diabetes Researchers Examine Increasing Veterans’ Disability Compensation

[carlie]

http://www.dailyfreepress.com/researchers-...ion-1.2028356#5

Researchers examine increasing veterans’ disability compensation

By Belén Cusi

Print this article

Share this article Published: Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Updated: Tuesday, October 20, 2009

The dramatic increase in the number of Vietnam War veterans receiving veterans’ disability compensation since the 1990s has been fueled more by growing incentives for lower-skill whites than by an actual increase in veteran disabilities, social science researchers said.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ph.D. candidate Brigham Frandsen, one of the authors of “The Complicated Effects of Military Service on Self-Reported Health,” spoke to about 20 students, professors and veterans at MIT Monday on his findings.

“The main point is to show the long term effect of serving in the military on disability rates,” Frandsen said. “This research speaks to an important component of the legacy cost of war, or at least of the Vietnam conflict and by extension to current wars.”

Frandsen said he found through his research that from 1999 to 2005, the number of veterans receiving compensation for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder doubled, rising from over 90,000 to about 180,000. PTSD was found to be the leading claim for compensation, with diabetes following close behind.

After the Agent Orange decision of 2003 where diabetes was determined to be service-related, he said, the number of veterans claiming compensation for diabetes increased by almost one third in just two years, rising from roughly 140,000 to 180,000.

Dennis Kenney, a veteran who fought in Germany, said he attended the lecture because he is interested in Frandsen’s research. He said he and his fellow veterans were told they could go home once relieved of their duties if they didn’t think they had any service-related disabilities.

“I think there were about eight out of 800 of us who left, myself included,” he said. “I wanted to go home.”

He said he and his peers were advised by older veterans to be picky about their disabilities and try to get as much as they could for compensation, that they should “keep their options open insurance-wise.”

Frandsen said eight million veterans receive compensation from VDC, one-third of whom are Vietnam veterans. Many of these claims are being awarded “individually unemployed” status, which automatically qualifies a veteran for the maximum payment of $2,300 tax-free per month for as long as they live, he said.

Increasing incentives and institutional changes in the late 1990’s may be the cause for the rise in veteran compensation, he said, specifically Vietnam-era veteran compensation.

“The overall effect of serving in the military for these veterans was small,” Frandsen said.

But he said he found a large effect specifically on low-skill white men.

“If you were a low-educated man, getting disability compensation though the program looks like a great deal,” he said. “One way to get compensation is to show PTSD or any other service-incurred disability, and the compensation is fairly generous.”

In the late 1990s, the individually unemployed status began to be granted more freely; extensive paperwork was no longer required, Frandsen said. The VDC also began to presume eligibility instead of requiring that veterans have to file for it, he said, and attitude changes could be another cause for the compensation increase.

Frandsen and his colleagues said they are not suggesting that veterans are committing fraud, but that they are responding to incentives. But the increasing compensation to Vietnam in the present day could mean less compensation for future veterans, such as those of the current war in Iraq, he said.

He said his overall conclusion is the legacy cost of war seems to be more political and incentive-driven than health-related, something more than an inevitable cost of war.

“We’re not suggesting anything,” Joshua Angrist, one of Frandsen’s co-authors, said. “We’re not into call to action, just pointing things out.”

[Testvet]

I respect that you disagree with me. I knew most would.

I don't know how to word this without it seeming ignorant on my part, but I don't feel I need to "read between the lines" to infer that they mean anything other than what they say.

He also doesnt say anything about "ignorant jerks". I suppose I could put anything between the lines untill I see what I want to see. Not trying to be a smart azz, but if people wanted to, they could say "if you read between the lines at Hadit, they are telling people how to cheat the VA". We shouldn't read between the lines.

It happens to be true that the lesser skilled class file more claim. Why? We fill the majority of the services. A small percentage of the higher skill population give up their 6 digit incomes to join the military. I'm not so thin skinned to think that I am being insulted because I am of the lower skilled class. Are there more enlisted who are sick/injured than officers. Yep. There are more enlisted to get hurt.

The only comment they made that is without basis is the one about VN veteran claims hurting future claims. They don't explain their reasoning behind so it's hard to know what they meant.

The only comment they made that is without basis is the one about VN veteran claims hurting future claims. They don't explain their reasoning behind so it's hard to know what they meant.

again reading between the lines on this issue becasue they did not spell it out, or how they even justify making a statement like this, but how many times do we read that veteras that file fraudulent claims are ripping off other veterans? A lot almost every fraud case involving the VA and either health care which would be true because that is a "finite" set of money determined by Congress annually but compensation claims are not veterans stealing from other veterans, and like many veterans civilians do not understand this any better than veterans do, claims compensation is not a "finite" amount like health care dollars, every claim that is approved by the VA the funds will be appropriated by Congress to pay them regardless of the amount like SSD claims once the claim is approved or adjudicated the check will be sent back pay and monthly checks regardless if it is a 10% issue or a SMC S issue the money is coming, if the VBA does not have enough funds to pay approved claims then the Secretary will have to go back to Congress and explain we have XXXXXXX numbers of follars in claims we ahve to pay and we only have XXX dollars and Congress will not refuse the request the compensation will be paid just as SSD claims are paid no compensation claim is going to bedenied a check after it is approved the frauds are not stealing from other veterans they are stealing from the taxpayers, plain and simple and YES they deserve to be prosecuted when they are caught, and yes they should get severe prison sentences, for the most part veterans are like other military men, they live the words, Duty, Honor and Country but even in the Army we had people that broke the rules, they either got caught and were given a Article 15, company of Field Grade if the crime was worse then they had the court martial route, summary, special or General, stealing funds and lot's of them always endedin a general court martial I never saw anyone not given a general court martial for stealing government money....that Army Major got what 17 years for taking bribes in Kuwait I think I read where he and his wife took 8 million dollars the government wants 19 million in fines and penalties, they will never see it but I am sure the govt is going to take everything they own and auction it off.

They should make sure when they put these fraudulent claims filing veterans on trial that the sentence is severe and in the papers on on the news to make other people think do I really want to do this, is it worth a 15 or 20 year prison term? I think when they did that last PTSD reveiw they found the biggest problem with the claims was improper paperwork by VA employees less than 2% of the claims were actually fraudlent which in terms of fraud involving a government program is out standing which shows my feelings about veterans being honest for the most part is accurate.

But civlian researchers never seem to take the time to learn these facts.

[Testvet]

When a Country goes to War they take on an obligation to help the Veterans who suffer due to their Service. I think that they were paying for the Civil War into the 1960's.

There are not near the amount of Veterans drawing 100% as many think and no one seems to consider that VA Hospitals are mainly teaching Hospitals and if anyone should know how bad it is than it should be the Interns who passed through the gates.

As I have said before I consider what the VA gives me as Retirement and there is no way it would be comparable to work income.I have a feeling that when the War is over that we will sink into the background not that we are nmot pretty far back as it stands now.

Pete as long as they continue to send the "retirement checks" I don't care where I am

[Commander Bob]

I respect that you disagree with me.

I truly appreciate that you respect my reaction to this article. I also apologize for my choice of descriptive words. However, it feels like deja vu. You must read between the lines of Frandsen and friends' and their statistical, sterile dribble. In the end the public will turn against this new generation of vets, as they did to Vietnam vets..

I remember in the late 1960's, 70's and 80's, many professional Doctors and PhD's slammed the Vietnam vets, and dismissed the vets actions as simply manifestations of poor self discipline and/or cowardice. The public ate it up. Comes now these jerks from MIT cleverly twisting and covering their misguided facts and figures to impugn the character of our nations combat wounded soldiers, again. I see it as the beginning of history repeating it's self.

Edited December 19, 2009 by Commander Bob

[john999]

They never miss an opportunity to kick a Vietnam vet in the teeth. First we were psychotic, baby killers. Then we were pathetic losers. Now we are greedy white trash. Maybe the Vietnam war never even happened. The only two Vietnam vets who ever made a serious run for the President's job lost. We are never forgiven for being part of a losing war.

[timetowinarace]

I remember in the late 1960's, 70's and 80's, many professional Doctors and PhD's slammed the Vietnam vets, and dismissed the vets actions as simply manifestations of poor self discipline and/or cowardice. The public ate it up. Comes now these jerks from MIT cleverly twisting and covering their misguided facts and figures to impugn the character of our nations combat wounded soldiers, again. I see it as the beginning of history repeating it's self.

I understand how you feel about this 'research' and I don't blame you. When I read it, I began to draw the same conclusion but decided to keep my mind open. I won't say you are 'wrong' in any way to feel the way you do.

The reason I knew my opinion would be disagree'd with has to do with your paragraph above. I'm aware of how the VN vet's were treated in the 60's, 70's and 80's. I remember attacks on PTSD in the 90's and 00's also. Just a couple of years ago really.

The recent attacks were blatant. There was no reading between the lines. They said fraud.

If you could, I would like you to try to forget history for a minute. Re-read the article without the bias. Try not to add past experience between the lines.

They are not guessing that lower skilled veterans are filing more claims. It is not an opinion. It's a fact. I don't know of a better phrase to use to describe the demographic. They could use lower skilled, low/average income, lower/middle class or what descriptive phrase would you have prefered?

Edited December 17, 2009 by timetowinarace

[Testvet]

They never miss an opportunity to kick a Vietnam vet in the teeth. First we were psychotic, baby killers. Then we were pathetic losers. Now we are greedy white trash. Maybe the Vietnam war never even happened. The only two Vietnam vets who ever made a serious run for the President's job lost. We are never forgiven for being part of a losing war.

You are right that 2nd Place Trophy for the Southeast Asia Wargames 1959-1975 will never be forgotten Much as I think that the Afghanistan War from 2001 - ? will be a quickly forgotten "mistake" as soon as it ends because no matter how it ends there is no "winning it" available the best we can hope for is that it doesn't expand into Pakistanand ignite the entire Southwest Asia into a regional war, or Iran on the other side, either way we are playing in a field fraught with no good outcome except leaving....I would hate to see these veterans get treated in the same manner the Vietnam Era and Vietnam War vets have been treated for the past 4 decades, and I don't think it's going to change in our lifetimes.

To many career military decided that 100 hour war in 1991 was "great" for our military. How, they didn't even really get warmed up, before Saddam called "Uncle" the enforcement of the "no fly zone" lasted for the next decade before Junior and Cheney and friends got the war bug to finish Saddam off.

I am begining to think we shouldn't send our kids to war, we should send the elected leaders all of Congress and occupants of the White House and people working in the Pentagon, I imagine diplomacy would work a lot better then.........

But as far as compensation raises if they could find a way to just raise compensation for the "new war" veterans I am sure that would be supported by far more politicians than raising compensation for all of us "older veterans"......lets face it they think that all of the WW2 and Korean war veterans are retired and use to living on their income now and they don't NEED a raise, there are to many of us Nam era vets around still, and GW1 vets they won't admit what caused the 25% disability rates they show, so that might cost them to much if they have to admit DU, pesticide exposures, chemical weapons they destroyed at Kamisayah Iraq on March 19, 1991 Sarin and Mustard agents both present. Some of the meds they made them take, the multiple vaccines they made the soldiers take in one day I was lucky I only had 7 some had as many as 13.

Then came the Anthrax shots which I heard were a series of six shots spread out over months. I am not sure when these were ordered or started. I don;t think GW1 though.

Like the nuclear test vets, chemical weapons and drug experiments, biological weapons and numerous other dangerous things the governemt has done to soldiers over the past 60 years they wait until the vast majority are dead before they admit there "may have been" a cause from the military service. Like Agent Orange how many have died from heart disease already that Secretary Shinseki is making them SC, not because the evidence is overwhelming, they have known it for decades, that was one reason Ranch Hand ignored it Kelley has been screaming these issues for years and other problems weren't they just forced early this decade by a Federal Court to SC colon cancer to AO exposure? They didn't do it because it was the right thing to do.

Enough ranting tonight, but they have always treated veterans wrong since the Revolutionary War and Washingtons statement to the effect that how they treat the nations veterans of that war, would affect the ability to get people to enlist or volunteer in future efforts based on the treatment of those veterans. They chit on them then and have been doing it ever since.....JMHO