Posted on 10/01/2007 7:59:58 AM PDT by SubGeniusX
WASHINGTON — Thousands of U.S. soldiers in Iraq — as many as 10 a day — are being discharged by the military for mental health reasons. But the Pentagon isn't blaming the war. It says the soldiers had "pre-existing" conditions that disqualify them for treatment by the government.
Many soldiers and Marines being discharged on this basis actually suffer from combat-related problems, experts say. But by classifying them as having a condition unrelated to the war, the Defense Department is able to quickly get rid of troops having trouble doing their work while also saving the expense of caring for them.
The result appears to be that many actually suffering from combat-related problems such as post-traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injuries don't get the help they need.
[snip]
The legislation sets a higher bar for the Pentagon to use the personality-disorder discharge, and also mandates a review of the policies by the Government Accountability Office. Bond said it also would "force the Pentagon to stop using this discharge until we can fix the problem."
Bond said he learned of the practice from returning Iraq veterans. He called it an "abuse" of the system and "inexcusable."
"They've kicked out about 22,000 troops who they say have pre-existing personality disorders. I don't believe that," Bond said in an interview Friday. "And when you kick them out, they don't get the assistance they need, they aren't entitled to DOD or Veterans Administration care for those problems."
[snip]
Defense Department records show that 22,500 cases of personality-disorder discharges have been processed over the last six years.
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
either the Military is abandoning these men/women...
or
the pre-screening process, sucks rocks ...
thoughts?
Wouldn’t be the first time that bureacraps stuck a serviceman in the back if this is true. 22K so far?
Smells like budget considerations to me....
This sounds like enemy propaganda.
Do tell. Always easy to smear the administration with stories like this but the way the military treats soldiers and marines today I would believe it’s true.
This sounds like the next Code Pink/MoveOn talking point. Because they care about the soldiers so much more than the military does, don'tcha know.
It sounds to me like the military is trying to screen out dangerous people who cannot be trusted in a tense environment that demands tremendous amounts of restraint and judgement. Isn't this something we want them to do?
This is the same stunt that the V.A. used early on with returning vets from Vietnam.
Once again “W”s colors and his true feelings about vets are being exposed.
This sounds like some crafty idea a civilian wonk in the Pentagon would come up with to save money. Changing the rules isn’t enough. They should hunt down whoever came up with this policy, tie his arms and legs to four horses...
For the life of me, I keep hearing that Arlo Guthrie monologue at the beginning of “Alice’s Restaurant,” where tried to avoid the draft by telling the recruiter “I want to kill...keelll...”
Yes there is. What is the reason for more mental health problems among college students? Trauma isn't good for baggage.
Yes, there is more to this story. I know of one young man who received an honorable discharge because he did not like following orders and could not control his anger. He is attending college on the GI Bill. His discharge was at the convenience of the government for a personality disorder. He functions normally in society. Instead of making him stay in, they did him and the service a favor and did not hold him to his contract. I think they gave him a better deal than he deserved. A significant portion of the other personality discharges may be because of similar personality problems.
I'm inclined to believe this line more than others. The services haven't been getting Wally and Beaver Cleaver types for a long time. By my own observation I reckon that this country's youth culture was down the tubes in 1968, and nothing I've seen since encourages me at all. Since the late 1960's I've observed yoots doing things that were unthinkable to do when I was their age. Today's young people carry a lot of heavy cultural baggage that didn't exist in earlier decades.
I think it's a cost-saving issue by the Army. The VA will support them as well as a bunch of military Vet groups. DAV is one resource among many.
yes ...
BEFORE THEY SIGN THEM UP ...
One Republican congressional staff member who works on military issues said the rationale behind the Pentagon's practice was: "We didn't break you, you were already broken. You're not our responsibility."
"One soldier I know received a diagnosis for a personality disorder after a 45-minute talk," said the staffer, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "He'd been in the military 10 years, had made it his career, and then he was told he was being shuffled out in a couple of weeks. We keep getting these stories."
so the Military did not notice this "pre-existing" condition for 10 years?
The only experts cited in the story are politicians. This smacks of the old left-wing canard, that military duty creates a lot of crazy people.
For decades, Vietnam veterans were portrayed as homeless drug addicts. Those who I served with were quite unlike the media image. Funny how long after that war, young homeless addicts continued to replenish the supply of bums on the streets. Yet, they hadn't served in the military let alone any war.
One can imagine that some soldiers do fall apart after joining the military. Many schizophrenics appear to function normally in their early adulthood only to cross over to madness thereafter. I've met a few growing up who I did not know would later on go mad. I can't imagine recruiters having the medical qualifications to spot such problems.
This is contrary to everything I have known about “service connected” status as relates to the VA, medical care and disability benefits. This is the very first time I’ve ever heard “pre-existing” in this context.
“Jon Soltz, an Iraq war combat veteran who founded the group VoteVets.org, said untreated psychological problems were contributing to the highest military suicide rate in a quarter-century and to growing homelessness among veterans, he said.”
lets google this guy:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Jon+Soltz%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
I think Kit Bond has been had, and Obama never pre-existed, LOL
What’s not so? I’ve talked with the doctors who examined Vietnam vets returing from Vietnam who the V.A. declared as having pre-existing conditions and those vets were refused treatment and compensation.
Those decisions were made by administrators in spite of the doctors findings.
I don’t know what to think...SG.
My first reaction, if it’s virulently anti-military than there’s probably something bogus about it.
Now I got to figure out who’s behind this and how have they mis-stated things.
See, so many years of being misled by the libs I’m finally wary of anything like this.
Let’s do some math:
As many as 10 a day means that the number is usually lower, with 10 being the peak. Then we have 22,500 total. That means, at least, 2,250 days that this has been going on. If they process them out 7 days a week, that would mean that the program has been running at full speed for over 6 years. If you figure an average of 8 a day over a 5 day week, That’s 562.5 weeks, or over 10 years.
Wait, based on the math, it has to be a Clinton era program that pre-dates the current war!
In my experience, I've dealt with "problem children". and I didn't have any problem showing them the door. I believe it's better to dump one "problem case" in order not to expose their fellow Airman to an internal danger (Walking Time bomb). Passing them off to someone else is not the right way to handle them, putting them out is. In a tense situation those clowns will get you and your team killed. As for the numbers I believe they are a bit high.
Minimum Service Requirement
You do not have to meet the 24 continuous months of active duty service requirement if you:
* Were a reservist who was called to Active Duty and who completed the term for which you were called, and who was granted an other than dishonorable discharge, or
* Were a National Guard member who was called to Active Duty by federal executive order, and who completed the term for which you were called, and who was granted an other than dishonorable discharge, or
* Only request a benefit for or in connection with:
o a service-connected condition or disability; or
o treatment and/or counseling of sexual trauma that occurred while on active military service; or
o treatment of conditions related to ionizing radiation; or
o head or neck cancer related to nose or throat radium treatment while in the military.
* Were discharged or released from active duty for a hardship , or
* Were discharged with an “early out”; or
* Were discharged or released from active duty for a disability that began in the service or got worse because of the service; or
* Have been determined by VA to have compensable service-connected conditions; or
* Were discharged for a reason other than disability, but you had a medical condition at the time that
o Was disabling, and
o In the opinion of a doctor, would have justified a discharge for disability (in this last case, the disability must be documented in service records)
http://www.va.gov/healtheligibility/eligibility/DetermineEligibility.asp
this 22k number would include the many bolo’s and duds who wash out during the first few days, weeks, and months of active duty. They are grandstanding by including all “personality-disorder” out-processes and falsely representing them with those who served long enough to be eligible for VA medical care.
Geez, the VA “LOVES” nutjob patients, and they try to coax nearly all Vets enrolled for care into being seen and treated by psych services. My most recent offer was in connection with treatments in the pain clinic......
When they are deployed to a highly stressed and a relatively unstructured environment, they may become disorganized mentally and their personalities disintegrate. Some become withdrawn, depressed, and unresponsive. Some suspect outside forces are causing their unhappiness and may become manic or angry/violent.
However, some emerging psychotics can function very successfully in combat if they see themselves as valuable and powerful for their fighting skills. Only when they re-integrate back to civilian or non-theater tasks do they disintegrate.
All of this is very subtle and recruiters are not qualified to detect much of it.
The military is essentially claiming, so to speak, that the worn tires caused the automobile accident, not the wet road and speeding.
Gulf War Syndrome — “it’s all in your head”
“Preexisting condition” - it’s all in your head......Oh, wait.
Nothing new here.
IMHO, a significant part of the population suffers from personality disorders.
Liberals?
It is not so now. The policy has obviously changed. I know of several vets who received VA compensation settlements >30% (Special Disabled) for pre-existing conditions which were deemed to have been made worse by military service.
I met a retiring First Sergeant a few years ago who even though he had no disabling injuries and was not medically boarded by the Army was still planning to file a claim with the VA for 'the stuff that got worse' during his service. It was part of his retirement planning. I know of another Army vet who was medically seperatated for a pre-existing knee condition. He eventually received a 100% VA disability for his pre-existing condition. In fact under the photo on the VA ID card it lists if the injury is Service Connected or not.
Are you aware that every penny a retiree receives from the V.A., an exact amount is deducted from his military retirement check?
Uggh, more Military Urban Legend. Last I checked nothing is deducted from military retirement for VA compensation. In fact the two are legally seperate entities. The VA compensation isn't even reportable as income. Neither the IRS, the Ex or anyone else can touch it.
So ...
either the Military is abandoning these men/women...
or
the pre-screening process, sucks rocks ...
thoughts?
It is the second choice. As a nurse in a Military Treatment Facility..I can safely say that many recruiters are out there telling some of these kids - “when you go for the physical - don’t tell them of your psych problems/history....
Thanks for the update. Is your VA disability >30% ?
I have to go to the VA for hearing aids, batteries and other things but I still use base hospital for everything else.
I used to get the third degree for PSTD until I told them to knock it off in very colorful language.
How about a negotiated deal with those troops?
Perhaps they are problem children and wanna go home very badly, so badly that they’ll trade a general discharge or early discharge with no VA benefits for the chance to go home?
You had better check again. Legislation to remove the offset has never made its way through Congress. I have a brother in law who retired from the A.F. as a Colonel and he keeps me updated on this issue.
The greater issue I think is disabilities created or worsened during service which are not covered by service branch or VA disability compensation and support. IMO contrary to the article's implications there should be no service members who are so affected. If they are not covered by their service branch they will get coverage by the VA. One or the other disability processes is set up to assist and compensate service members even for preexisting conditions.
I didn't get a great settlement from the VA but I used the medical treatment and Voc Rehab and did very well thereafter thanks to all which was available to me. Most of the people at the VA really are on the Vets' side.
It's very important to realize these soldiers have VA support via financial compensation, treatment, retraining and integration if they're to turn themselves around. Losing hope and goals is the worst tragedy which could befall them which is why the false premises and implications promulgated by this article and some posters is the greater betrayal.
There’s a pattern of the government trying to weasel out of caring for veterans. It is disgraceful, it is wrong, and it must stop now.
“Support the troops” is not an obligation that ends with a discharge. And while it’s tempting to dismiss the story or claim some bias on the part of the Post-Dispatch, these stories keep piling up.
There was a cover story in US News last year about veterans who lost the use of both arms, but were classified as 49% (something like that; I don’t remember the exact number) disabled. Just below the threshold for a full disability pension.
Our government is treating our veterans shabbily. There is no excuse.
There’s a pattern of the government trying to weasel out of caring for veterans. It is disgraceful, it is wrong, and it must stop now.
“Support the troops” is not an obligation that ends with a discharge. And while it’s tempting to dismiss the story or claim some bias on the part of the Post-Dispatch, these stories keep piling up.
There was a cover story in US News last year about veterans who lost the use of both arms, but were classified as 49% (something like that; I don’t remember the exact number) disabled. Just below the threshold for a full disability pension.
Our government is treating our veterans shabbily. There is no excuse.
Bingo.
How did these so-called experts rule out personality disorder in these patients?
You agree now when you were formerly disagreeing about retirees?
whoever wrote what you claim to remember is full of it.....and I expect that what you fell for is the poseur veteran who was working in some sporting goods shop in NJ? who was exposed as a fraud.
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
38CFR4.16]
[Page 337-338]
TITLE 38—PENSIONS, BONUSES, AND
VETERANS’ RELIEF
CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
PART 4—SCHEDULE FOR RATING DISABILITIES—Table of Contents
Subpart A—General Policy in Rating
Sec. 4.16 Total disability ratings for compensation based on unemployability of the individual.
(a) Total disability ratings for compensation may be assigned, where
the schedular rating is less than total, when the disabled person is, in
the judgment of the rating agency, unable to secure or follow a
substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected
disabilities: Provided
[[Page 338]]
That, if there is only one such disability, this disability shall be
ratable at 60 percent or more, and that, if there are two or more
disabilities, there shall be at least one disability ratable at 40
percent or more, and sufficient additional disability to bring the
combined rating to 70 percent or more. For the above purpose of one 60
percent disability, or one 40 percent disability in combination, the
following will be considered as one disability: (1) Disabilities of one
or both upper extremities, or of one or both lower extremities,
including the bilateral factor, if applicable, (2) disabilities
resulting from common etiology or a single accident, (3) disabilities
affecting a single body system, e.g. orthopedic, digestive, respiratory,
cardiovascular-renal, neuropsychiatric, (4) multiple injuries incurred
in action, or (5) multiple disabilities incurred as a prisoner of war.
It is provided further that the existence or degree of nonservice-
connected disabilities or previous unemployability status will be
disregarded where the percentages referred to in this paragraph for the
service-connected disability or disabilities are met and in the judgment
of the rating agency such service-connected disabilities render the
veteran unemployable. Marginal employment shall not be considered
substantially gainful employment. For purposes of this section, marginal
employment generally shall be deemed to exist when a veteran’s earned
annual income does not exceed the amount established by the U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, as the poverty threshold
for one person. Marginal employment may also be held to exist, on a
facts found basis (includes but is not limited to employment in a
protected environment such as a family business or sheltered workshop),
when earned annual income exceeds the poverty threshold. Consideration
shall be given in all claims to the nature of the employment and the
reason for termination.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)
(b) It is the established policy of the Department of Veterans
Affairs that all veterans who are unable to secure and follow a
substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected
disabilities shall be rated totally disabled. Therefore, rating boards
should submit to the Director, Compensation and Pension Service, for
extra-schedular consideration all cases of veterans who are unemployable
by reason of service-connected disabilities, but who fail to meet the
percentage standards set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. The
rating board will include a full statement as to the veteran’s service-
connected disabilities, employment history, educational and vocational
attainment and all other factors having a bearing on the issue.
[40 FR 42535, Sept. 15, 1975, as amended at 54 FR 4281, Jan. 30, 1989;
55 FR 31580, Aug. 3, 1990; 58 FR 39664, July 26, 1993; 61 FR 52700, Oct.
8, 1996]
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=38&PART=4&SECTION=16&YEAR=2000&TYPE=TEXT
here’s some more on the exact subject you were on about.
TITLE 38—PENSIONS, BONUSES, AND
VETERANS’ RELIEF
CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
PART 4—SCHEDULE FOR RATING DISABILITIES—Table of Contents
Subpart A—General Policy in Rating
Sec. 4.15 Total disability ratings.
The ability to overcome the handicap of disability varies widely
among individuals. The rating, however, is based primarily upon the
average impairment in earning capacity, that is, upon the economic or
industrial handicap which must be overcome and not from individual
success in overcoming it. However, full consideration must be given to
unusual physical or mental effects in individual cases, to peculiar
effects of occupational activities, to defects in physical or mental
endowment preventing the usual amount of success in overcoming the
handicap of disability and to the effect of combinations of disability.
Total disability will be considered to exist when there is present any
impairment of mind or body which is sufficient to render it impossible
for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation;
Provided, That permanent total disability shall be taken to exist when
the impairment is reasonably certain to continue throughout the life of
the disabled person. The following will be considered to be permanent
total disability: the permanent loss of the use of both hands, or of
both feet, or of one hand and one foot, or of the sight of both eyes, or
becoming permanently helpless or permanently bedridden. Other total
disability ratings are scheduled in the various bodily systems of this
schedule.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=38&PART=4&SECTION=15&YEAR=2000&TYPE=TEXT
That's what I "claim to remember." Or part of it. The US News Web site doesn't allow browsing by date or edition that I can find , and the story linked above is one of several similar stories in the same issue.
I don't know what your point is in posting chapter and verse from the US Code -- no one denies that veterans' pensions are written into the law. At issue is bureaucrats downgrading veterans' disability to get out of paying pensions.
I don't consider it "supporting the troops" to call them malingering, lying frauds and to side with government bean-counters over wounded soldiers. You are obviously operating under a different definition.
you’d be better off not swallowing and repeating embellished and deceitful crap written for suckers or those pursuing an agenda.
The “support the troops” bandwagon is jumped on by the full spectrum of folks, some of whom would surrender for them, and at the other end of the spectrum are folks feel the need to prove their “support” in any way imaginable. Time and time again these kind of stories are printed, and the yappers that just LOOOVE victims chirp up for awhile, and then settle down until the next time it comes around. I guess people that express their “feelings” best and mean well can be part of this group, too.
Take a break.
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.