Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

Ask Your VA   Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
  
 Read Disability Claims Articles 
 Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • homepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Ptsd/advisory Committee On Disability Compensation

Rate this question


Testvet

Question

  • HadIt.com Elder

This needs quick action to get your comments to Ersie Farber at the VA who is handling the correspondence for this commission.

Here they come again, please write your opinions on changes to the VA compensation for PTSD for 100% or TDIU veterans, one of their ideas is to stop IU payments when the veterans reaches retirement age at 65, my opinion is below, like most people I have opinions on most subjects but being rated 100% schedular for PTSD leaves me as one of the targets of this commission, they have had two recent commissions on this similar subject in the past 3 years the Dole/Shalala Commission and the VDBC Veterans Disability Benefits Commission chaired by the same man chairing this commission LTG Scott

Comments should be e mailed to Ersie.farber@va.gov

PTSD/Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation

On Sep 21-22, the Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation meets in Arlington. This committee is now chaired by the same LTG Scott who chaired the infamous Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission. While they intend to concede some items on PTSD, they are in fact attempting to recommend an end to TDIU and 100% disability. Please forward this to all concerned.

Kurt; Vet Advocate

kpriessman@yahoo.com

To the Members of the Commission; 19 September 2009

I just learned of this commission and it's purpose this morning, it is the first mention of it I had even seen, and I try and stay informed of veterans issues. I am a veteran of the Vietnam War Era active duty from October 31, 1973 - September 1982 leaving as a Staff Sergeant Promotable. I then joined the Army National Guard in Augusta Georgia, the local unit was an Engineer battalion, the 878th HHC in Augusta. I volunteered in November 1990 when the 878th was not going to be activated to transfer to the 48th Infantry Brigade that was being activated for Desert Storm and need infantry NCO's to fill out the units, I was assigned to HHC 1/121st Infantry as a Squad Leader in a 4.2 Mortar Unit.

I was diagnosed with PTSD by a team of psychiatrists and pyschologists by a VA PTSD team after four months of testing and interviews. The incident which the VA based my PTSD on was an attempted murder and robbery by 7 fellow soldiers at Fort Wainwright Alaska on Feb 6, 1975. Four of the men were sentenced by General Court Martial to 15 years in Leavenworth, the other 3 were reduced by Filed Grade Article 15 to PV1 and all were given Bad Conduct Discharges, I was transferred from the 9th ID at Fort Lewis, to the 2nd ID in August 1975 to get me away from the friends of the men found guilty of the attack. It was considered a racial incident and the Army's solution was to get me off Fort Lewis as soon as possible after the trials ended, I left within a week.

Needless to say there are other incidents that occurred over my Army career that would be considered "stressors" as well, the human experiments at Edgewood Arsenal, when I learned the full extent of what really happened at Edgewood Arsenal in October 2002, my life took a deep spiral. I was on the DMZ got the Operation Paul Bunyan, I knew CPT Bonifas and 1LT Barrett, and 1LT Charles Pigg although at JSA they made him wear name tags identifying him as 1LT Charles. I was assigned to Camp Lilberty Bell, which was located across the MSR on the DMZ itself. The men of Camp Liberty Bell used the PX at JSA frequently, I also knew 1LT Pigg at Fort Lewis when we were both in the 2/47 Infantry battalion.

I am not proud of the way I lived my civilian life after leaving the Army, like most NCOs of the time, I drank quite a bit, it was "normal" back then, Bosses nights at the NCO club where we brought the Officers and Right hand night at the Officers clubs where they brought the senior NCOs in the unit. Company parties used to provide beer from the unit funds, many NCOs hid their PTSD thru self medicating, admitting symptoms of PTSD was a career ender back then.

I then went to work for the Postal Service where many veterans worked and many of the Supervisors knew the symptoms of PTSD and they worked with the other veterans, one of my surpervisors was a 100% disabled Ranger 1SG Dale Curry, he knew I had problems as did a few other carriers with military histories, quite a few of us had problems self medicating, Dale got many of us into a Postal service program for couseling to help us keep our jobs rather than get terminated. I have four failed marriages, 2 DUI's and various other problems in my past, am I proud of this no, but it is what it is.

I was ashamed of being "weak" I spent years telling my troops to suck it up, be a man, you have to forget the men you lost, training accidents happened, we named places after them, but the job still had to be done, so we have the memorial service and then it's back to the mission. The mission always comes first, drive on. Be all that you can be.

I don't know the right answers on how to "adjust" compensation for these totally disabled veterans with "PTSD" how can I be expected to change my lifestyle from my current VA compensation when I turn 65 "retirement age" to be reduced from 100% Scehdular to lets say 70%, as wel all know 70% rating is not 70% of the 100% pay it is less than half of the pay, how am I supposed to make my mortgage paymenst, pay my utility bills, car payments, insurance, buy groceries etc? What happens to the state benefits I get because I am a 100% disabled veteran, discounts on property taxes, free disabled license plates for my 2 vehicles, that would all be gone if the Commission recommends reducing retirement age disabled veterans from either TDIU or a 100% schedular rating.

Given the fact that I like many other veterans would have had out 100% schedular ratings for more than ten years what would be the basis for reducing us, because we have reached retirement age? Where is any type of historical basis for doing such an action, and besides what other than saving money for the government would even be the reason for this? Is this the PROMISE future veterans have to look forward to, if you are disabled we will compensate you at this higher rate until you turn age 65 and then we are going to reduce your compensation. Has the government proposed reducing the retirement pay of any other federal employees at age 65 or offsetting it against their Social Security payments? They shouldn't both are earned benefits, one thru work and other thru the SSDI payments each individual makes thruout their working years.

As I am sure you are aware most disabled veterans already receive SSD payments if they are rated either 100% schedular or TDIU and have been receiving these payments along with their veterans benefits. Both have been paid for and and due to the veterans one is the SSD is anm insurance program that each and every American is eligible for if they become disabled before regular retirement age, and the VA compensation is the payment each military member gets for losing part of themselves either physically or mentally thru their service to this nation commoningly known as the PROMISE.

Two previous commission the VDBC recommended a 25% immediate increase in compensation for quality of life issues that the commission felt the disabled veterans were not being properly compensated for. Despite this report being published over 2 years ago, nothing has been done, even the Dole/Shalala Commission recommended immediate raises in compensation, although that commission recommended higher benefits for the veterans of the 2 new wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, and ignore the veterans of the older wars, the Cold War, Gulf War One, Vietnam, Korea and WW2, Senator Dole made comments that creating a two tier veterans compensation was acceptable to him one that paid veterans of the new wars more money than veterans from the First Gulf War and past, that the veterans would accept it, if it meant that new disabled veterans would get better benefits.

That was an assumption on his part only, no two tier system is acceptable, we are all disabled veterans, and we all should be compensated equally based on our percentages, not which war we served in.

Mt step father was a WW2 Army Air Corp B 17 flight crew member, he stayed and retired from the Air Force in 1961, he then went to work for the Postal Service as Civil Service and then became disabled and drew SSD based on his military service, he was a "triple dipper" one of those that President Reagan went after in the 80's, but Dale was grandfathered in, he had earned and deserved all three benefit payments. But future retirees lost their SS benefits to their military retirements and Civil Service retirement benefits.

I am sure this action saved the United States a few hundred million dollars over the years, but they broke a lot of promises in this action.

Given that todays military is all voluntary, does the nation want to go down the road of telling future recruits that if you happen to become totally disabled by mental problems PTSD/TBI etc, we will pay you more money until you turn 65 and then we are going to reduce your pay level to barely above poverty level. How will this entice people to enlist in the service to learn that in their elederly years when they can not obtain a decent paying job, the veterans agency that is supposed to take care of them, is going to stick it to them, and reduce their income so the federal government can save some money, after all the veterans are older now, they shouldn't expect to live so well at 65 as they did at 55, now should they?

How many of this commission are going to have their retirement incomes adjusted down decades after becoming used to that certain level of income, and what would it do to your household to frop from 3,000 a month income to 1400.00 a month income, and you are not physically or mentally able to obtain work to replace that income, or lose your home because after years of not having to pay property taxes because you have been considered totally disabled by the VA, only to have the state send a tax bill of 5,000 a year that has never had to be paid before, ad valorem taxes for cars that had been exempt and now you owe an extra 1000.00 a year in vehicle fees?

You will not just be saving the federal governent a few dollars you will be totally destroying many people's lives. In some cases like mine my wife has not been able to work for the past 10 years, as I am unable to drive and it is not safe to leave me unattended for 8-10 hours a day, panic attacks, fall asleep witha lit cigarette due to being drowsy from the meds the VA shrinks have me on, to make me more compatible with other people, without the meds, I don't play well with others.

Please consider all of these factors when you make your decisions, I can live without a 25% immediate pay hike, I don't see how I could make it if at 65 you decide to reduce my income by half and then make my property taxable after the past 10 years of being tax exempt and having my lifestyle set to my income. Is it to much to expect the government to keep the PROMISE and care for us until we die, and our survivors with DIC benefits that was promise when we enlisted 10-50 years ago?

Michael G Bailey

US Army Infantry SSG disabled

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder

well here's a Stars and Stripes article from August 1 and here is a link to the VA Commissions page http://www1.va.gov/advisory/page.cfm?pg=62

VA not ready to back extra pay for lost quality-of-life

By Tom Philpott, Special to Stars and Stripes

Pacific edition, Saturday, August 1, 2009

Monthly compensation that the Department of Veterans Affairs pays to veterans with service-connected disabilities is intended to replace average earnings loss due to their injuries or ailments.

But should VA also pay disabled veterans something extra for diminished quality of life? Two prominent commissions in 2007 said that it should. On Wednesday, however, a senior VA official told senators that the department isn’t prepared yet to endorse a qualify-of-life payment, or to make any other significant change to disability compensation.

“There’s more information that’s needed, and…more discussion that needs to take place with many experts, before we are prepared to say yes or no on any of those recommendations,” said Patrick W. Dunne, under secretary for benefits in VA’s Veterans Benefits Administration.

Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.), ranking Republican on the veterans’ affairs committee, raised the issue in a hearing on a different topic: What VA is doing to speed the processing of a rising number of disability claims.

Burr noted that VA just last year commissioned a study, by Economic Systems Inc., of Falls Church, Va., on appropriate levels of disability pay to compensate for loss of earning capacity and quality of life as a result of service-related disabilities. This six-month study was to follow up on recommendations from both the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission and the Dole-Shalala Commission in 2007 to reform disability compensation.

The benefits commission, in its comprehensive report, concluded that VA disability pay was too low for three categories of veterans: those who suffer from mental disabilities; those severely injured while young, and those deemed unemployable (i.e., rated IU or Individual Unemployability) by VA.

The commission also said current disability pay should reflect the “adverse impact…on quality of life” of veterans’ disabilities. Commissioners recognized that some severely injured veterans are paid a Special Monthly Compensation too on top of VA disability pay. But they said the VA rating schedule still should be revised to compensate many more veterans for diminished quality of life. In the interim, the commission said, Congress should increase VA disability compensation immediately by 25 percent.

The Dole-Shalala panel focused its recommendations on wounded warriors and veterans who were in service after the attacks of 9/11. It recommended restructuring their VA disability compensation into three parts: transition payments to cover short-term living expenses for disabled vets and their families; earning loss payments until veterans become eligible for social security, and a quality-of-life payment to compensate for non-work-related effects of permanent “combat-related” injuries.

The study by Economic Systems, Inc. (EconSys), delivered last August, looked at VA disability compensation with regard to earnings loss, loss of quality of life, transition benefits and other areas raised by the two commissions. To ensure that VA didn’t ignore the findings, the Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 2008 directed VA to evaluate the EconSys study and, in a report to Congress, give a timeline and a list of legislative changes needed to make any worthy disability pay reforms.

VA’s assessment of the EconSys study arrived on Capitol Hill July 22.

“But I don’t see any planned actions or timelines laid out in the VA’s report,” Burr told Dunne a week later. “Could you clarify whether VA plans to take any actions in response to that study?”

Dunne said EconSys did a “good job” considering its six-month deadline, but much more information and debate is needed before VA can back changes. For VA or Congress to act based on the “truly national policy recommendations” found in the EconSys study, which relied on insufficient cost and earnings data, “would not be serving our veterans properly,” Dunne said.

In reading VA’s evaluation of the $3.2 million EconSys study, it’s easy to see why VA officials are cautious. It’s a mixed bag for veterans. Some options are quite costly but might help many veterans. Others, like one calling for IU compensation eligibility to end in old age, would save VA money but anger many veterans. VA calls some of the recommendations “inconsistent with the nation’s obligations to its wounded warriors.”

EconSys presented three options for compensating for loss of quality of life. The easiest to understand would create a standard additional payment based on a veteran’s combined degree of disability. Payments would be set by assigning a quality-of-life score to the degree of disability.

“The report used several factors in coming up with the score, but also found that the overall quality of life varies greatly among veterans with the same disability rating, depending on the body system involved,” VA warned.

A second option would create a separate pay scale for loss of quality of life, based on a veteran's combined degree of disability and primary disability. Certain disabilities would be associated with greater quality-of-life loss than others. That might result in veterans with a lower combined degree of disability getting a higher quality-of-life payment, VA said.

A third option would have VA conduct individual clinical and rating assessments and establish separate, empirically-based rates for loss of earnings and loss of quality of life. The VA medical exam would have to be expanded to include a rater to assess a wide range of quality-of-life criteria.

EconSys estimated the annual cost of each of its quality of life payment options would be in a range of between $10 billion to $30 billion.

Burr urged Dunne to consult with VA Secretary Eric Shinseki, and then tell Congress “what the next step should be.” Burr noted that both major commissions saw a need to “move to a system that compensates for the loss of quality of life.” That course was favored too, for a time, within VA and Congress. That momentum to help veterans shouldn’t be lost, Burr said

Disability Compensation

Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation*

To provide advice to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on establishing and supervising a schedule to conduct periodic reviews of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).

Charter Minutes

Committee Manager

Ersie Farber

Phone

(202) 461-9728

Fax

(202) 275-1728

E-Mail

Ersie.farber@va.gov

Future meetings

Location - St Regis, 923 16th and K Streets, NW, Washington, DC

September 21-22, 2009

October 19-20, 2009

November 16-17, 2009

December 7-8, 2009

http://www1.va.gov/advisory/docs/CharterSt...n10-29-2008.pdf

I am not a "chicken little" but we should not allow a window to state our opinions pass either being silent does none of us any good I still think thoseof us who have awards would be grand fathered in, but do we want to see future veterans get screwed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

We need to take this seriously! The VA not only does not want to give us a 25% raise, they want to make it even worse by cutting benefits off at age 65. I dont blame purple for not beleiving it, of course it is not carved in stone yet, but the VA has made it clear: Whenever they get a chance to increase the VA budget, while cutting benefits to Veterans, they are going to do so either individually, by denying/delaying individual Veterans benefits, or, collectively as in this case. Notice again, how the VA is attempting to turn Veteran against Veteran by awarding Veterans of some wars more than others. This is a deliberate ploy to "divide and conquer" Veterans in order to further force Veterans into submission of "the VA way". While VA employees are unaminiously united in achieving more bonuses for themselves, by making distinct classes of Veterans, Vietnam, WW2, Iraq, etc, they want us to "turn" our anger toward each other, rather than toward the VA.

What I think must be done is we need to associate ourself with the powerful AARP..because no politicain can even try to cut social security and keep his job. In a similar way, no politician should ever be able to cut "Veterans" benefits just because the Veteran turns 65.

To cut Veterans benefits at age 65 is blatant age discrimination which should not stand in court. Further, it is actually discriminatory against Veterans..if Vetrens income is cut at age 65, wouldn't it follow that civilians income should also be cut at 65? The AARP would annihilate any politicians carrer that suggests this, and we should do no differently. Is it right we cut ONLY Veteran's retirement, and not cut, say federal service, and other state, private and local concerns?

I would like to see social security and Veterans linked to congresses own pay and retirement, in that, when they cut VA or social security benefits, they are likewise cutting their own benefits/retirement by an equal amount.

Edited by broncovet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

The VA doesnt have a say in it.

They are there to administer the Benefits set forth by Congress. That is all.

They dont even do that very well.

The commission is at least proactive but there is not enough support to see their ideas through.

There in lies the problem.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

so far they have ignored the 2 commission that stated we should get increases, so now here comes another third commission to study many of the same issues VDBC and Dole/Shalala reported on Dole/Shalala blatantly established a 2 tier system and made no apologies for it and VDBC said all disabled vets deserved an immediate 25% raise that was 2 years ago the reports were delivered to the previous administration and then shelved and now this commission was established last year under Peake again to look at the same issues why? because they didn't like the answers the first 2 commission found keep going until you get answers you like I guess but if we don't respond to the new commission silence could give them cover to do what the VA wants establish guidelines to reduce compensation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use