U.s. Health Care System Is 'dysfunctional Mess,' Prominent Federal Ethicist Says

[huskerfanfl]

Allan,

Good comments and very well thought out. Explain to me please how I am not entitled to my own opinion. I served 26 years in the military defending peoples rights and now you are going to belittle my personal opinion? You are entitled to yours and I am entitled to mine. I will make mine as clear as I can. No, I do not believe that someone who was in the army for a year or so and goes out and gets into a civilian automobile accident deserves compensation. No, I do not believe someone that cannot manage to serve out their intial enlistment because they are found unsuitable for service deserves compensation. I was on another board the other day and a fella told his story. Evidently he needed to be on medicine to control his anger, but for some reason the Air Force let him in (supposedly he was told he would be able to take his meds while in basic training). Anyway, he could not handle being off his meds and he got discharged before he completed that training. He applied for compensation and was denied and his case is now at the BVA. Now, it is only my PERSONAL opinion, but he should not be getting compensation, and in my PERSONAL opinion, he is part of the problem with the VA because he is one of the people out there clogging the system with a claim that is essentially unwinable (again, my PERSONAL opinion). Now, since being on this, and other boards, I have seen people be given advice as to how to win claims. Many times this advice centered around bad conduct (drug problems, alcohol problems) while in the military to prove PTSD, and these were people who did not serve in combat.

To further clarify my position, I have nothing but respect for those who have served in combat. My war was the Gulf War, and let's be honest, there was not the same stress during that conflict as their was in Viet Nam or in the current war. My point was, and remains, that I find it incredible that someone can work for years after combat, and then when they retire from their civilian job are sudeenly unable to work because of their PTSD. Yes, I understand that there is such a thing as delayed PTSD, and that people working and raising a family can keep them going for years. The argument then becpmes, if work helped these people, why are they relunctant to work? It would seem to be the healthy thing for them to do (using Sledge's point). And yet, when someone testifies before congress and says that people with PTSD should work, people are all up in arms screaming because someone is trying to take their compensation away. So, as someone who does not suffer from PTSD, I have trouble understanding why if something will help someone be healthier mentally, they are against it.

As to whether or not I am a member of some cult or a VA employee, you seriously need to get your paranoia checked out. I am under no obligation to tell you, but here goes. I served in the army from 1978 - 2004 and upon retirement began to work for my state in a juveile facility where I assist troubled youth. I earned my Bachelor's degree in 2003 and hold a Master's Degree in Marriage and Family Therapy (that is mental health counseling). I finshed the degree last year with a 4.00 GPA. I am not not now, nor have I ever been an employee of the VA. So, now you know what I do for a living besides spread propaganda (sorry my PERSONAL opinions).

[allan]

>Explain to me please how I am not entitled to my own opinion.

Hello Steve,

I asked for fact, not your personal opinion.

Veterans with less than two yrs service come here seeking factual information. This is not a forum for you to spread your personal vendetta.

If a "VETERAN" with only 1.5 yrs of service becomes disabled to a compensable degree, due to an IN-SERVICE injury or illness & can prove it, they are entitled to it by law. THAT is what the law says.

Whatever nonsense you want to fabricate, because you can't except the truth, has no place on any site where Veterans need the truth so they can make an honest evaluation of the facts.

Are you able to submit ANY USC, CFR, M-manual procedure, memo's or law of any kind?????, that states: if a veteran serves less than a yr and a half & is involved in an accident(vehicle or any other)and it's not due to their own misconduct, they are not entitled to compensation?

Are you aware that slight head trauma, be it from bio-toxins, vaccines, car accidents, active duty training, etc., may cause PTSD symptoms?

If you & SAlly are so interested in helping vets with jobs, why not direct your efforts to assist Voc rehab.

You can live with the symptoms for decades, & not know PTSD is what is wrong with you.

You don't have PTSD yourself? My guess is that Sally doesn't either.

Maybe it would be better to leave helping Vets with PTSD, to Vets with PTSD?

[huskerfanfl]

Allan,

Again good job. You not only managed to ignore the fact that you implied that I was a clown, a fanatic, or a VA employee, but the majority of my posting as well. I can only assume the your posting the clown, fanatic, and and va employee crap is YOUR OPINION. Again, you are entitled to yours, and I am entitled to mine.

As far as the PTSD issue, I never once said that the symptoms could not appear for years, in fact I acknowledged as much when I said that PTSD can occur with delayed onset. My point about work was taken from a vet who has PTSD who said that his working kept him functioning. There is no doubt that keeping one's mind occupied will help one deal with the PTSD symtoms.

In my post I cited an example of a person who had anger issues before he entered the service. He did not make it through basic training, so my OPINION is that the injury did not occur and was nto aggravated by active duty, an opinion apparantly shared by the VA since he was declined compensation.

There are of course other things that may occur that would not lead to compensation. One being drunk, getting behind the wheel of a car and wrapping said car around a tree for instance. If the military does the proper paperwor (line of duty investigation) then that person should not receive compensation. Do I have a problem with a person who is hit by a car getting compensation? No I do not. Do I have a problem with a person seeing his buddy die in a training accident receiving compensation? No I do not. My comments about time in service have to do with people who are jusdged to be unsuited for military service not due to accident, injury, PTSD, MST or anything like that. There ARE people who have joined the service, and upon getting out on their own, hit the bottle or take drugs, are judged unsuitable, get discharged, and then try to get compensation for their drug use. To be honest, I do not feel that people should be able to get SSDI because they CHOSE to use drugs either. Now, if the alcohol and/or drugs are a means of self-medication, then that is a completely different story.

As far as leaving PTSD up to those who have PTSD, that does not seem very bright considereing the fact that they are having trouble functioning (hence the reason for the disability). Now my PERSONAL OPINION is that those with mental disorders and are rated 100% should be able to work without losing their benefits. This would accomplish both goals, that of compensating the veteran for the disability and allowing them much needed work therapy. This is the exact way that veterans with phyiscal disabilities are treated. Now, if you have a problem with that OPINION, you can take this board and all the opinions that EVERYONE posts on here and shove them where the sun does not shine.

Here are the opinions of others expressed in this thread:

From you:

"If not, is someone mentally unbalanced to go around spreading false information, in order to discourage federal employees from seeking care & compensation?

Or is this some kind of personal vendetta of VA employees who force their "PERSONAL" beliefs as to how compensation SHOULD be dealt out, if they had "THEIR" way.

Every once in a while, some clown comes on here & tries to spread the beliefs of a fanatical cult, who believes, NO one who serves, deserves a damn thing. This group HATES the fact that any of us get one penny for their employment time in the military, no matter how long they serve."

From Jay:

"No offense, but I'm guessing your opinions on this were shaped by conservative propaganda."

"One more note - a universal system should be based on income level (as to copays and such). Someone making over 500K/yr should, basically, be paying their entire medical bill (short of catastrophic claims); whereas, someone making 20K/yr should have little, or no, copays. A system like this would end up costing the average American very little because many folks currently covered would actually be paying more for insurance, but most Americans would end up paying less."

Edited May 26, 2007 by huskerfanfl

[Jay Johnson]

As far as the PTSD issue, I never once said that the symptoms could not appear for years, in fact I acknowledged as much when I said that PTSD can occur with delayed onset. My point about work was taken from a vet who has PTSD who said that his working kept him functioning. There is no doubt that keeping one's mind occupied will help one deal with the PTSD symtoms.

Work, in and of itself, can, and usually does, hurt PTSD vets. The only time work becomes therapeutic is when the job is such that one is not forced to work (IE - to pay the bills) and/or one's job is very low stress (good boss, good environment, etc). Although there are scenarios in which one can work without needing the cash while the same person can be in a low stress, good work environment, I don't believe that's the norm for 95% of us. Rather, we work to live in jobs most of us don't care for, while working for inferior, rude people.

This is the major flaw in Sally's argument to the VA. I guess she assumes that everyone makes 7 figures and gets paid to give opinions to a "think tank". Of course, if every vet had her job, they probably could work while being 100% with PTSD and it may actually help their symptoms......

To be honest, I do not feel that people should be able to get SSDI because they CHOSE to use drugs either. Now, if the alcohol and/or drugs are a means of self-medication, then that is a completely different story.

You say you have a degree in mental health and you use this tired cliche? Drugs and mental disability are inextricably linked. People who abuse drugs are almost always using them as a form of self-medication. Hell, Freud was a huge proponent of cocaine as a psychologically therapeutic drug.

People who are categorized as "choosing" to take drugs are just folks who are self-medicating and cannot admit to others, or even themselves, WHY they are self-medicating. Do you honestly believe hookers become hookers because it's a good career path? How many prostitutes, and other women in the sex industry, say that they had no childhood trauma? Yet, they smoke crack and sleep with dirty old men for money (which is used to buy more crack). In truth, these women cannot admit to THEMSELVES that they were molested as children and have become desensitized to the act of sex.

I took drugs as a kid (LSD, coke, pot, etc.) and I never even came close to getting hooked or abused it. However, the friends who came from rough backgrounds ALL got hooked on the drugs and some even died as teenagers. So, is it conceivable that some people abuse drugs just for some sort of "high"? Perhaps, but it's far outside of the norm.

As far as leaving PTSD up to those who have PTSD, that does not seem very bright considereing the fact that they are having trouble functioning (hence the reason for the disability). Now my PERSONAL OPINION is that those with mental disorders and are rated 100% should be able to work without losing their benefits. This would accomplish both goals, that of compensating the veteran for the disability and allowing them much needed work therapy. This is the exact way that veterans with phyiscal disabilities are treated. Now, if you have a problem with that OPINION, you can take this board and all the opinions that EVERYONE posts on here and shove them where the sun does not shine.

Here we agree. 100% PTSD vets should be locked into that rating (after, say, a period of 3-5yrs) and they should be allowed to work. Money earned on said job should be deducted from their VA compensation. This would allow those vets to seek employment without having to worry about "needing" said employment to live, which takes away most of the stress associated with work. In essence, if you get $2500 from the VA you will always be guaranteed that wage, so income becomes less of an issue, which leaves one to focus on personal goals without unneeded stress.

The problem is that the VA still buys into this idea that PTSD can be cured with words (IE - therapy), which is voodoo medicine in my opinion. Regardless, the VA will not lock any PTSD vet into a rating, nor give them any real guarantees that a veteran could trust with so many people advising them that PTSD is "all in one's head" and can be cured with hard work and dedication. Maybe we should tell someone who is missing two legs to just "walk it off"? Their ideas on PTSD are just as absurd.

[huskerfanfl]

I respect all of your opinions, thank you for sharing

[SLEDGE]

In retrospect,

I personally know an intelligent guy who is well off and pleasant to be with.

He served with me for a short period of time in the local Guard unit.

(After I got back from the war.)

He will swear that the nobody wrestles on TV with any kind of a script or predetermined outcome.

They never pull their punches and everything that they say into a microphone is how they really feel toward each other.

Some people just KNOW that their beliefs are the only correct beliefs and nothing will change their minds.

Which reminds me of the camel jockeys that are blowing up our trucks and troops in Irag.

And the US Congress.

sledge