|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics |
|
November 10, 2004Iraq Veterans and PTSDLast night on the Newshour with Jim Lehrer, I heard that and estimated 17% of the returning soldiers coming back from Iraq are being diagnosed with PTSD. That is the same rate as those who returned from Vietnam, and we all know what kind of an impact that had on those soldiers lives and on our cultural memory of that war. I believe the report said something like 43% of these soldiers don't want to report their symptoms because they fear being viewed as weak by their C.O., and 50% believe that it would jeopardize their job, possibly to the point of dishonorable discharge if they did report it. Sorry, I tried to find a text link to the story, but it doesn't look like the Newhour has posted one yet. I think we need to do some serious examination of why these soldiers believe this. Are these men and women at risk of being stigmatized by the military if they report PTSD symptoms, and what can be done to correct that? Soliders are starting to return from this war. Are we doing everything that we can do to help these people in the aftermath of their service in this war? I'd love to hear the views of any former veterans if there are any of you lurking out there. Comments
Sorry. Not "former" vetrans. Just veterans. I meant former soldiers. :-) Posted by: AmyE at November 10, 2004 10:11 AM My brother is a vet ( he's been home about 2 months) and he says it's a matter of pride for some, however, many have no idea that their problems adjusting are related to PTSD. They are told about it, but the fact that everyone at home is adjusting (or readjusting) to a soldier coming home can disguise symptoms. It's just hard to tell when it is time to get help. He also says that he has not heard of "punitive" action being taken against those who are dealing with that issue. My wife is a lawyer for the Veterans Administration and I can tell you why the soldiers fear it. If they get a dishonorable discharge (as opposed to an honorable discharge), they are not eligible for VA benefits. It may be paranois on their part, but the military has some incentive to get rid of these people. And benefits for PTSD as opposed to say, benefits for amputees, are based on ability to work. If they get kicked out of the military, but are not totally unfit for work, they would not get PTSD benefits or least not as much. Posted by: MWS at November 10, 2004 10:49 AMEdudude, you bring up a point I forgot to mention in the original post. The report also said that soldiers are given info about PTSD as soon as they return, but that for the reasons you note above, that is not the time to try to diagnose PTSD. The psychologists that they interviewed said that in most cases, symptoms don't start to really make their presence adamantly known until about 4 months after the soldier has been home. Posted by: AmyE at November 10, 2004 11:21 AMThere's a bunch of information here: "The National Center for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was created within the Department of Veterans Affairs in 1989, in response to a Congressional mandate to address the needs of veterans with military-related PTSD." http://www.ncptsd.org/ Posted by: Susan at November 10, 2004 02:07 PMIt shouldn't really be very surprising that many soldiers don't feel they can trust the brass to give them a fair shake on such issues. The Army is very segrated between officers and regular non-com soldiers. Distrust and antipathy follows from this. And such attitudes are also found throughout various workplace cultures. It's especially so in rigid organized ones like the Army and in union shops, but it is far from exclusive to them. People who feel like foot soldiers compared to whoever their brass is are prone to getting together to commiserate about their bosses, who can be seen as mean, unfeeling, unloyal, greedy, more concerned about their @ss than yours, and so on. Such bitch sessions are the vehicles for spreading terrible stories about this that or the other footsoldier that got shafted by this or that executive, general, HR person, etc. There's something of an oppositional mindset. And the terrible stories are very, very often also teaching tales that spread prudent conventional wisdom about how to shelter your hindquarters, like "wait until after discharge to file a claim." HR departments are ALWAYS sending out nice stuff urging employees that they can trust the company, that it's a big family, and so on. But if it's a big company, few people really buy into this completely. So the answer is that soldiers believe the things you describe because they are jaded, and they are jaded because it's pretty much an inevitable by-product of service in a large hierarchical organization with a clear dividing line between the worker bees and the queens. Posted by: bk at November 10, 2004 03:38 PMBK: I believe this bifurcation you're talking about is called "military discipline" and "command structure". The military is not a Fortune 500 company and should not be run like one. The divisions between officer and enlisted exist for a reason. Besides, any line officer is just as likely to suffer from PTSD as a grunt. IMO, the military mindset (at all levels) does not take kindly to mental illness in any form. Jason Posted by: Jason at November 12, 2004 10:13 AMJason wrote: IMO, the military mindset (at all levels) does not take kindly to mental illness in any form. This is my take. If you look at history, soldiers aren't encouraged to talk about the horrors of war in and of itself regardless of rank. You only get attention when you can tie physical damage to some sort of chemical exposure or maybe POW-related torture. Gulf War vets had to lobby to get a minimum evaluation and that came about seven years after the war. You'll also find this same mindset in specific communities/households. A lot of it has to do with economic limitations to getting help. So, it comes down to suck it up and get on with your (dysfunctional) life. |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|