Many Veterans Need Mental Health Care
By Rachel Stockton
A new study out of the University of California in San Francisco is focusing on VA data on nearly 300,000 soldiers returning from either Afghanistan or Iraq. The emotional toll the war has inflicted on soldiers is substantial; of the data studied, more than 40% who visited the VA after returning home were treated for mental health disorders. These stats beg the question, “Are we ready to handle the onslaught of potential psychological issues vets will experience once they return home?”
For those of us back home, news clips that emphasize the psychological price we pay during warfare, are disturbing. In May of 2009, one US soldier killed 5 of his comrades at a clinic that specialized in helping soldiers deal with combat stress and personal issues.
As alarming and extreme as this even t was, it emphasized that those who are coming home will not be unscathed by what they’ve experienced, as "war is all hell." Dozens of our soldiers have been to hell; now they are returning home, hoping to take up where they left off.
Of the soldiers studied by Dr. Karen Seal and her team, over 106,000 soldiers were given mental health care. 62,000 were diagnosed with depression and 50,432 were suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. These diagnoses were not discovered in the first year after soldiers returned home, prompting a move to provide 5 years of free health care for vets.
The disorders are the result of more combat experience; those who suffered the greatest were soldiers who had two tours of duty. The full extent of the emotional toll may not be known or fully realized for another twenty years. In fact, the term “post traumatic stress disorder” was coined in an effort to put a name to what some Viet Nam vets were experiencing: anxiety, stress and other combat related symptoms, years after the fall of Saigon.
To help ease the transition, the United States National Center for PTSD has a website devoted to helping soldiers and their families understand some of the challenges the family unit will go through as the soldier attempts to reintegrate. Descriptions of combat stress reactions are explained, along with healthy coping strategies.
The site also deals with the emotional expectations the soldier has, and how those may differ from what his or her spouse is expecting. There is advice on becoming reacquainted; the war experience will have changed, to an extent, every single man and woman who has endured combat.
Years after the war ends, the fallout will still be with us. Hopefully, we will rise to the occasion, relying on the “better angels of our nature” to provide what our soldiers need to help them reenter the world of normalcy.
del.icio.us |
Digg
Email to a friend
Print version
Plain text
Home
Set as homepage
Add to favorites
Mobile site
Rss
Plain text
Archive
In 2009, despite the efforts of some members of Congress, do the U.S. Senate proven Department of Defense (DOD) "designed to harm" experiments continue?[8] Under BARDA’s "NATIONAL SECURITY MISSIONS", now continued are the DOD on "hundreds of thousands" of Veterans lessons learned? In 2006 the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) was signed into law.[10] In October 1995 is the history of human experiments 15 January 1994 U.S. President’s Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) Report.[2] On December 8, 1994 is the U.S. Senate REPORT 103-97 "Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans' Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century."[8] This is its many "designed to harm" DOD experiments conducted on "hundreds of thousands" of U.S. Military personnel. The 1987 U.S. Supreme Court STANLEY [3] determined that their 1950 FERES also protects the government from the DOD "experiments that were designed to harm" [8]. The 1950 U.S. Supreme Court FERES Doctrine determined that the U.S. Government can not be held accountable for injuries incident to U.S. Military Service.[1]
"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." Footnote 4, U.S. Supreme Court 1987 STANLEY military experiments case, Page 688.[3] This case confirms their FERES Doctrine [1] decision that correction is through the U.S. Congress. After STANLEY Congress passed the 1988 Veterans’ Judicial Review Act (VJRA). Established was the Legislative, Article I severely restricted, Veteran’s Court with Congress’s, "The court may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities or the policies underlying the schedule.", i.e., the needed for treatment "designed to harm" evidence.[4] In 2009 the U.S. Congress still has not corrected the U.S. Senate’s 1994 reported 50 years of a DOD "experiments that were designed to harm" policy.. The Veterans Court Chief Judge stated, "The Court simply identifies error made below by a failure to adhere, in individual cases, to the Constitution, statutes, and regulations which themselves reflect policy -- policy freely ignored by many initial adjudicators whose attitude is, "I haven't been told by my boss to change. If you don't like it -- appeal it."[7] Given to the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the Judicial Branch’s final authority on "the policies underlying the schedule" questions of law![5] Accordingly a sham, politically correct with ‘no teeth’ Veteran’s Court. The "to harm" experiments were performed under the secrecy cover of our past wars. They were in direct disobedience of the DOD Secretary's 1953 TOP SECRET order. This order was unclassified twenty two (22) years later.[2] 1953 and since known by the Secretary's of all Services, Joint Chiefs of Staff, the DOD Research and Development (R&D) Board and the U.S. Congress.
Each deliberate "to harm" project completes the R&D process. Prior R&D is reviewed. The resulting Scope of Work defines what each experiment is "designed" to accomplish. The how, where, when and who is identified. The conducted RESEARCHED cause and effects are closely followed and recorded. From the results are DEVELOPED safe production, use, treatment and protection.
The needed for treatment, experiment revealing evidence is: 1. Not in a subject’s Medical History, so that they never the wiser become. And 2. The resulting alerting injuries are not in the VA "schedule...for disabilities"! There is no, "Veterans Right to Know...". After honorable service Congress still has not given back to veterans those rights that convicted rapists and murderers keep![6]
The "Veterans Right to Know Act" to establish the Veterans' Right to Know Commission was proposed in the 2005 and H.R. 4259 [109th] 2006 Congress.[9] A "to harm" subject's right to get the needed for treatment evidence never became law.
GIVEN THE U. S. CONGRESSIONAL, NOW 65 YEAR [8], PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR, DO NOT THE EXPERIMENTS CONTINUE UNDER THE COVER OF OUR PRESENT WARS??
REFERENCES:
NOTE: Copies of all documents have been downloaded. If any of the links are not active, on request they are available as PDF or wpd attachments.
[1] 1950 - Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950). LINK: http://supreme.justia.com/us/340/135/case.htmlhttp://supreme.justia.com/us/340/135/case.htmlhttp://supreme.justia.com/us/340/135/case.html
[2] 1953 - 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. The provided Link is to the U.S. President’s established 15 January 1994 Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) resulting October 1995 Report. Chapter 1: The Department of Defense: Consent is Formalized Go "Page Down" 15 times to the DOD Secretary's 26 February 1953 Memo. .
[3] 1987 - 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 NOTE169. http://supreme.justia.com/us/483/669/case.htmlhttp://laws.findlaw.com/us/483/669.html
[4] 1988 - Veterans’ Judicial Review Act (VJRA), Pub. L. No. 100-687, Div. A, 102 Stat. 4105 (8 December 1988) DVA-Chapter 4 and http://law.jrank.org/pages/6784/Federal-Courts-Court-Appeals-Veterans-Claims.html#ixzz0MIKbF8ND
[5] "United States Code (USC) Title 38, 511. Decisions of the Secretary; finality." US CODE: Title 38511. Decisions of the Secretary; finality
[6] 1994 - U.S. State Dept., "U.S. Report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Article 7". Second and Third Periodic Report of the United States of America ...
[7] 1994 - Chief Judge and colleague statements, Court of Veterans Appeals, Annual Judicial Conference, Fort Meyer, VA., 17 & 18 October 1994. www.firebase.net/state_of_court_brief.htm Chief Judge Frank Nebeker's Statement
[8] 1994 - 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. Senate Report 103-97
[9] 2005 & 2006 - "Veterans Right to Know Act" to establish the Veterans' Right to Know Commission was proposed in the 2005 and H.R. 4259 [109th] 2006 Congress. H. R. 4259
[10] 2006 - Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), Bill S. 3678 2006. Signed into law 16 December 2006. Cloaking BARDA - The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Blog
Post your comment