FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 30, 2008
VA Awards Contract for Disability Benefits Studies
Virginia Company Awarded Contract
WASHINGTON – The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has awarded a $3.2 million contract to Economic Systems Inc. of Falls Church, Va., to develop information relating to possible changes in the composition of disability payments to disabled veterans.
“This contract is further evidence of VA’s commitment to review the full range of benefits and programs to ensure today’s disabled veterans receive the help they have earned,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Dr. James B. Peake.
The contact is based upon recommendations of the Dole-Shalala Commission, which issued its final report in July 2007, and the October 2007 final report of the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission.
The contractor will provide its findings in August. Economic Systems Inc. will address three basic research questions in two studies. One study will examine the nature and feasibility of making “long-term transition payments” to service members separated from the military due to disability while those veterans undergo rehabilitation.
A second study will provide information on the appropriate levels of compensation necessary to compensate for any loss in earnings capacity caused by service-incurred or service-aggravated conditions. It will also provide information on potential “quality of life” payments called for by both studies.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Monday, February 4, 2008
Another Disgraceful Action
Way to go Montel and thank you for years of service... Shame on FOX & CBS. Fox and most News shows don't care about the truth or the real issues & news
It's about ratings & celebrities. ... every vet should call their local stations and complain about
celebrity news.... who cares which celebrity is pregnant? is arrested? married? NO Spin zone..Indeed. .what a Joke.
CBS TV Distribution confirmed Wednesday it will end production on the syndicated yakker at the end of this season. CBS plans to offer stations a "Best of Montel" package for the fall that will feature segs from throughout the show's run.
Fate of "The Montel Williams Show" was sealed when key Fox-owned stations opted not to renew it for the 2008-09 season. But a number of other stations had cleared the show for next season, prompting CBS to offer the "Best of" package. The rerun package is sold on an all-cash basis, which is a boon to stations that had been handing over 3½ minutes of barter ad time per seg to CBS for the firstrun episodes.
"Stations continue to embrace Montel and the message of social responsibility that has been the cornerstone of his show," said CBS TV Distribution prexy and chief operating officer John Nogawski.
Williams, a former military officer, launched his yakker in New York and a handful of other markets in 1991. Show was picked up for national distribution by Viacom the following year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Parkertwo [mailto:parkertwo@ roadrunner. com]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 7:32 PM
To: Undisclosed- Recipient: ;
Subject: Montel Williams Loses Job after Defending Troops on Fox News
Montel Williams Loses Job after Defending Troops on Fox News
by Brandon Friedman
Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 11:39:14 PM PST
For just over three minutes on Saturday morning, TV talk show host Montel Williams owned the hosts of Fox and Friends. A former Marine and Naval officer, Montel lectured the stunned hosts on the stupidity of spending air time on the death of Heath Ledger, rather than covering the war in Iraq. It was a spectacle rarely seen on live cable television, as Montel exposed and condemned both tabloid "news" shows and much of American culture for what they have each become: shallow and greedy.
Three minutes into this awkward segment on Fox, one host cut off Montel in order to go to a commercial. Montel did not return after the break. Four days later, after 17 years as a television host, Montel lost his job. Variety reported on Wednesday that the
Fate of "The Montel Williams Show" was sealed when key Fox-owned stations opted not to renew it for the 2008-09 season.
Here is the video: on the site link attached http://www.dailykos .com/story/ 2008/1/31/ 23326/1083/ 699/446791
::
I have no idea whether Montel already knew his show wasn’t going to be renewed, and thus felt emboldened to cut loose on the air, or whether his firing was a result of his actions on Saturday. Either way, Montel Williams exhibited courage this week that few in the television industry ever will. And for that, American troops around the world stand with him. We support him not only because he stood up for the troops, but because he did it on Fox News—a station that has done more damage to the U.S. military since 9/11 than any other.
Montel Williams is an American patriot. Though he left the military years ago, he has never forgotten "his" troops.
For that we salute and thank you, Montel. Best of luck with whatever you choose to do next.
It's about ratings & celebrities. ... every vet should call their local stations and complain about
celebrity news.... who cares which celebrity is pregnant? is arrested? married? NO Spin zone..Indeed. .what a Joke.
CBS TV Distribution confirmed Wednesday it will end production on the syndicated yakker at the end of this season. CBS plans to offer stations a "Best of Montel" package for the fall that will feature segs from throughout the show's run.
Fate of "The Montel Williams Show" was sealed when key Fox-owned stations opted not to renew it for the 2008-09 season. But a number of other stations had cleared the show for next season, prompting CBS to offer the "Best of" package. The rerun package is sold on an all-cash basis, which is a boon to stations that had been handing over 3½ minutes of barter ad time per seg to CBS for the firstrun episodes.
"Stations continue to embrace Montel and the message of social responsibility that has been the cornerstone of his show," said CBS TV Distribution prexy and chief operating officer John Nogawski.
Williams, a former military officer, launched his yakker in New York and a handful of other markets in 1991. Show was picked up for national distribution by Viacom the following year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Parkertwo [mailto:parkertwo@ roadrunner. com]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 7:32 PM
To: Undisclosed- Recipient: ;
Subject: Montel Williams Loses Job after Defending Troops on Fox News
Montel Williams Loses Job after Defending Troops on Fox News
by Brandon Friedman
Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 11:39:14 PM PST
For just over three minutes on Saturday morning, TV talk show host Montel Williams owned the hosts of Fox and Friends. A former Marine and Naval officer, Montel lectured the stunned hosts on the stupidity of spending air time on the death of Heath Ledger, rather than covering the war in Iraq. It was a spectacle rarely seen on live cable television, as Montel exposed and condemned both tabloid "news" shows and much of American culture for what they have each become: shallow and greedy.
Three minutes into this awkward segment on Fox, one host cut off Montel in order to go to a commercial. Montel did not return after the break. Four days later, after 17 years as a television host, Montel lost his job. Variety reported on Wednesday that the
Fate of "The Montel Williams Show" was sealed when key Fox-owned stations opted not to renew it for the 2008-09 season.
Here is the video: on the site link attached http://www.dailykos .com/story/ 2008/1/31/ 23326/1083/ 699/446791
::
I have no idea whether Montel already knew his show wasn’t going to be renewed, and thus felt emboldened to cut loose on the air, or whether his firing was a result of his actions on Saturday. Either way, Montel Williams exhibited courage this week that few in the television industry ever will. And for that, American troops around the world stand with him. We support him not only because he stood up for the troops, but because he did it on Fox News—a station that has done more damage to the U.S. military since 9/11 than any other.
Montel Williams is an American patriot. Though he left the military years ago, he has never forgotten "his" troops.
For that we salute and thank you, Montel. Best of luck with whatever you choose to do next.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Mexican Denistry
OUR VETERANS AND MEXICAN DENISTRY
BY: ROCKY STONE
Under current VA Regulations a veteran can not get dental care at a VA facility unless that veteran is either 100% Service Connected, a former Prisoner of War (POW) or has sustained a dental injury, which must be noted in the veteran’s military medical records, while in service. This regulation causes thousands of veterans each year to go without needed dental care unless they have private insurance that covers their dental needs or they go to one of the many Mexican dental clinics which offer cut rate prices for dental work.
In a recent article by Robin Emmett, published in Reuters and MSNBC News stories, Feb. 1 2008, the author speaks about the thousands of Americans who seek dental care across the border in dental clinics, many of which are located in areas of high crime created by the drug wars. These clinics are, also, noted to have poor hygiene; yet, due to the high cost of dental treatment in the U.S. many Americans forego the risk of becoming victims of crime, a disease or infection to seek dental treatment that is affordable in Mexico. Sadly, many of these Americans are retired military veterans who can not, due to regulation, receive dental care at the VA dental clinics located within the VA hospitals across the nation.
One such veteran is 62 year old Al Undiemi, a retired Sergeant First Class with 21 ½ years service in the U.S. Army. Al, a veteran of the Vietnam War, who was one of six survivors from his platoon, along with this writer, from the 173rd Airborne Brigade in the Battle for Hill 875 in 1967, retired from the Army in 1988. Upon his retirement, Al was never advised by the military that he could seek medical attention from the VA. Recently, Al has been plagued with various medical problems, including a tooth ache, the inability to breathe, swallow, and properly digest his food, constant heart burn and other problems; therefore, acting upon my advice, Al sought assistance from the VA Medical Center located in Temple Texas.
“I told the doctors what my symptoms were the first time I went to the VA”, Al states, “and the doctor told me that it might be my tooth causing my problems.” The doctor informed Al that he might go to a civilian dentist and get his tooth pulled. “I told the doctor that I could not afford to go to a civilian dentist as my only income was my military retirement and social security and that I had no insurance. The doctor told me I could go to Mexico and have my tooth pulled,” Al states.
Al once again returns to the VA after having been given antibiotics on his first trip in an attempt to clear up the infected tooth but to no avail. Still suffering from multiple symptoms and the throbbing tooth ache Al relates, “I went back to the VA the 2nd time and was once again told by the VA staff to go to Mexico and get my tooth pulled. I was given more antibiotics, which were not doing me any good and which I was paying for under the Tri-Care program for retired veterans. The medications were costing me money each month but I was getting no help for my problem, my tooth.”
In Jan. 2008 Al, once again returns to the VA Medical Center in Temple Texas still suffering from the pain and symptoms caused by his infected tooth. Once again when Al sees the doctor and nurse he had seen previously Al was given the same medical advice. “Once again the doctor tells me to go to Mexico and get my tooth pulled,” relates Al. “The doctor told me that I needed to get my tooth pulled as soon as possible or my health would get worse and that I could even die from my infected tooth, but they could not help me at the VA due to regulations, that I had to be 100% disabled or a former POW to get dental treatment at the VA.”
One of the nurses, who had seen Al at the VA Medical Center, told him of her husband who was a retired Air Force veteran who had to go to Mexico for his dental work due to not being able to get it done at the VA in which she worked. Another nurse at the VA told Al of her daughter who she took to Mexico to get dental work done. This nurse related to Al that her daughter received work that would have cost approximately $4000 in the U.S. for $1400 in Mexico. All of these VA employees suggested that Al go to Mexico for his dental needs.
The cost of dental care in the U.S. is on the rise due to the cost of operation, insurance and supplies. The cost is come prohibited to more and more Americans daily. Dentist in Mexico are flocking to the border towns where Americans are crossing the border daily for dental care. The cost of dental care in the U.S. can be four times that in Mexico.
The dental care in Mexico does not come without risks. Many of the hundreds of dental clinics, ranging from dingy dives to posh parlor like establishments, popping up in border towns such as Ciudad Juarez, El Paso, Del Rio and Laredo, just to name a few are located in areas that requires patrons to travel through areas infested with prostitutes, drug dealers, gang members and petty thieves. It stands to reason that these types will haunt the areas where dental clinics are located as they realize that Americans with money in their pockets will be traveling across the border to seek dental care.
Then there is, also, the risk of infection caused by unsanitary conditions noted in some of these clinics. Health standards are not like those required in the U.S. and many of these fly-by-night clinics are not, perhaps, even run by certified dentist with the appropriate training. There is no way for the unsuspecting American to know just who it is that is working on their teeth.
This brings us to legal consideration, who is legally responsible if something goes wrong? The Mexican dentists are not required to be covered by the insurance dentist in the U.S. are required so if something goes wrong U.S. citizens will probably have no legal recourse. There are American dentist in Mexico conducting business but I doubt they carry any insurance either. One such dentist is Joe Andel and his wife Jessica. “We’ve gone from a handful of patients when we started 2 ½ years ago to 150 new patients a month”, said Joe in his interview with the author of the Reuters article. Joe and his wife own the Rio Dental clinic in Ciuded Juarez which uses U.S. labs to make the crowns used in their practice. Joe states that he will even pick up his patients at the El Paso airport to get their business. Joe states that he has treated people from as far away as Alaska and Hawaii.
The fact that American citizens are going to Mexico is due to our economic situation here in the U.S. and there is little that can be done about that, although it is a shame that the richest country in the world has it’s people going to a foreign county for health care services, and not just dental. However, in this writer’s opinion, who is a Vietnam veteran himself, it is a crime that our American veterans are forced by our economic situation to resort to such action. Our veterans who have served this country with honor should be taken care of when they need medical and/or dental care but that is simply not happening. Our retired veterans, all with over 20 years of service to our nation, are left out when it comes to receiving dental care from the Veterans Administration. They can not even go to the VA Dental Clinics and pay for dental care, they must seek it elsewhere, even, it appears, in Mexico.
Our nation should insist that our veterans are cared for. It is to our veterans and active duty military personnel that we owe our freedom. Do we care so little for their contributions to our nation’s security that we send them into a foreign land to seek dental health care? Do we care so little about our veterans that we as a nation will stand by and watch them forced, due to their economic situation, into the alley ways and crime infested streets of a foreign land to get the care they should be provided in U.S. VA hospitals? It appears that is the case. Fellow citizens this says to us, the veterans of this country that our nation does not care once our active service is over.
Those individuals who aspire to join the military and serve their nation are watching what is happening to our veterans. These young citizens may decide that they do not wish to be treated the way our veterans are treated when they become veterans, thus, may chose not to serve. What happens to our nation when no one joins the military? Do we go back to the draft? Do we go to mandatory service in the military for a specific number of years? This is already being talked about in Congress. A Bill has already been introduced making it mandatory to serve in the military and covers everyone from the ages of 18 to 42.
It is time for our nation’s leaders to wake up; it is time for our nation’s people to wake up and realize that without the military we will lose all that we have. If we as a nation do not insure that our nation’s veterans are taken care of then we may soon be lost as a free people. People are watching you who serve in the Congress and Senate, we are watching how you treat those who serve us all and continue to keep us free. As our military and veterans go so goes our nation.
BY: ROCKY STONE
Under current VA Regulations a veteran can not get dental care at a VA facility unless that veteran is either 100% Service Connected, a former Prisoner of War (POW) or has sustained a dental injury, which must be noted in the veteran’s military medical records, while in service. This regulation causes thousands of veterans each year to go without needed dental care unless they have private insurance that covers their dental needs or they go to one of the many Mexican dental clinics which offer cut rate prices for dental work.
In a recent article by Robin Emmett, published in Reuters and MSNBC News stories, Feb. 1 2008, the author speaks about the thousands of Americans who seek dental care across the border in dental clinics, many of which are located in areas of high crime created by the drug wars. These clinics are, also, noted to have poor hygiene; yet, due to the high cost of dental treatment in the U.S. many Americans forego the risk of becoming victims of crime, a disease or infection to seek dental treatment that is affordable in Mexico. Sadly, many of these Americans are retired military veterans who can not, due to regulation, receive dental care at the VA dental clinics located within the VA hospitals across the nation.
One such veteran is 62 year old Al Undiemi, a retired Sergeant First Class with 21 ½ years service in the U.S. Army. Al, a veteran of the Vietnam War, who was one of six survivors from his platoon, along with this writer, from the 173rd Airborne Brigade in the Battle for Hill 875 in 1967, retired from the Army in 1988. Upon his retirement, Al was never advised by the military that he could seek medical attention from the VA. Recently, Al has been plagued with various medical problems, including a tooth ache, the inability to breathe, swallow, and properly digest his food, constant heart burn and other problems; therefore, acting upon my advice, Al sought assistance from the VA Medical Center located in Temple Texas.
“I told the doctors what my symptoms were the first time I went to the VA”, Al states, “and the doctor told me that it might be my tooth causing my problems.” The doctor informed Al that he might go to a civilian dentist and get his tooth pulled. “I told the doctor that I could not afford to go to a civilian dentist as my only income was my military retirement and social security and that I had no insurance. The doctor told me I could go to Mexico and have my tooth pulled,” Al states.
Al once again returns to the VA after having been given antibiotics on his first trip in an attempt to clear up the infected tooth but to no avail. Still suffering from multiple symptoms and the throbbing tooth ache Al relates, “I went back to the VA the 2nd time and was once again told by the VA staff to go to Mexico and get my tooth pulled. I was given more antibiotics, which were not doing me any good and which I was paying for under the Tri-Care program for retired veterans. The medications were costing me money each month but I was getting no help for my problem, my tooth.”
In Jan. 2008 Al, once again returns to the VA Medical Center in Temple Texas still suffering from the pain and symptoms caused by his infected tooth. Once again when Al sees the doctor and nurse he had seen previously Al was given the same medical advice. “Once again the doctor tells me to go to Mexico and get my tooth pulled,” relates Al. “The doctor told me that I needed to get my tooth pulled as soon as possible or my health would get worse and that I could even die from my infected tooth, but they could not help me at the VA due to regulations, that I had to be 100% disabled or a former POW to get dental treatment at the VA.”
One of the nurses, who had seen Al at the VA Medical Center, told him of her husband who was a retired Air Force veteran who had to go to Mexico for his dental work due to not being able to get it done at the VA in which she worked. Another nurse at the VA told Al of her daughter who she took to Mexico to get dental work done. This nurse related to Al that her daughter received work that would have cost approximately $4000 in the U.S. for $1400 in Mexico. All of these VA employees suggested that Al go to Mexico for his dental needs.
The cost of dental care in the U.S. is on the rise due to the cost of operation, insurance and supplies. The cost is come prohibited to more and more Americans daily. Dentist in Mexico are flocking to the border towns where Americans are crossing the border daily for dental care. The cost of dental care in the U.S. can be four times that in Mexico.
The dental care in Mexico does not come without risks. Many of the hundreds of dental clinics, ranging from dingy dives to posh parlor like establishments, popping up in border towns such as Ciudad Juarez, El Paso, Del Rio and Laredo, just to name a few are located in areas that requires patrons to travel through areas infested with prostitutes, drug dealers, gang members and petty thieves. It stands to reason that these types will haunt the areas where dental clinics are located as they realize that Americans with money in their pockets will be traveling across the border to seek dental care.
Then there is, also, the risk of infection caused by unsanitary conditions noted in some of these clinics. Health standards are not like those required in the U.S. and many of these fly-by-night clinics are not, perhaps, even run by certified dentist with the appropriate training. There is no way for the unsuspecting American to know just who it is that is working on their teeth.
This brings us to legal consideration, who is legally responsible if something goes wrong? The Mexican dentists are not required to be covered by the insurance dentist in the U.S. are required so if something goes wrong U.S. citizens will probably have no legal recourse. There are American dentist in Mexico conducting business but I doubt they carry any insurance either. One such dentist is Joe Andel and his wife Jessica. “We’ve gone from a handful of patients when we started 2 ½ years ago to 150 new patients a month”, said Joe in his interview with the author of the Reuters article. Joe and his wife own the Rio Dental clinic in Ciuded Juarez which uses U.S. labs to make the crowns used in their practice. Joe states that he will even pick up his patients at the El Paso airport to get their business. Joe states that he has treated people from as far away as Alaska and Hawaii.
The fact that American citizens are going to Mexico is due to our economic situation here in the U.S. and there is little that can be done about that, although it is a shame that the richest country in the world has it’s people going to a foreign county for health care services, and not just dental. However, in this writer’s opinion, who is a Vietnam veteran himself, it is a crime that our American veterans are forced by our economic situation to resort to such action. Our veterans who have served this country with honor should be taken care of when they need medical and/or dental care but that is simply not happening. Our retired veterans, all with over 20 years of service to our nation, are left out when it comes to receiving dental care from the Veterans Administration. They can not even go to the VA Dental Clinics and pay for dental care, they must seek it elsewhere, even, it appears, in Mexico.
Our nation should insist that our veterans are cared for. It is to our veterans and active duty military personnel that we owe our freedom. Do we care so little for their contributions to our nation’s security that we send them into a foreign land to seek dental health care? Do we care so little about our veterans that we as a nation will stand by and watch them forced, due to their economic situation, into the alley ways and crime infested streets of a foreign land to get the care they should be provided in U.S. VA hospitals? It appears that is the case. Fellow citizens this says to us, the veterans of this country that our nation does not care once our active service is over.
Those individuals who aspire to join the military and serve their nation are watching what is happening to our veterans. These young citizens may decide that they do not wish to be treated the way our veterans are treated when they become veterans, thus, may chose not to serve. What happens to our nation when no one joins the military? Do we go back to the draft? Do we go to mandatory service in the military for a specific number of years? This is already being talked about in Congress. A Bill has already been introduced making it mandatory to serve in the military and covers everyone from the ages of 18 to 42.
It is time for our nation’s leaders to wake up; it is time for our nation’s people to wake up and realize that without the military we will lose all that we have. If we as a nation do not insure that our nation’s veterans are taken care of then we may soon be lost as a free people. People are watching you who serve in the Congress and Senate, we are watching how you treat those who serve us all and continue to keep us free. As our military and veterans go so goes our nation.
Agent Orange BVA Decisions
from Col Dan
AGENT ORANGE ASSOCIATED DISORDERS APPROVED BVA DECISIONS OUTSIDE OF VIETNAM
Lot of good AO info at: http://www.2ndbatta lion94thartiller y.com/Chas/ LinkToxicChemica l.htm
Go to web site below: BVA DECISIONS OUTSIDE OF VIETNAM
http://www.2ndbatta lion94thartiller y.com/Chas/ guambva.htm
IN ORDER BELOW OF:
GUAM - DIABETES TYPE II
Thailand - malignant lymphoma
Okinawa - PROSTATE CANCER
AGENT ORANGE ASSOCIATED DISORDERS APPROVED BVA DECISIONS OUTSIDE OF VIETNAM
Lot of good AO info at: http://www.2ndbatta lion94thartiller y.com/Chas/ LinkToxicChemica l.htm
Go to web site below: BVA DECISIONS OUTSIDE OF VIETNAM
http://www.2ndbatta lion94thartiller y.com/Chas/ guambva.htm
IN ORDER BELOW OF:
GUAM - DIABETES TYPE II
Thailand - malignant lymphoma
Okinawa - PROSTATE CANCER
Friday, February 1, 2008
News on Personality Disorder Discharges
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Col. Dan,
As you know, there have been numerous cases of pre-existing personality disorder discharges. I was glad to see this email that I received this morning and wanted to pass it along:
GA Committee: Just received confirmation from Senator Feingold's office that H.R. 4986, The FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, did, indeed, include S. 1817 (H.R. 3167), Proper Administration of the Discharge of Members of the Armed Forces for Personality Disorder. S. 1817 was offered as an amendment to both H.R. 1585 and H.R. 4986 by Senator Obama, and it was accepted by unanimous consent. It appeared in both the vetoed H.R. 1585 and the signed H.R. 4986 as Section 597. Therefore it is now law. Note that in Parts (a) (2) (C) and (D), it mandates policies and measures prohibiting discharges for personality disorder and that those "who may have been so separated from the Armed Forces should be provided with expedited review by the applicable board for the correction of military records."
Ron Scott, Chair
SEC. 597. REPORTS ON ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATIONS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FOR PERSONALITY DISORDER.
(a) Secretary of Defense Report on Administrative Separations Based on Personality Disorder-
(1) REPORT REQUIRED- Not later than April 1, 2008, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on all cases of administrative separation from the Armed Forces of covered members of the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder.
(2) ELEMENTS- The report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:
(A) A statement of the total number of cases, by Armed Force, in which covered members of the Armed Forces have been separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder, and an identification of the various forms of personality disorder forming the basis for such separations.
(B) A statement of the total number of cases, by Armed Force, in which covered members of the Armed Forces who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan since October 2001 have been separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder, and the identification of the various forms of personality disorder forming the basis for such separations.
(C) A summary of the policies, by Armed Force, controlling administrative separations of members of the Armed Forces based on personality disorder, and an evaluation of the adequacy of such policies for ensuring that covered members of the Armed Forces who may be eligible for disability evaluation due to mental health conditions are not separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder.
(D) A discussion of measures being implemented to ensure that members of the Armed Forces who should be evaluated for disability separation or retirement due to mental health conditions are not processed for separation from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder, and recommendations regarding how members of the Armed Forces who may have been so separated from the Armed Forces should be provided with expedited review by the applicable board for the correction of military records.
(b) Comptroller General Report on Policies on Administrative Separation Based on Personality Disorder-
(1) REPORT REQUIRED- Not later than June 1, 2008, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report evaluating the policies and procedures of the Department of Defense and of the military departments relating to the separation of members of the Armed Forces based on a personality disorder.
(2) ELEMENTS- The report required by paragraph (1) shall--
(A) include an audit of a sampling of cases to determine the validity and clinical efficacy of the policies and procedures referred to in paragraph (1) and the extent, if any, of the divergence between the terms of such policies and procedures and the implementation of such policies and procedures; and
(B) include a determination by the Comptroller General of whether, and to what extent, the policies and procedures referred to in paragraph (1)--
(i) deviate from standard clinical diagnostic practices and current clinical standards; and
(ii) provide adequate safeguards aimed at ensuring that members of the Armed Forces who suffer from mental health conditions (including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, or traumatic brain injury) resulting from service in a combat zone are not separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder.
(3) ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION METHOD- In lieu of submitting a separate report under this subsection, the Comptroller may include the evaluation, audit and determination required by this subsection as part of the study of mental health services required by section 723 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 118 Stat. 1989).
(c) Covered Member of the Armed Forces Defined- In this section, the term `covered member of the Armed Forces' includes the following:
(1) Any member of a regular component of the Armed Forces who has served in Iraq or Afghanistan since October 2001.
(2) Any member of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces who served on active duty in Iraq or Afghanistan since October 2001
Inga Guenther
Proud Army Wife of Scot
Proud Army Mom of Andrew
Proud Marine Mom of Clayton
www.militaryspouses forchange. com
Col. Dan,
As you know, there have been numerous cases of pre-existing personality disorder discharges. I was glad to see this email that I received this morning and wanted to pass it along:
GA Committee: Just received confirmation from Senator Feingold's office that H.R. 4986, The FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, did, indeed, include S. 1817 (H.R. 3167), Proper Administration of the Discharge of Members of the Armed Forces for Personality Disorder. S. 1817 was offered as an amendment to both H.R. 1585 and H.R. 4986 by Senator Obama, and it was accepted by unanimous consent. It appeared in both the vetoed H.R. 1585 and the signed H.R. 4986 as Section 597. Therefore it is now law. Note that in Parts (a) (2) (C) and (D), it mandates policies and measures prohibiting discharges for personality disorder and that those "who may have been so separated from the Armed Forces should be provided with expedited review by the applicable board for the correction of military records."
Ron Scott, Chair
SEC. 597. REPORTS ON ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATIONS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FOR PERSONALITY DISORDER.
(a) Secretary of Defense Report on Administrative Separations Based on Personality Disorder-
(1) REPORT REQUIRED- Not later than April 1, 2008, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on all cases of administrative separation from the Armed Forces of covered members of the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder.
(2) ELEMENTS- The report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:
(A) A statement of the total number of cases, by Armed Force, in which covered members of the Armed Forces have been separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder, and an identification of the various forms of personality disorder forming the basis for such separations.
(B) A statement of the total number of cases, by Armed Force, in which covered members of the Armed Forces who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan since October 2001 have been separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder, and the identification of the various forms of personality disorder forming the basis for such separations.
(C) A summary of the policies, by Armed Force, controlling administrative separations of members of the Armed Forces based on personality disorder, and an evaluation of the adequacy of such policies for ensuring that covered members of the Armed Forces who may be eligible for disability evaluation due to mental health conditions are not separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder.
(D) A discussion of measures being implemented to ensure that members of the Armed Forces who should be evaluated for disability separation or retirement due to mental health conditions are not processed for separation from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder, and recommendations regarding how members of the Armed Forces who may have been so separated from the Armed Forces should be provided with expedited review by the applicable board for the correction of military records.
(b) Comptroller General Report on Policies on Administrative Separation Based on Personality Disorder-
(1) REPORT REQUIRED- Not later than June 1, 2008, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report evaluating the policies and procedures of the Department of Defense and of the military departments relating to the separation of members of the Armed Forces based on a personality disorder.
(2) ELEMENTS- The report required by paragraph (1) shall--
(A) include an audit of a sampling of cases to determine the validity and clinical efficacy of the policies and procedures referred to in paragraph (1) and the extent, if any, of the divergence between the terms of such policies and procedures and the implementation of such policies and procedures; and
(B) include a determination by the Comptroller General of whether, and to what extent, the policies and procedures referred to in paragraph (1)--
(i) deviate from standard clinical diagnostic practices and current clinical standards; and
(ii) provide adequate safeguards aimed at ensuring that members of the Armed Forces who suffer from mental health conditions (including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, or traumatic brain injury) resulting from service in a combat zone are not separated from the Armed Forces on the basis of a personality disorder.
(3) ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION METHOD- In lieu of submitting a separate report under this subsection, the Comptroller may include the evaluation, audit and determination required by this subsection as part of the study of mental health services required by section 723 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 118 Stat. 1989).
(c) Covered Member of the Armed Forces Defined- In this section, the term `covered member of the Armed Forces' includes the following:
(1) Any member of a regular component of the Armed Forces who has served in Iraq or Afghanistan since October 2001.
(2) Any member of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces who served on active duty in Iraq or Afghanistan since October 2001
Inga Guenther
Proud Army Wife of Scot
Proud Army Mom of Andrew
Proud Marine Mom of Clayton
www.militaryspouses forchange. com
In Harms Way from Our Own
The U.S. Congress "to harm" Ignored.
U. S. Senate Background.
In 2008, despite the efforts of some, the U.S. Congress still treats
as an "incident to service" [1] the U.S. Senate’s DOD "experiments
that were designed to harm" [7]! "III. Findings and conclusions" , "K.
DOD and DVA have repeatedly failed to provide information and medical
followup to those who participate in military research..." and "N.
Participation in military research is rarely included in military
medical records, making it impossible to support a veteran’s claim for
service-connected disabilities from military research." By their
inaction Congress has approved the Report’s: "Introduction" A. "During
the last 50 years, hundreds of thousands of military personnel have
been involved in human experimentation and other intentional exposures
conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD), often without a
servicemember' s knowledge or consent.", B. "most Americans would agree
that the use of soldiers as unwitting guinea pigs in experiments that
were designed to harm them, at least temporarily, is not ethical." And
"Forward" C. " The findings and conclusions contained in this report
are those of the majority staff and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the members of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs." Chairman.
Thereby, DOD & VA Healthcare System to-date covered up are these
experiments and prevented is treatment as documented by the 1994 U.S.
Senate Report.[7] The disagreeing "views" resulted in the 2008
continuing on the general public is a version of the DOD Project 112
biological lessons learned.[8] This is by the 19 December 2006
established civilian "Biomedical Advanced Research and Development
Authority (BARDA)".[10] Under the cover of its "national security
missions", as it is for military personnel, withheld from the civilian
"guinea pigs" are the cause and effects of its "Biomedical Advanced
Research and Development" (R&D) Projects.
Order Ignored!
From 1953 the U.S. Senate "to harm" lessons learned were in direct
disobedience of the DOD Secretary's TOP SECRET order. Forty one (41)
years earlier it required the U.S. Senate’s 1994 "servicemember' s
knowledge" and "consent". [3] 1953 known by the Secretary's of all
Services, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and their R&D Board. It was
"UNCLASSIFIED" in 1975. Nineteen (19) years later, during the U.S.
Senate’s reported past 50 years, most of the "to harm" service records
were destroyed in a 1973 National Personnel Records Center (NPRC)
fire. Those that survived had all witnesses censored by Congress’s
1974 Privacy Act! The "Veterans Right to Know Act" was proposed in the
2005 and H.R. 4259 [109th] 2006 Congress. It never became law.
The U.S. Supreme Court Did Not Know?
The 1987 U.S. Supreme Court Stanley decision [4] extends the coverage
of their 1950 Feres Case that a death by a military barracks fire was
an "incident to service" [1]. Stanley treats the 1958 DOD
"experiments. ..designed to harm" disobedience of the 1953 order [3] as
also an "incident to service"! To-date not accomplished is the Senate
Report’s correcting, "IV. Recommendations. G. The Feres Doctrine
should not be applied for military personnel who are harmed by
inappropriate human experimentation when informed consent has not been
given." A few in Congress made certain that the in-the-record
revealing evidence will not be addressed. The year following STANLEY
was the 1988 Veterans’ Judicial Review Act. Established was the
Veteran’s Legislative severely restricted, Article I Court. "The court
may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities or the
policies underlying the schedule.", i.e., the order ignored "to harm"
R&D experimental effects and their causes! The Veterans Court Chief Judge's no teeth statement with his VA ignoring of the Court’s decisions! [6] The
Secretary of the VA was given Final Decision authority on these
issues. [9] Included is the power of NO APPEAL to this LEGISLATIVE
Veterans Court or to the independent U.S. Judicial Branch Courts. If
allowed an APPEAL, it is not part of the record at the Article I
Veterans Court. The evidence is also missing at the next level U.S.
Judicial Branch Article III, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
All Is In-The-Record!
Each Executive Branch (DOD, CIA & BARDA) Project completes the R&D
process. The prior lessons learned are reviewed. The then Scope of
Work defines what the experiment is "designed" to do. The how, where,
when and who is identified. The conducted researched cause and effects
are closely followed. From the results are developed safe production,
use, the needed for treatment and protection, e.g., the DOD
manufacturers handling of hazardous materials such as Depleted
Uranium, Agent Orange, the biological agents of Project 112 [8] and
the jet-engine noise levels of Project 7210 [2]. All is in the
Executive Branch record! Under the cover of national security the
revealing treatment evidence: 1. Is not cause identified in a
subject’s Medical History, so that they never the wiser become. The
deceived victim’s "to harm" effects are not Medical History recorded,
therefore not addressed! Prevented is any follow up by independent
civilian and Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) physicians. And 2. For veterans’ the 64 years
of experiment specific injuries are not in the VA "schedule of ratings
for disabilities" [6]!
Why "may not review"?
May not be reviewed records prevent medical, administrative and
judicial "activities" that "would be detrimental to the accomplishment
of...mission. " This is by the still in 2008 reasoning of "it was
necessary to conceal these activities from the american public in
general, because public knowledge of the unethical and illicit
activities would have serious repercussions in political and
diplomatic circles and would be detrimental to the accomplishment of
its mission." U.S. Supreme Court 1987 Stanley Case; Footnote 4, Page
688 on its proven 1958 CIA experiment on U.S. Army personnel. [4]
"Right to Know".
There now is no 64 years later "Veterans Right to Know". After they
complete Honorable Service despite the efforts of some Congress has
not given back to veterans their rights. Revealed would be the few’s
corrupt for the greater good of all. Accomplished by the end justifies
the "designed to harm" means. Carried out under the cover of our
nation’s wars! A few key members in Congress, have dishonored those
that serve. Lost are those prior to service rights that convicted
rapists and murderers keep! [5]
Hold Responsible.
Now BARDA Experiments Conducted on You! Please, Hold Your Members in
the U.S. Congress Accountable! These U.S. Supreme Court and U.S.
Senate Documented Facts Are Internet Censored.[11] Passing this on to
Others So That They May Do the Same Would Be Appreciated. Thank You.
David H. Marshall
REFERENCES:
[1] U.S. Supreme Court, Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950).
[2] USAF Project 7210 "A Compilation of Turbojet Noise Data", Bolt
Beranek & Newman, Inc. Cambridge 38, MA. Sound pressure levels for all
jet-engines in-service. Conducted at Wright Patterson Air Force Base,
Dayton, Ohio in 1952. 1954 logged in as the 401st report for that year
published as Report 54-401 July 1956
[3] DOD Secretary's 26 February 1953 NO non-consensual, human
experiment’s Memo pages 343-345. George J. Annas and Michael A.
Grodin, "The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in
Human Experimentation" (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). In
Reference [8] as NOTES 72, 168 & 169.
[4] U.S. Supreme Court, June 25, 1987, U.S. V. Stanley, 107 S. Ct.
3054 (Volume 483 U.S., Section 669, Pages 699 to 710). In Reference
[8] Cited in Note 169.
[5] U.S. State Dept., "U.S. Report under the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Art. 7".
[6] Chief Judge Frank Q. Nebeker, State of the Court for Presentation
to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals Third Judicial
Conference October 17-18, 1994. In the Veterans Appeals Reporter.
www.firebase. net/state_of_ court_brief. htm Annual Judicial Conference
Transcript. www.goodnet. com/~heads/ nebeker
[7] U.S. Senate December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 "Is Military Research
Hazardous to Veterans' Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century."
Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, 103rd
Congress 2nd Session. With NOTES 1 to 170. Committee Print - S. Print.
103-97.
[8] "Project 112 (Including Project SHAD) Home" chemical and
biological experiments; www. 1.va.gov/shad/
[9] United States Code (USC) Title 38, 511. Decisions of the
Secretary; finality. http://www.law. cornell.edu/
[10] "Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)" S-3678.
U. S. Senate Background.
In 2008, despite the efforts of some, the U.S. Congress still treats
as an "incident to service" [1] the U.S. Senate’s DOD "experiments
that were designed to harm" [7]! "III. Findings and conclusions" , "K.
DOD and DVA have repeatedly failed to provide information and medical
followup to those who participate in military research..." and "N.
Participation in military research is rarely included in military
medical records, making it impossible to support a veteran’s claim for
service-connected disabilities from military research." By their
inaction Congress has approved the Report’s: "Introduction" A. "During
the last 50 years, hundreds of thousands of military personnel have
been involved in human experimentation and other intentional exposures
conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD), often without a
servicemember' s knowledge or consent.", B. "most Americans would agree
that the use of soldiers as unwitting guinea pigs in experiments that
were designed to harm them, at least temporarily, is not ethical." And
"Forward" C. " The findings and conclusions contained in this report
are those of the majority staff and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the members of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs." Chairman.
Thereby, DOD & VA Healthcare System to-date covered up are these
experiments and prevented is treatment as documented by the 1994 U.S.
Senate Report.[7] The disagreeing "views" resulted in the 2008
continuing on the general public is a version of the DOD Project 112
biological lessons learned.[8] This is by the 19 December 2006
established civilian "Biomedical Advanced Research and Development
Authority (BARDA)".[10] Under the cover of its "national security
missions", as it is for military personnel, withheld from the civilian
"guinea pigs" are the cause and effects of its "Biomedical Advanced
Research and Development" (R&D) Projects.
Order Ignored!
From 1953 the U.S. Senate "to harm" lessons learned were in direct
disobedience of the DOD Secretary's TOP SECRET order. Forty one (41)
years earlier it required the U.S. Senate’s 1994 "servicemember' s
knowledge" and "consent". [3] 1953 known by the Secretary's of all
Services, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and their R&D Board. It was
"UNCLASSIFIED" in 1975. Nineteen (19) years later, during the U.S.
Senate’s reported past 50 years, most of the "to harm" service records
were destroyed in a 1973 National Personnel Records Center (NPRC)
fire. Those that survived had all witnesses censored by Congress’s
1974 Privacy Act! The "Veterans Right to Know Act" was proposed in the
2005 and H.R. 4259 [109th] 2006 Congress. It never became law.
The U.S. Supreme Court Did Not Know?
The 1987 U.S. Supreme Court Stanley decision [4] extends the coverage
of their 1950 Feres Case that a death by a military barracks fire was
an "incident to service" [1]. Stanley treats the 1958 DOD
"experiments. ..designed to harm" disobedience of the 1953 order [3] as
also an "incident to service"! To-date not accomplished is the Senate
Report’s correcting, "IV. Recommendations. G. The Feres Doctrine
should not be applied for military personnel who are harmed by
inappropriate human experimentation when informed consent has not been
given." A few in Congress made certain that the in-the-record
revealing evidence will not be addressed. The year following STANLEY
was the 1988 Veterans’ Judicial Review Act. Established was the
Veteran’s Legislative severely restricted, Article I Court. "The court
may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities or the
policies underlying the schedule.", i.e., the order ignored "to harm"
R&D experimental effects and their causes! The Veterans Court Chief Judge's no teeth statement with his VA ignoring of the Court’s decisions! [6] The
Secretary of the VA was given Final Decision authority on these
issues. [9] Included is the power of NO APPEAL to this LEGISLATIVE
Veterans Court or to the independent U.S. Judicial Branch Courts. If
allowed an APPEAL, it is not part of the record at the Article I
Veterans Court. The evidence is also missing at the next level U.S.
Judicial Branch Article III, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
All Is In-The-Record!
Each Executive Branch (DOD, CIA & BARDA) Project completes the R&D
process. The prior lessons learned are reviewed. The then Scope of
Work defines what the experiment is "designed" to do. The how, where,
when and who is identified. The conducted researched cause and effects
are closely followed. From the results are developed safe production,
use, the needed for treatment and protection, e.g., the DOD
manufacturers handling of hazardous materials such as Depleted
Uranium, Agent Orange, the biological agents of Project 112 [8] and
the jet-engine noise levels of Project 7210 [2]. All is in the
Executive Branch record! Under the cover of national security the
revealing treatment evidence: 1. Is not cause identified in a
subject’s Medical History, so that they never the wiser become. The
deceived victim’s "to harm" effects are not Medical History recorded,
therefore not addressed! Prevented is any follow up by independent
civilian and Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) physicians. And 2. For veterans’ the 64 years
of experiment specific injuries are not in the VA "schedule of ratings
for disabilities" [6]!
Why "may not review"?
May not be reviewed records prevent medical, administrative and
judicial "activities" that "would be detrimental to the accomplishment
of...mission. " This is by the still in 2008 reasoning of "it was
necessary to conceal these activities from the american public in
general, because public knowledge of the unethical and illicit
activities would have serious repercussions in political and
diplomatic circles and would be detrimental to the accomplishment of
its mission." U.S. Supreme Court 1987 Stanley Case; Footnote 4, Page
688 on its proven 1958 CIA experiment on U.S. Army personnel. [4]
"Right to Know".
There now is no 64 years later "Veterans Right to Know". After they
complete Honorable Service despite the efforts of some Congress has
not given back to veterans their rights. Revealed would be the few’s
corrupt for the greater good of all. Accomplished by the end justifies
the "designed to harm" means. Carried out under the cover of our
nation’s wars! A few key members in Congress, have dishonored those
that serve. Lost are those prior to service rights that convicted
rapists and murderers keep! [5]
Hold Responsible.
Now BARDA Experiments Conducted on You! Please, Hold Your Members in
the U.S. Congress Accountable! These U.S. Supreme Court and U.S.
Senate Documented Facts Are Internet Censored.[11] Passing this on to
Others So That They May Do the Same Would Be Appreciated. Thank You.
David H. Marshall
REFERENCES:
[1] U.S. Supreme Court, Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950).
[2] USAF Project 7210 "A Compilation of Turbojet Noise Data", Bolt
Beranek & Newman, Inc. Cambridge 38, MA. Sound pressure levels for all
jet-engines in-service. Conducted at Wright Patterson Air Force Base,
Dayton, Ohio in 1952. 1954 logged in as the 401st report for that year
published as Report 54-401 July 1956
[3] DOD Secretary's 26 February 1953 NO non-consensual, human
experiment’s Memo pages 343-345. George J. Annas and Michael A.
Grodin, "The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in
Human Experimentation" (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). In
Reference [8] as NOTES 72, 168 & 169.
[4] U.S. Supreme Court, June 25, 1987, U.S. V. Stanley, 107 S. Ct.
3054 (Volume 483 U.S., Section 669, Pages 699 to 710). In Reference
[8] Cited in Note 169.
[5] U.S. State Dept., "U.S. Report under the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Art. 7".
[6] Chief Judge Frank Q. Nebeker, State of the Court for Presentation
to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals Third Judicial
Conference October 17-18, 1994. In the Veterans Appeals Reporter.
www.firebase. net/state_of_ court_brief. htm Annual Judicial Conference
Transcript. www.goodnet. com/~heads/ nebeker
[7] U.S. Senate December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 "Is Military Research
Hazardous to Veterans' Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century."
Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, 103rd
Congress 2nd Session. With NOTES 1 to 170. Committee Print - S. Print.
103-97.
[8] "Project 112 (Including Project SHAD) Home" chemical and
biological experiments; www. 1.va.gov/shad/
[9] United States Code (USC) Title 38, 511. Decisions of the
Secretary; finality. http://www.law. cornell.edu/
[10] "Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)" S-3678.
Why is it that this is not discussed in the Presidential debates or elsewhere in political circles? Why is this not a part of the National News nightly until something is done about it? Why? Because the military, the VA and others who are responsible for the care of our soldiers do not want you, the American public to know about this. This is a cost of war just like the cost of the bombs and other munitions use to fight the enemy. Our soldiers mental health is a cost of war and the cost is becoming very high!
Rocky
Soldier Suicides at Record Level
By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 31, 2008; A01
Lt. Elizabeth Whiteside, a psychiatric outpatient at Walter Reed Army Medical Center who was waiting for the Army to decide whether to court-martial her for endangering another soldier and turning a gun on herself last year in Iraq, attempted to kill herself Monday evening. In so doing, the 25-year-old Army reservist joined a record number of soldiers who have committed or tried to commit suicide after serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"I'm very disappointed with the Army," Whiteside wrote in a note before swallowing dozens of antidepressants and other pills. "Hopefully this will help other soldiers." She was taken to the emergency room early Tuesday. Whiteside, who is now in stable physical condition, learned yesterday that the charges against her had been dismissed.
Whiteside's personal tragedy is part of an alarming phenomenon in the Army's ranks: Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006.
At the same time, the number of attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries in the Army has jumped sixfold since the Iraq war began. Last year, about 2,100 soldiers injured themselves or attempted suicide, compared with about 350 in 2002, according to the U.S. Army Medical Command Suicide Prevention Action Plan.
The Army was unprepared for the high number of suicides and cases of post-traumatic stress disorder among its troops, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have continued far longer than anticipated. Many Army posts still do not offer enough individual counseling and some soldiers suffering psychological problems complain that they are stigmatized by commanders. Over the past year, four high-level commissions have recommended reforms and Congress has given the military hundreds of millions of dollars to improve its mental health care, but critics charge that significant progress has not been made.
The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have placed severe stress on the Army, caused in part by repeated and lengthened deployments. Historically, suicide rates tend to decrease when soldiers are in conflicts overseas, but that trend has reversed in recent years. From a suicide rate of 9.8 per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2001 -- the lowest rate on record -- the Army reached an all-time high of 17.5 suicides per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2006.
Last year, twice as many soldier suicides occurred in the United States than in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, the Army's top psychiatrist and author of the study, said that suicides and attempted suicides "are continuing to rise despite a lot of things we're doing now and have been doing." Ritchie added: "We need to improve training and education. We need to improve our capacity to provide behavioral health care."
Ritchie's team conducted more than 200 interviews in the United States and overseas, and found that the common factors in suicides and attempted suicides include failed personal relationships; legal, financial or occupational problems; and the frequency and length of overseas deployments. She said the Army must do a better job of making sure that soldiers in distress receive mental health services. "We need to know what to do when we're concerned about one of our fellows."
The study, which the Army's top personnel chief ordered six months ago, acknowledges that the Army still does not know how to adequately assess, monitor and treat soldiers with psychological problems. In fact, it says that "the current Army Suicide Prevention Program was not originally designed for a combat/deployment environment. "
Staff Sgt. Gladys Santos, an Army medic who attempted suicide after three tours in Iraq, said the Army urgently needs to hire more psychiatrists and psychologists who have an understanding of war. "They gave me an 800 number to call if I needed help," she said. "When I come to feeling overwhelmed, I don't care about the 800 number. I want a one-on-one talk with a trained psychiatrist who's either been to war or understands war."
Santos, who is being treated at Walter Reed, said the only effective therapy she has received there in the past year have been the one-on-one sessions with her psychiatrist, not the group sessions in which soldiers are told "Don't hit your wife, don't hit your kids," or the other groups where they play bingo or learn how to properly set a table.
Over the past year, the Army has reinvigorated its efforts to understand mental health issues and has instituted new assessment surveys and new online videos and questionnaires to help soldiers recognize problems and become more resilient, Ritchie said. It has also hired more mental health providers. The plan calls for attaching more chaplains to deployed units and assigning "battle buddies" to improve peer support and monitoring.
Increasing suicides raise "real questions about whether you can have an Army this size with multiple deployments, " said David Rudd, a former Army psychologist and chairman of the psychology department at Texas Tech University.
On Monday night, as President Bush delivered his State of the Union address and asked Congress to "improve the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives of hope and promise and dignity," Whiteside was dozing off from the effects of her drug overdose. Her case highlights the Army's continuing struggles to remove the stigma surrounding mental illness and to make it easier for soldiers and officers to seek psychological help.
Whiteside, the subject of a Post article in December, was a high-achieving University of Virginia graduate, and she earned top scores from her Army raters. But as a medic in charge of a small prison team in Iraq, she was repeatedly harassed by one of her commanders, which disturbed her greatly, according to an Army investigation.
On Jan. 1, 2007, weary from helping to quell riots in the prison after the execution of Saddam Hussein, Whiteside had a mental breakdown, according to an Army sanity board investigation. She pointed a gun at a superior, fired two shots into the ceiling and then turned the weapon on herself, piercing several organs. She has been at Walter Reed ever since.
Whiteside's two immediate commanders brought charges against her, but Maj. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker, the only physician in her chain of command and then the commander of Walter Reed, recommended that the charges be dropped, citing her "demonstrably severe depression" and "7 years of credible and honorable service."
The case hinged in part on whether her mental illness prompted her actions, as Walter Reed psychiatrists testified last month, or whether it was "an excuse" for her actions, as her company commander wrote when he proffered the original charges in April. Those charges included assault on a superior commissioned officer, aggravated assault, kidnapping, reckless endangerment, wrongful discharge of a firearm, communication of a threat and two attempts of intentional self-injury without intent to avoid service.
An Army hearing officer cited "Army values" and the need to do "what is right, legally and morally" when he recommended last month that Whiteside not face court-martial or other administration punishment, but that she be discharged and receive the medical benefits "she will desperately need for the remainder of her life." Whiteside decided to speak publicly about her case only after a soldier she had befriended at the hospital's psychiatric ward hanged herself after she was discharged without benefits.
But the U.S. Army Military District of Washington, which has ultimate legal jurisdiction over the case, declined for weeks to tell Whiteside whether others in her chain of command have concurred or differed with the hearing officer, said Matthew MacLean, Whiteside's civilian attorney and a former military lawyer.
MacLean and Whiteside's father, Thomas Whiteside, said the uncertainty took its toll on the young officer's mental state. "I've never seen anything like this. It's just so far off the page," said Thomas Whiteside, his voice cracking with emotion. "I told her, 'If you check out of here, you're not going to be able to help other soldiers.' "
Whiteside recently had begun to take prerequisite classes for a nursing degree, and her mental stability seemed to be improving, her father said. Then late last week, she told him she was having trouble sleeping, with a possible court-martial weighing on her. On Monday night, she asked her father to take her back to her room at Walter Reed so she could study.
She swallowed her pills there. A soldier and his wife, who live next door, came to her room and, after a while, noticed that she was becoming groggy, Thomas Whiteside said. When they returned later and she would not open the door, they called hospital authorities.
Yesterday, after having spent two nights in the intensive care unit, he said, his daughter was transferred to the psychiatric ward.
Whiteside left two notes, one titled "Business," in which her top concern was the fate of her dog. "Appointment for the Vetenarian is in my blue book. Additional paperwork on Chewy is in the closet at the apartment in a folder." On her second note, she penned a postscript: "Sorry to do this to my family + friends. I love you."
Staff writer Anne Hull contributed to this report.
Rocky
Soldier Suicides at Record Level
By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 31, 2008; A01
Lt. Elizabeth Whiteside, a psychiatric outpatient at Walter Reed Army Medical Center who was waiting for the Army to decide whether to court-martial her for endangering another soldier and turning a gun on herself last year in Iraq, attempted to kill herself Monday evening. In so doing, the 25-year-old Army reservist joined a record number of soldiers who have committed or tried to commit suicide after serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"I'm very disappointed with the Army," Whiteside wrote in a note before swallowing dozens of antidepressants and other pills. "Hopefully this will help other soldiers." She was taken to the emergency room early Tuesday. Whiteside, who is now in stable physical condition, learned yesterday that the charges against her had been dismissed.
Whiteside's personal tragedy is part of an alarming phenomenon in the Army's ranks: Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006.
At the same time, the number of attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries in the Army has jumped sixfold since the Iraq war began. Last year, about 2,100 soldiers injured themselves or attempted suicide, compared with about 350 in 2002, according to the U.S. Army Medical Command Suicide Prevention Action Plan.
The Army was unprepared for the high number of suicides and cases of post-traumatic stress disorder among its troops, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have continued far longer than anticipated. Many Army posts still do not offer enough individual counseling and some soldiers suffering psychological problems complain that they are stigmatized by commanders. Over the past year, four high-level commissions have recommended reforms and Congress has given the military hundreds of millions of dollars to improve its mental health care, but critics charge that significant progress has not been made.
The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have placed severe stress on the Army, caused in part by repeated and lengthened deployments. Historically, suicide rates tend to decrease when soldiers are in conflicts overseas, but that trend has reversed in recent years. From a suicide rate of 9.8 per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2001 -- the lowest rate on record -- the Army reached an all-time high of 17.5 suicides per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2006.
Last year, twice as many soldier suicides occurred in the United States than in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, the Army's top psychiatrist and author of the study, said that suicides and attempted suicides "are continuing to rise despite a lot of things we're doing now and have been doing." Ritchie added: "We need to improve training and education. We need to improve our capacity to provide behavioral health care."
Ritchie's team conducted more than 200 interviews in the United States and overseas, and found that the common factors in suicides and attempted suicides include failed personal relationships; legal, financial or occupational problems; and the frequency and length of overseas deployments. She said the Army must do a better job of making sure that soldiers in distress receive mental health services. "We need to know what to do when we're concerned about one of our fellows."
The study, which the Army's top personnel chief ordered six months ago, acknowledges that the Army still does not know how to adequately assess, monitor and treat soldiers with psychological problems. In fact, it says that "the current Army Suicide Prevention Program was not originally designed for a combat/deployment environment. "
Staff Sgt. Gladys Santos, an Army medic who attempted suicide after three tours in Iraq, said the Army urgently needs to hire more psychiatrists and psychologists who have an understanding of war. "They gave me an 800 number to call if I needed help," she said. "When I come to feeling overwhelmed, I don't care about the 800 number. I want a one-on-one talk with a trained psychiatrist who's either been to war or understands war."
Santos, who is being treated at Walter Reed, said the only effective therapy she has received there in the past year have been the one-on-one sessions with her psychiatrist, not the group sessions in which soldiers are told "Don't hit your wife, don't hit your kids," or the other groups where they play bingo or learn how to properly set a table.
Over the past year, the Army has reinvigorated its efforts to understand mental health issues and has instituted new assessment surveys and new online videos and questionnaires to help soldiers recognize problems and become more resilient, Ritchie said. It has also hired more mental health providers. The plan calls for attaching more chaplains to deployed units and assigning "battle buddies" to improve peer support and monitoring.
Increasing suicides raise "real questions about whether you can have an Army this size with multiple deployments, " said David Rudd, a former Army psychologist and chairman of the psychology department at Texas Tech University.
On Monday night, as President Bush delivered his State of the Union address and asked Congress to "improve the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives of hope and promise and dignity," Whiteside was dozing off from the effects of her drug overdose. Her case highlights the Army's continuing struggles to remove the stigma surrounding mental illness and to make it easier for soldiers and officers to seek psychological help.
Whiteside, the subject of a Post article in December, was a high-achieving University of Virginia graduate, and she earned top scores from her Army raters. But as a medic in charge of a small prison team in Iraq, she was repeatedly harassed by one of her commanders, which disturbed her greatly, according to an Army investigation.
On Jan. 1, 2007, weary from helping to quell riots in the prison after the execution of Saddam Hussein, Whiteside had a mental breakdown, according to an Army sanity board investigation. She pointed a gun at a superior, fired two shots into the ceiling and then turned the weapon on herself, piercing several organs. She has been at Walter Reed ever since.
Whiteside's two immediate commanders brought charges against her, but Maj. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker, the only physician in her chain of command and then the commander of Walter Reed, recommended that the charges be dropped, citing her "demonstrably severe depression" and "7 years of credible and honorable service."
The case hinged in part on whether her mental illness prompted her actions, as Walter Reed psychiatrists testified last month, or whether it was "an excuse" for her actions, as her company commander wrote when he proffered the original charges in April. Those charges included assault on a superior commissioned officer, aggravated assault, kidnapping, reckless endangerment, wrongful discharge of a firearm, communication of a threat and two attempts of intentional self-injury without intent to avoid service.
An Army hearing officer cited "Army values" and the need to do "what is right, legally and morally" when he recommended last month that Whiteside not face court-martial or other administration punishment, but that she be discharged and receive the medical benefits "she will desperately need for the remainder of her life." Whiteside decided to speak publicly about her case only after a soldier she had befriended at the hospital's psychiatric ward hanged herself after she was discharged without benefits.
But the U.S. Army Military District of Washington, which has ultimate legal jurisdiction over the case, declined for weeks to tell Whiteside whether others in her chain of command have concurred or differed with the hearing officer, said Matthew MacLean, Whiteside's civilian attorney and a former military lawyer.
MacLean and Whiteside's father, Thomas Whiteside, said the uncertainty took its toll on the young officer's mental state. "I've never seen anything like this. It's just so far off the page," said Thomas Whiteside, his voice cracking with emotion. "I told her, 'If you check out of here, you're not going to be able to help other soldiers.' "
Whiteside recently had begun to take prerequisite classes for a nursing degree, and her mental stability seemed to be improving, her father said. Then late last week, she told him she was having trouble sleeping, with a possible court-martial weighing on her. On Monday night, she asked her father to take her back to her room at Walter Reed so she could study.
She swallowed her pills there. A soldier and his wife, who live next door, came to her room and, after a while, noticed that she was becoming groggy, Thomas Whiteside said. When they returned later and she would not open the door, they called hospital authorities.
Yesterday, after having spent two nights in the intensive care unit, he said, his daughter was transferred to the psychiatric ward.
Whiteside left two notes, one titled "Business," in which her top concern was the fate of her dog. "Appointment for the Vetenarian is in my blue book. Additional paperwork on Chewy is in the closet at the apartment in a folder." On her second note, she penned a postscript: "Sorry to do this to my family + friends. I love you."
Staff writer Anne Hull contributed to this report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
