferer who projected his fears to politics. <<

And meant to ask. . .you know this. . .how?

I mean. . .come on. . .PTSD MADE Hitler into the monster he was. . .and all the while I thought it was because he had a small willy and was making up for it by trying to be the big "man" of the world.

Silly me. . .it was PTSD all the time.

[ukman]

>Here’s a clue. . .Rambo was a MOVIE, fiction. LOL. . .can’t tell the difference, can you? <

Sure it's fiction, but sometimes fiction is based on fact.

>It is not new and you make my point. It has been recognized and dealt with, sometimes well, sometimes not, but in all cases we recognize the symptoms and are prepared to deal with it when it is REQURIED. Oh, and we in the US did not shoot anyone for battle fatigue (didn’t the British Army do that to some poor sap in WWI?).<

MANY poor saps.

>Civil War veterans were out to make a life for themselves, many moved west and settled this country. . .a risky and dangerous effort. They were honest, hardworking, innovative, brave and certainly not adverse to standing up to tyranny. Anytime you see some western movie where some bad guy has the town scared, think again; likely the banker and shopkeeper and the average citizen were veterans of the Civil War, as well as Indian wars, and would not stand for such nonsense.<

Here’s a clue. . .westerns are MOVIEs, fiction. LOL. . Can’t tell the difference, can you? :-)

I see you don't believe in PTSD affecting Americans. Fair enough, there's no problem then. Whether Vietnam vets are scroungers or not or whether they are combat vets... well that's not for me to say.

Re. Adolf and Germans. No inconsistency: PTSD affects different people different ways. It makes some aggressive, some timid, some a strange mixture of the two. I don't see any contradiction. I didn't say PTSD made Hitler what he was. But WW1 certainly affected him deeply. Ultimately he got over it too. As regards ex-Wehrmacht men being an aberration, I bow to your superior knowledge of this country.

I can't be bothered to look up about Falklands vets: I just recall reading articles years back about problems with them. A Google search could turn up something, I suppose.

As regards looking after your own returnees; if you're sure there's no problem, who am I to gainsay you? You live in the USA, not me.

>Get a grip, get a life and grow up. Men are men and we have enough support groups/organizations/counselors/hand-holding stick-boys to go around.<

Pleased to hear it.

>And now we have you.<

No you don't. I was just offering a few thoughts on the matter to perhaps provoke an intelligent debate, rather than just get insulted. Like I said, I'm British, interested in all sorts of things, but not an expert. And yet again, it's not really my concern...

Tell you what, just ignore my post if you don't like it. Have a nice day!

[ukman]

> he had a small willy and was making up for it by trying to be the big "man" of the world.<

Wow, I never knew that.

[Modernman]

I don't think mandatory treatment would pass Constitutional muster.

Why not? These are National Guardsmen. The rules are different for soldiers than they are for regular civilians. You can make soldiers take tests and submit to treatment.

[Modernman]

So, you see nothing wrong with compelling ALL warriors that come home to sit down for a Oprah gab-fest with some stick-boy and discuss "feelings"?

PTSD is much more common in people who have been in highly stressful situations. Combat. Natural disasters. Things like that.

We used to ignore PTSD and pretend like it didn't exist or that it was a sign of cowardice. We know better now.

Maintaining the stigma will only serve to keep veterans with PTSD suffering. I don't really see why you would be opposed to getting help for National Guardsmen who need it.

I guess all those millions, yes millions, of men from WWI and WWII became mass murdering thugs. . .and not the men that built this great nation. . .

No. But many of them suffered from PTSD for the rest of their lives because it was considered "wussy" to seek help for mental problems back then.

[bvw]

Maybe. Two things against that argument, maybe more. (1) The National Guard is under Federal Control, or Command Authority. Such mustering-out treatments would surely fall under the umbrella of Federal authority. (2) ALL citizens are subject to call-up as part of the militia. Used to be just men -- now its unisex. Therefore the 14th extends all Liberties of person to the Mass. Gaurd.

[Modernman]

The attitude regarding PTSD is part of the bigger picture of many peoples' views on mental illness in general.

A lot of ignorant people still look at mental illness as something shameful or to be covered up and ignored. People used to think of cancer the same way a couple of generations ago.

If we were talking about physically wounded soldiers going through physical therapy, nobody here would be complaining. However, since this is a mental wound, people revert to old prejudices.

It's kind of sad, actually. Some people would rather that National Guardsmen continue to suffer from PTSD if that means that they can brush the problem under the table.

[Modernman]

(1) The National Guard is under Federal Control, or Command Authority.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the periods that the NG is not federalized, isn't it under the control of the respective State Governor?

(2) ALL citizens are subject to call-up as part of the militia.

The National Guard is slightly different than the militia mentioned in the 2nd Amendment. Liberals actually claim that only the NG is part of the militia, not the regular citizenry.

In any event, I'm not sure how the Constituion would prevent mandatory mental-health screenings of returning National Guardsmen.

[bvw]

(1) The "therapy" is in these days more likely to mean or include heavy doses of (a) political indoctrination and (b) psycho-active drugs such as Prozac, etc.

(2) The therapy appears to be mandatory. Is any therapy for a physical wound is "mandatory", anymore? Can a enlisted man or officer be ordered -- for example -- to have their leg cut off, or forced to have a skin-graft or some experimental therapy?

[joebuck]

If I was a returning vet, I'd want to see if I had any symptoms before I took a risk of getting a PTSD label permanently attached to my jacket. And I would want it done by a private health care provider under a strict pledge of confidentiality. It would be awfull hard to get a decent job if info like that got out and people started considering you a "wack-job vet" likely to go postal at any moment.

[Modernman]

(1) The "therapy" is in these days more likely to mean or include heavy doses of (a) political indoctrination and (b) psycho-active drugs such as Prozac, etc.

For the majority of returning NG, the screening will involve spending less than an hour with a shrink answering some basic questions (Do you have nightmares? Depression? Mood swings?). Many of the people who have PTSD don't even know what it is until it is diagnosed. They just know that there is something wrong with them. If they do, in fact, have PTSD a regime of drugs and/or therapy is appropriate.

(2) The therapy appears to be mandatory. Is any therapy for a physical wound is "mandatory", anymore? Can a enlisted man or officer be ordered -- for example -- to have their leg cut off, or forced to have a skin-graft or some experimental therapy?

You can be ordered to take certain medications while in the military. You can be ordered to submit to physical therapy after a wound, as well as life-saving procedures.

At the start of this latest war in Iraq, there were some soldiers who refused to get Anthrax innoculations. Courts ruled that they had no right to refuse.

[Ranger]

Yup some one threw a juice bottle and then he shot hitting a passing high schooler

[Gunrunner2]

ME: Here’s a clue. . .Rambo was a MOVIE, fiction. LOL. . .can’t tell the difference, can you?

You: Sure it's fiction, but sometimes fiction is based on fact. >>

Back at ya: You are alleging Rambo is based on FACT. . .LOL. . . .BWAHAHAHAH


ME: Civil War veterans were out to make a life for themselves, many moved west and settled this country. . .a risky and dangerous effort. They were honest, hardworking, innovative, brave and certainly not averse to standing up to tyranny. Anytime you see some western movie where some bad guy has the town scared, think again; likely the banker and shopkeeper and the average citizen were veterans of the Civil War, as well as Indian wars, and would not stand for such nonsense.<

YOU: Here’s a clue. . .westerns are MOVIEs, fiction. LOL. . Can’t tell the difference, can you? :-)

Back at ya: Back up bubba, you do not know American history, you do not know what you think you know when it comes to the American West and the people that built this nation. Strong, brave, independent and self-reliant. . .they had to be in order to survive. I said Western movies are wrong in their depiction of townies. Historical fact.

YOU: I see you don't believe in PTSD affecting Americans. Fair enough, there's no problem then.

Back at ya: Never said that. Never.

YOU: Whether Vietnam vets are scroungers or not or whether they are combat vets... well that's not for me to say.

Back at ya: Oh come on. . .again being disingenuous. . .other regular UK posters would be embarrassed to read your posts because they are illogical, inane, silly and downright weird. . .allege something then quickly follow up with some silly qualifier.

YOU: Re. Adolf and Germans. No inconsistency: PTSD affects different people different ways. It makes some aggressive, some timid, some a strange mixture of the two. I don't see any contradiction.<<

Back at ya: You allegation in the post clearly said one thing and them immediately said another, and now you are backtracking because you are wrong and you know it.

YOU: I didn't say PTSD made Hitler what he was.

Back at ya: Yes you clearly and unequivocally did say it (Post 37; “Adolf Hitler is a classic example of a PTSD sufferer who projected his fears to politics.”).

YOU: Ultimately he got over it too.

Back at ya: Really. . .when ? After he was dead?

YOU: As regards ex-Wehrmacht men being an aberration, I bow to your superior knowledge of this country.

Back at ya: You better.

YOU: I can't be bothered to look up about Falklands vets: I just recall reading articles years back about problems with them. A Google search could turn up something, I suppose.

ME: On FR if you make declarative statements like you did ref Falklands war, you better back it up with something better than “I think I heard something once.”

YOU: As regards looking after your own returnees; if you're sure there's no problem, who am I to gainsay you?

Back at ya: You are deliberately being silly and trying to be provocative for whatever inane reason. Never said SOME didn’t suffer, was objecting to ALL being presumed to suffer from some malady related to combat or service in a combat theater.

YOU: You live in the USA, not me.

Back at ya: Thank God for that. I like the UK, and lecture in university there all the time, but let me tell ya, your level or argument/discourse/discussion doesn’t measure up to most of the students I encountered, and even to the level of the average Brit I met, from the Shetlands to Lands End.

YOU: I was just offering a few thoughts on the matter to perhaps provoke an intelligent debate, rather than just get insulted.

Back at ya: No. You were far from innocent in that regard. Browse the postings from other Brit members, like Mad Ivan. Excellent poster and an intelligent debater.

YOU: Tell you what, just ignore my post if you don't like it. Have a nice day!

Back at ya: I think you may not long survive here on FR. You bias is certainly not conservative and this is a conservative forum.

[Gunrunner2]

>>I don't really see why you would be opposed to getting help for National Guardsmen who need it. <<

And here is the crux of your post.

Find where I ever said I object to guys seeking treatment or for those identified as needing treatment.

You can't.

Period.

I object to the aim of presuming all warriors are PTSD and all must be subject to some analysis prior to being "cleared."

Agenda at work here?

Most likely.

I predict if this forced analysis is implemented then all of a sudden we shall find a virtual epidemic of PTSD.

In response the shrinks (read; liberals) will be hollering for more money and how the war is wrong. Just a prediction, mind you, as we will likely never know as this program probably never will be implemented.

[ukman]

A lot of points to answer, but quite frankly I can't be bothered and I don't really have time. To judge by your vehemence, I seem to have got your back up.
You certainly make some interesting (and incorrect) assumptions about me.
I'm intrigued that you lecture in the UK at universities. What in? I'm also gratified that you approve of the results of our nanny-state leftist-biased educational system.
Mad Ivan sounds like a reasonable kind of chap, although the forum name is often misleading. I mean, are you really a gunrunner? Not to UK universtities surely?
Whatever, I'm aware that this is a conservative foreign forum, so I try to be polite as a guest. Whether I last long is a different matter. I mean, there are more important things to do in life. My cue to start work. Bye!

[ukman]

On second thoughts, the working day over, I will reply.

I think your reading comprehension is at fault here. When I say "Rambo" is based on fact, what I meant was that it's not entirely unknown for disturbed veterans to cause trouble.

I misread your paragraph about Civil War veterans in my haste. I agree with you that western movies are largely myths. I think Coffeyville and Northfield bear out your views. Whether the settlers were all like Shane, or more like William Munny and Little Bill I'd venture to doubt...

I know a little about American history, far more than the average European, but obviously I wouldn't argue the toss with a real expert.

PTSD not affecting Americans: you're right, you didn't say that. You just implied it wasn't a problem that really needed addressing by professionals.

I did NOT say Hitler was what he was due to PTSD. I suspect he may have suffered it (like many others) in the early 20s, but later on found his "higher" calling in the NSDAP. Given his WW1 war record, it would be very surprising if he wasn't mentally disturbed - or rather, even more so than he was in 1914. Like I said, he was affected by the war. So what? American veterans of WW2 were also affected by the war; they still have reunions today. That doesn't mean they had PTSD. My dad never had any bother either.

"Alleging something and then following it immediately by a qualifier." Oh dear, I must be turning into a politician.

Are you familiar with Germany and its society and history? When I said "this country", I didn't mean the USA. I'd suggest I might know rather a lot more about Germany than you do: I've lived here since the 70s.

>"In FR if you make declarative statements like you did ref Falklands war, you better back it up with something better than “I think I heard something once<

Good lord, you don't expect me to dig out a source for everything I've ever read in the past 30-odd years. And you haven't backed up any of your statements either, nor did I expect it. For example, your write: "Western movies are wrong in their depiction of townies. Historical fact." It's a good ploy, to write "historical fact" after every statement. I might start doing that myself. Let's see. "The Americans would have lost their Independence War without the French. Historical fact."

Hey, it works! :-)

Where in the UK do you lecture, and in what subject? Do you know Yorkshire and the Midlands well?

Conservative bias. Do I have to be biased here? I prefer to be open-minded, myself, but that's just me.

Bye for now, thanks for your time.

[Gunrunner2]

Security Assistance = Foreign Military Sales = "Gunrunning" (Yes, that's what I do but the media and Hollywood have no clue about the business).

Spent 1.5-yrs living in Lincolnshire (Sleaford). Lived 2-yrs in Cambridgshire (Huntington). Lived 2-yrs East Anglia (Ipswitch). London for nearly a year (Stanmore).

Lecture on US national security policy, strategic campaign planning, theory and rules of war (Just War), things like that. given these lectures at Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol, Manchester University, University of London (War Studies), University of Wales. Still lecture on regular occasion when I have time during my monthly trips to the UK.

Implied and stated it is wrong to assume all warriors suffer PSTD unless proved otherwise is wrong.

Hitler thing. . .seems pretty clear to me what you meant, but if you say so otherwise, fine.

Open mind: This is a conservative forum for conservative use, to debate conservative ideas, thoughts and policies.

As the Home Page says; "Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America."

If you are not a conservative this is not the place for you.

The West: From Texas so am well versed in Texas history and the West in general. Most all western men (and women) were honest and true, selfless good neighbors, independent with little tolerance for those that did not carry their own weight or engaged in lawless behavior. Revisionist history is a lie.

Bye now.

[Gunrunner2]

"Implied and stated it is wrong to assume all warriors suffer PSTD unless proved otherwise is wrong" should be "Implied and stated it is wrong to assume all warriors suffer PSTD unless proved otherwise"

But you knew what I meant.