Informational and interesting veteran news. |
posted Dec 1, 2010 12:16 AM by USIAV Organization
November 30, 2010 5:50 PMSome of us, when we see a proposal to raise VA health care fees for a category of veteran in a report on ways to curb federal budget deficits, jump to the conclusion that veteran benefits are under fresh attack. Bernard Rostker, former under secretary of defense for personnel and now a senior fellow at the RAND Corp., has a more optimistic perspective on how, over time, America cares for and compensates its wartime veterans. For more than a year Rostker has been researching what will be a two-volume study on the treatment of veterans and their survivors, going back to before the Revolutionary War, with a special focus on wounded warrior care. His original working premise, as he explained it in a phone interview, was that veterans’ care and benefits today reflect a deeper attachment to the force, the result of moving away from a military of conscripts, after the Vietnam War, to a more professional force comprised entirely of volunteers. But as he completed volume one of his study, covering the Colonial era through World War II, Rostker said he found the working premise to be wrong. Much of what’s being done today for veterans of the all-volunteer force is “rediscovering” what’s been done before. One glaring exception, he said, is the focus today on treating mental wounds of war, post-traumatic stress disorder. Resources aimed at the invisible wounds are unprecedented, reflecting more medical knowledge, the nature of current wars and an attitude shift, even since the Persian Gulf War. In the late 1990s he was the defense secretary’s special assistant on Gulf War Illness. Otherwise the infusion of money and staff for veterans’ care and benefits today fits an historical pattern, Rostker said, the nation’s deep appreciation for those who fight for country and suffer wounds or illness. Other patterns emerge, Rostker said. Government support tends to deepen with budget surpluses. Benefits tend to improve as veterans age, their ranks thin out, and enhancements become more affordable. Wars bring change too. The Department of Veterans Affairs budget has more than doubled since U.S. troops invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 — from $51 billion then to $114 billion in the fiscal years that ended Sept. 30. VA spending is set to climb another 10 percent this year, to $125 billion. Vet groups laud a 25 percent rise in VA spending since President Obama took office. Some contrast that largess to the Bush administration difficulty in June 2005 when it had to request $2 billion supplemental for VA to meet pressing health care obligations. Some veterans groups had called the original budget that year “tightfisted, miserly” and “woefully inadequate.” Given the history, I asked, what might be ahead for the newest generation of war veterans. More effective help, Rostker suggested. The nation knows now that not all wounded have missing limbs or physical scars. Through history, he said, “you see the generosity in many ways. You see it in the amount of money given, in the change of eligibility standards. And recently in the understanding of the mental aspects of conflict.” Retrieved from:http://www.pntonline.com/opinion/veteran-23452-veterans-care.html |
posted Sep 20, 2010 7:00 PM by USIAV Organization
The first living recipient to receive the Medal Of Honor since the Vietnam War is Staff Sergeant Salvatore Giunta, he was an Army specialist in Afghanistan when he performed actions on the battlefield that were above and beyond the call of duty.Specialist Giunta put his life on the line to save his fellow soldiers when he and fellow paratroopers were ambushed by the Taliban in 2007. Staff Sergeant Giunta recently received a personal call from President Obama and was informed that he would receive the Medal Of Honor.In October of 2007 in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan, then Specialist Giunta and his fellow soldiers were ambushed by the Taliban from three sides. The engagement took place at night and with the Americans so close to their enemies, air support could not be called in during the firefight. The point man of the unit, Sergeant Josh Brennan, was hit eight times and Salvatore Giunta was hit in the chest but his body armor saved him from being mortally wounded.Being the fourth man in this patrol, Specialist Giunta recovered quickly from getting hit in his body armor and quickly set about to help the three men that were in front of him while patrolling. Moving up the trail to reach his wounded buddies, Specialist Giunta fired his weapon and threw hand grenades counter attacking the insurgents that had just ambushed him and his unit. He reached Staff Sergeant Eric Gallardo and Specialist Franklin Eckrode, Eckrode has received serious wounds in the ambush after his machine gun had jammed.Continuing under fire, Specialist Giunta saw two Taliban and they were trying to remove Sergeant Brennan from the battlefield to take him prisoner. Giunta engaged the two enemy soldiers, killing one, and continued to provide cover fire and comfort to his wounded buddy until help arrived. Sadly, Sergeant Brennan did not survive surgery and died from his wounds.The following is the White House action account of then Specialist Giunta’s actions on October 25, 2007:Then-Specialist Salvatore A. Giunta distinguished himself by acts of gallantry at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as a rifle team leader with Company B, 2d Battalion (Airborne), 503d Infantry Regiment during combat operations against an armed enemy in the Korengal Valley, Afghanistan on October 25, 2007. When an insurgent force ambush split Specialist Giunta’s squad into two groups, he exposed himself to enemy fire to pull a comrade back to cover. Later, while engaging the enemy and attempting to link up with the rest of his squad, Specialist Giunta noticed two insurgents carrying away a fellow soldier. He immediately engaged the enemy, killing one and wounding the other, and provided medical aid to his wounded comrade while the rest of his squad caught up and provided security. His courage and leadership while under extreme enemy fire were integral to his platoon’s ability to defeat an enemy ambush and recover a fellow American paratrooper from enemy hands.Retrieved from: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/09/12/first-living-recipient-to-receive-medal-of-honor-from-afghanistaniraq-wars/ |
posted Aug 19, 2010 10:35 PM by USIAV Organization
No rejoicing in Iraq as U.S. combat mission endsIraqis are apprehensive and bitter about the departure of the last U.S. combat brigade amid the growing violence and political divide in their country.By Liz Sly, Los Angeles TimesAugust 20, 2010Reporting from BaghdadIraqis danced in the streets when U.S. troops withdrew from their cities a little over a year ago. After the last American combat brigade trundled across the border into Kuwait early Thursday, reversing a journey that began more than seven years ago, there was no rejoicing.Instead, a mood of deep apprehension tinged with bitterness is taking hold as Iraqis digest the reality that the American invaders whom they once feared would stay forever are in fact going home, when their country is in the throes of a deep political crisis that many think could turn increasingly violent."I'm not happy at all. I'm worried. They're leaving really early," said Wissam Sabah, a carpet seller in one of Baghdad's shopping districts. "We don't have a government and we don't know what is going to happen next. Maybe we will go back to civil war."The situation is getting worse every day. The politicians are inflaming the situation, there is a battle between them, and I am 100% certain it will be reflected in the streets."U.S. combat operations in Iraq won't officially end until Aug. 31, the deadline set by President Obama for the reduction of the force to 50,000 troops involved in what the military calls "stability operations."But with the departure to Kuwait this week of the last combat brigade this week, the formal battle mission is now essentially over. In coming days, 2,000 more troops from units scattered around the country will depart, bringing the number remaining down to the 50,000 promised by the president.The U.S. military emphasizes that it is a sizeable number of troops, and that they will be equipped with considerable firepower. Fighter jets and attack helicopters will remain, as will about 4,500 Special Forces members who will continue to carry out counter-terrorism missions alongside Iraqi counterparts.The soldiers staying behind have been rebranded from combat troops into six advise-and-assist brigades, which will focus on mentoring Iraqi security forces until the Dec. 31, 2011, deadline for the departure of all U.S. forces under the terms of a 2008 security agreement with Iraq.But many Iraqis worry that the time is wrong for a troop reduction whose date was a result of Obama's campaign promise to bring troops home. Parliamentary elections in March that were supposed to cement Iraq's fledgling democracy have instead triggered a deeply destabilizing political standoff between factions that got roughly similar numbers of votes and now cannot agree on who should be in charge."Some people think it's a run-out. An irresponsible withdrawal," Kurdish legislator Mahmoud Othman said, echoing Obama's pledge to bring about a "responsible withdrawal" of U.S. troops. "This is about what's going on in America, not about what's going on on the ground."On the ground, there has been no dramatic deterioration in security, at least not yet. But many Iraqis are concerned about the recent uptick in the number of shootings and assassinations across Baghdad and in the still troubled provinces.A rash of assassinations of judges, traffic policemen, senior civil servants and members of the Iraqi security forces has stirred fear that insurgents are more ubiquitous than had been thought. A suicide bombing Tuesday in Baghdad targeting army recruits, in which 63 people died, called into question the Iraqi security forces' ability to take care of its own, let alone the safety of civilians."I'm surprised they're going because the situation is really uncertain, really tense," said Mohammed Khalid, 22, whose toy shop is lined with blond-haired dolls dressed in pink and a fearsome array of plastic rifles, pistols and automatic weapons. "The Americans should stay until the Iraqi army can control Iraq," he said.The effect of the withdrawal may be more psychological than real. U.S. and Iraqi officials point out that American troops have for the last year played little part in securing the urban centers where the insurgency is most active. U.S. troops were redeployed to the outskirts of the cities in June 2009 under the terms of the 2008 security agreement, and Iraqi forces have been in charge of urban areas since then.Gen. Babakir Zebari, chief of staff of the Iraqi armed forces, predicted that the shift in the American mission would have no major effect, and said he was confident that the Iraqi security forces could continue to maintain stability. "Aug. 31 is not going to be very important," he said in a recent interview. "This withdrawal is gradual. It has been going on since last year. And up till now we have had no problems."A group of Iraqi soldiers standing guard beside their U.S.-supplied Humvee on a major Baghdad street didn't seem so sure. One of the soldiers, when asked whether he thought security would deteriorate without U.S. combat forces, replied, "Of course, because we have no government." The soldier, who refused to give his name because he was not authorized to talk to reporters, made it clear he wasn't happy to see the Americans go. "I wish they had taken me with them," he said. "I don't want to be here."liz.sly@latimes.comTimes staff writer Nadeem Hamid contributed to this report.Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles TimesRetrieved from: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-unease-20100820,0,6664066.story |
posted Aug 1, 2010 11:49 PM by USIAV Organization
[
updated Aug 1, 2010 11:52 PM
]
Taking Calls From Veterans on the BrinkCANANDAIGUA, N.Y. — Melanie Poorman swiveled in her chair and punched a button on the phone. The caller, an Iraq war veteran in his 30s, had recently broken up with his girlfriend and was watching a movie, “Body of War,” that was triggering bad memories. He started to cry. And he had a 12-gauge shotgun nearby. Could someone please come and take it away, he asked.Ms. Poorman, 54, gently coaxed the man into unloading the weapon. As a co-worker called the police, she stayed on the line, talking to him about his girlfriend, his work, the war. Suddenly, there were sirens. “I unloaded the gun!” she heard him shout. And then he hung up. (He was taken to a hospital, she learned later.) Ms. Poorman sat back and took a deep breath. “That was an easy one,” she said. The hard ones are “angry, angry, angry — they have intent, they have a plan, and they have no desire for help,” she said. But they call anyway.“I think contact is important, even at the end of life,” she said. It was just an average night at the Department of Veterans Affairs suicide prevention hot line in central New York. Over here, Rebecca talked to a drunken man who was seeing people he had killed. Over there, Katie was on the line with a bipolar man having nightmares. Across the room, Virginia tried to calm a man who had refused to take his medication and was threatening to run headlong into traffic.This is the front line of the government’s expanding efforts to deter suicide among veterans.Though suicides among active-duty service members are carefully tracked — they hit a one-month record, 32, in June — no reliable data exists for suicides by veterans. But estimates, while not universally accepted, seem alarming. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, veterans account for about one in five of the more than 30,000 suicides committed in the United States each year.Under growing pressure from veterans groups and Congress, the Veterans Affairs Department in recent years has hired more than 5,000 therapists and counselors and established a system of suicide prevention coordinators at more than 150 medical centers. It also opened a research center here in Canandaigua associated with the University of Rochester, which already had one of the nation’s largest programs for the study of suicide.But the hot line has become the most visible facet of the government’s efforts to prevent suicide among veterans, providing tangible examples of both successes and shortcomings in the campaign.To critics, including some veterans advocates, the hot line is a necessary but last-ditch approach, a tourniquet for people with dire psychological wounds. Until the department develops more effective long-term programs to treat and prevent suicidal behavior, the numbers will continue to rise, they say.“A veteran would have to have reached the point of actually considering suicide to actually call the suicide hot line,” a veteran, Melvin Citron, testified before a House Veterans’ Affairs subcommittee in a hearing on suicide this month. “I would submit that by then, for some, it could have been prevented.”But the department and its supporters say the hot line is much more than a Band-Aid. For many veterans, it has become a gateway into government services. About a third of callers are not in the veterans health system, so workers on the prevention hot line can steer them to programs they may not have known about.The hot line is also clearly saving some people, if only for a day. In the 2007 fiscal year, when it opened, the center handled about 9,380 calls. Last year the number jumped more than tenfold, to nearly 119,000.On a typical day, responders handle 250 to 300 calls from across the country and overseas. Not all are veterans, but the responders take all calls. No one knows what ultimately happens to the callers, a vast majority of whom are men. Some probably overcome their impulse, but many eventually call back making new threats. And a few undoubtedly kill themselves.One measure of effectiveness is known as a rescue: when emergency service workers are able to rush people threatening or actually trying to commit suicide to a hospital. The hot line has chalked up 10,000 rescues since 2007. Benjamin Rowe, 24, had one such rescue a few weeks ago. A caller said he had tied a noose around his neck and was going to hang himself from a ceiling fan.Mr. Rowe called the police, but before they arrived, the man, still holding the phone, stepped off his chair. Mr. Rowe could hear him gasping for air. But the rope broke and the man fell to the floor, softly crying for help as the police finally knocked down the door. “I couldn’t disconnect, I had to listen,” Mr. Rowe said. “Everyone who works here has had several calls like that.”Janet Kemp, the department’s national mental health director for suicide prevention, said she was initially skeptical about the hot line. “I didn’t think soldiers would call,” she said. “But I was wrong. It’s kind of blown me away.” The hot line is run in conjunction with the nation’s largest network of crisis call centers, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. Veterans who call 1-800-273-TALK (8255) are prompted to press 1 and are then connected to a bank of about 15 phones in a red-brick building at the Canandaigua veterans medical center.Recently, the center also began conducting online chats with suicidal veterans, as well as handling calls from homeless veterans seeking emergency housing. Just about all of the 124 people on staff have degrees or experience in counseling, social work or therapy. Only about a third are veterans themselves, which has prompted criticism from some veterans groups.Caitlin Thompson, the clinical care coordinator, said a vast majority of veterans simply wanted an empathetic ear. “The very act of picking up the phone is an attempt to reach out one last time,” she said. “It’s that ambivalence that we are trying to jump on.” Throughout the evening, Kevin Prenatt hovered near the responders, a clipboard in hand. His job was to hunt through databases and phone records for the addresses of callers who refused to give locations. Luck and hunches are sometimes his only tools.In April, he was able to locate a man who had slit both wrists in a public park simply because the responder could hear a train in the background. As luck would have it, the town had just one park near the tracks. “I know the residual effects of suicide,” said Mr. Prenatt, a 52-year-old Navy veteran whose older brother killed himself at the age of 26. “It changed my mother forever.”He was soon hovering near Michelle Edwards as she talked to a despondent National Guard soldier who had just broken up with her boyfriend, was drinking heavily and had a 9-millimeter pistol nearby.Ms. Edwards firmly tried to persuade the woman’s mother to take her to a hospital. When that failed, she called the police. “I lived all this stuff,” Ms. Edwards said after hanging up. Her father, she said, was a veteran who returned from Vietnam with serious physical and psychological injuries. But he became a social worker and threw his energy into helping others. She learned from him, she says, to love counseling.Within minutes, her phone rang again. She had forgotten to press a button that bounces calls to other lines — a system designed to give responders time to decompress before taking another call.She answered, and a moment later, her voice lowered into an earthy calm.“Slow down, sir,” she said. “You say you’re seeing people with guns?”Retrieved article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/31/us/31hotline.html?src=me |
posted Jul 27, 2010 6:46 PM by USIAV Organization
Veterans Affairs relaxes anti-medical marijuana rulesJuly 27, 2010by Astrid Fiano, DOTmed News WriterVets are off the hook in being denied services if they are using medical marijuana, according to a new policy from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). In the past, the policy has denied veterans pain medication if they use illegal drugs, but now, in states that permit the use of medical marijuana, vets can use the substance as directed without being denied VHA substance abuse programs, pain control programs or other clinical programs in which the use of marijuana "maybe be considered inconsistent with treatment goals." But modifications may need to be made in treatment plans of such patients. Any decision should be made by individual providers and their patients. According to the directive, 14 states have enacted laws authorizing the use of medical marijuana. Medical marijuana is used for a variety of medical conditions, including glaucoma, chemotherapy-induced nausea, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and chronic pain. The VHA directive makes clear that the state laws authorizing the use of medical marijuana are still contrary to current federal law. If a VA physician completed forms to permit a patient to participate in a state medical marijuana program, the Drug Enforcement Administration could possibly revoke the physician's registration to prescribe controlled substances, as well as raise criminal charges. VA providers are expected to comply with federal laws. If a veteran presents a prescription or authorization for medical marijuana to a VA provider or pharmacist, the VA will not provide marijuana nor pay for the prescription to be filled by a non-VA entity.
|
posted Jul 20, 2010 8:41 PM by USIAV Organization
July 20, 7:43 PM · Robert Whited - Dayton Veterans Issues ExaminerA study released in the Journal of Psychopharmacology on Monday, July 14, shows the drug Ecstasy had positive results in the majority of patients when used to treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Existing treatments for PTSD include bothpharmacotherapy and psychotherapies. Although a variety of drugs are used to treat symptoms of PTSD, they have limited efficacy. The study group was mostly female victims of child sexual abuse and rape who suffered from PTSD for an average of about 19 years, said Dr. Michael Mithoefer, a South Carolina psychiatrist who oversaw the testing done by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) – a group that analyzes the use of psychedelic drugs in mental health treatment. Dr. Mithoefer explains the study in a video on the MAPS website. The MAPS organization mission statement reads, Our mission is 1) to treat conditions for which conventional medicines provide limited relief—such as post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), pain, drug dependence, anxiety and depression associated with end-of-life issues—by developing psychedelics and marijuana into prescription medicines; 2) to treat many thousands of people by building a network of clinics where treatments can be provided; and 3) to educate the public honestly about the risks and benefits of psychedelics and marijuana. MAPS founder Dr. Rick Doblin told Military.com in a recent interview, the study focused on 20 patients for whom previous drug and psychotherapy treatments were unsuccessful. He also said, "the study was the first of its kind and a stepping stone for a follow-up that will focus entirely on U.S. military veterans."
According to the study, the high incidence of PTSD and the limited effectiveness of existing treatments combine to create an urgent need for the development of new treatments. In the United States, the lifetime prevalence of PTSD in the general population is between 6% and 10% and is much higher in countries where there is endemic armed conflict. In US soldiers returning from service in Iraq war and/or Afghanistan conflict, the incidence of PTSD is as high as 18% and it is estimated that those with PTSD will number between 75,000 and 225,000. For more information on the study visit: http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=4492 For more information about Ecstasy visit: http://www.drugfree.org/portal/drug_guide/ecstasy orhttp://www.drugs.com/ecstasy.html From article: http://www.examiner.com/x-39830-Dayton-Veterans-Issues-Examiner~y2010m7d20-New-Ecstasy-drug-study-to-focus-on-Veterans-with-PTSD |
posted Jul 17, 2010 11:48 PM by USIAV Organization
Saturday, Jul. 17, 2010 Iraq War Veterans Join Environmentalists in the Oiled Gulf of MexicoBy Bryan Walsh Robin Eckstein has a closer relationship than most of us to the long supply chains that brings oil from the well to the wheel. In 2007 she was an Army truck driver in Iraq, shipping fuel from Baghdad International Airport to the forward bases of American operations. The U.S. military is an oil-thirsty machine, and it was the job of troops in logistics, like Eckstein, to keep the occupation fueled. That meant driving miles every day in a fuel convoy through some of the most dangerous streets in the world. "Every day when we left the airport, I was thinking, time to roll the dice," she said. "Would it be insurgents, an IED, something else? We were just a big, slow, vulnerable target." (See "Oil Spill: For Now The Pressure Holds.") To Eckstein—who made it home OK from her tour in Iraq—the epiphany was inevitable. If gas was still cheap in America it was in part because the U.S. military was paying to keep some level of stability in the Middle East. Oil had its hidden costs for the U.S., costs that weren't factored into the price of gas—one of which was the blood of young American soldiers. "It all really resonated with me," the 33-year-old said. "Why weren't we doing things in a more efficient way?" I met Eckstein on a boat among the oiled waterways of southern Louisiana, where we'd come to see a once-hidden cost of crude that had suddenly made itself heartbreakingly visible: the Gulf oil spill. Eckstein, a handful of other Iraq veterans and even some and retired generals were in Louisiana as part of Operation Free, a young advocacy group that has begun pushing a green message not so much on environmental grounds, but on national security ones. They point out that the Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency has put out reports highlighting the danger that a warming world will post to America's security. Climate change is a "threat multiplier," these experts say, because a warmer planet will have more refugees, more instability and more conflict. And the other side of their message is the price of oil addiction. With hostile countries like Iran buoyed by oil revenue, our refusal to move away from cheap crude has us, in the words of former CIA director James Woolsey, "funding both sides of the war on terror." Adds Jonathan Murray, the campaign director for Operation Free and a Marine veteran: "The real cost of gas is not what people pay at the gas station." (See how bad the oil spill could have gotten.) Operation Free had sponsored the Louisiana boat trip with the arch-green Sierra Club. Veterans and tree-huggers are two groups that might not have that much in common. But their union—even if they don't agree on anything—is a welcome sign as the environmental movement tries to broaden its message and win skeptics. Think Al Gore or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change just made up global warming? Then listen to Pentagon, which is already preparing for a warmer world. Think renewable power is a joke? Well the Department of Defense has invested billions in energy efficiency and renewable power-in part because they know from Iraq, where a gallon of gas is priced at $400 given the long and threatened supply chain, just how vulnerable our oil dependence makes us. "We come from different perspectives," said Kate Colanilli, who runs the dirty fuels campaign at the Sierra Club. "But we can leverage those skills toward the same goal." Among the bayous and wetlands of Louisiana, however, it was the environmental message, not the national security one, that was most pressing. I'd last been in these waters at the start of June, just when the oil from the ongoing Deepwater Horizon spill was really beginning to hit the coast. The cleanup and coastal defense operation was barely getting off the ground then, but it's now become much more visible. Massive barges hold thick coils of red and yellow shoreline boom to be deployed throughout hard-hit Barataria Bay. Wetlands are ringed with foamy white absorbent boom that can soak up oil, and their fresh color indicated that they'd been recently changed. Small charter boats carrying Coast Guard officers and BP officials skim the bay. Hundreds of brown pelicans roost on a small outcrop called Cat Island, protected by three layers of boom. (See pictures of the oil spill.) But take a closer look: a number of those pelicans were lightly but distinctly oiled, placing them among the thousands of seabirds directly threatened by the spill. And soon enough, as we cruised into Bay Jimmy, we could see where oil had infected the marsh grasses. Crude had penetrated several feet deep into the wetlands, turning the cane grass closest to the water as brown as a decayed tooth and leaving the plants dead or dying. There was boom but it was too late for this path of marsh. I reached in and fingered the plants—they were wrapped in crude that had the consistency and tenacity of caramel. This was an old oiling—there was no crude visible floating in the water. But there would be no cleaning up, no saving this wetland. One of the retired senior officers on the boat, General Paul Monroe, part of the Operation Free team, shook his head at the scene. "It's hard to believe we could have such an impact on the environment," he said. Nearly three months into the oil spill, that shouldn't be hard to believe any longer. The question going forward is whether this disaster will change us—or be ignored, another forgotten tax on the price of gas. National security isn't a perfect argument for moving away from oil, at least for environmentalists—it's too easy to see how an even dirtier fuel like Canadian tar sands crude could pass muster just because it doesn't come from a hostile nation. But the oil spill has demonstrated that America must have a reckoning with the way it develops — and uses — energy, and oil especially. Greens—whether that's the color of a tree or camouflage—will need all the allies they can get. From article: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2004456,00.html |
posted Jul 17, 2010 11:29 PM by USIAV Organization
[
updated Jul 17, 2010 11:36 PM
]
VA changes date of submission to Federal Register and changes effective date of rule from July 12, 2010 to July 13, 2010.
Check out the Federal Register Here for more details. Make a pot of coffee, it's a long read. |
posted Jul 11, 2010 10:10 PM by USIAV Organization
Obama changes VA rule to help vets get stress disorder aidWar-zone veterans will no longer have to submit specific evidence to get benefits and treatment for post-traumatic stress.By Katherine Skiba, Tribune Washington BureauJuly 11, 2010Reporting from Washington- President Obama, saying that post-traumatic stress is one of two "signature injuries" of today's wars, announced Saturday that new policies will soon take effect to make it easier for war-zone veterans with the disorder to receive disability benefits.The president previewed the changes at the Veterans Affairs Department in his Saturday radio address. He said traumatic brain injuries also beset today's veterans and that too few of them "receive the screening and treatment they need" for both conditions.In the past, veterans were often stymied by a requirement to produce evidence that a specific event triggered their stress disorder. That's kept those who served in noncombat roles in war zones from getting the care they need, he said.Post-traumatic stress disorder is an anxiety disorder that can surface after traumatic events and leave patients feeling scared, confused or angry, according to the VA's National Center for PTSD. They may experience flashbacks, become suddenly angry, have a hard time sleeping or concentrating and develop problems involving relationships, employment and alcohol or drug use.Rep. John Hall (D-N.Y.), who championed the changes, said veterans had been required to produce incident reports, buddy statements, medals or other corroboration to prove they experienced trauma.Hall, whose district includes West Point and who chairs a House Veterans Affairs subcommittee on disability assistance, told of a World War II veteran who was on ships that sank in the Pacific and was rescued in both instances. "Like a bad 'Twilight Zone' episode, there were body parts and sharks going by him," the lawmaker said. But when the man sought help during the 1970s, the VA initially dismissed him as having a preexisting condition, schizophrenia.He now is receiving disability checks, Hall said.Hall said the new policy will presume there is a service-related connection when a combat-zone veteran suffers from the stress disorder.More than 400,000 veterans now receive compensation benefits for service-related post-traumatic stress disorder, VA officials said. Officials declined to say how many people might be affected by the new regulation.In an April 2008 study, the RAND Corp. found that nearly 20% of service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan — 300,000 in all — reported symptoms of post-traumatic stress or major depression, but only slightly more than half had sought treatment.The study says these cases of post-traumatic stress and depression would cost the nation as much as $6.2 billion in the two years after deployments for costs associated with medical care, lost productivity and suicide.An analysis by the Chicago Tribune published last spring found that overall disability payments to veterans from all wars reached $34.3 billion in 2009, a 76% increase since 2003.Veterans of recent U.S.-declared wars on terrorism received $329 million in disability payments in 2009 related to mental disorders, including post-traumatic stress, which is 34% of all disability payments to vets from this period, the paper found.Officials said the changes would be published Monday in the Federal Register and take effect immediately. The new regulation will also make it easier for veterans to receive treatment for post-traumatic stress.Joe Davis, a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said Saturday that the change was "a very good step forward." But the VFW favored a more expansive bill introduced by Hall that would have also accepted diagnoses from private sector mental-health professionals, not just those at the VA."The VA mental-health professionals, as good as they are, are understaffed and over tasked," Davis said.Still, Davis saluted the VA for "acknowledging that we've got a lot of troops fighting in a war without front lines. Whether you saw it upfront as an infantryman or you were a truck driver or you were working in a medical unit in the rear or, unfortunately, you were sitting in a chow hall when a suicide bomber let go, you were impacted."kskiba@tribune.comCopyright © 2010, The Los Angeles TimeFrom article: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-veterans-20100711,0,6249040.story |
posted Jul 10, 2010 9:04 AM by USIAV Organization
(AP) With the military fighting two wars, President Barack Obama said Saturday the country has a "solemn responsibility" to ensure that veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder get the help they need. Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki is to announce new regulations Monday intended to make it easier for veterans with PTSD to receive government benefits. The new rules will not only apply to veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but also those who served in previous conflicts. The regulations drop a provision requiring veterans to prove what caused their illness. Instead, veterans would have to show that the conditions surrounding the time and place of their service could have contributed to their illness. Veterans advocates and some lawmakers have argued that it sometimes could be impossible for veterans to find records of a firefight or bomb blast. They also have contended that the old rules ignored other causes of PTSD, such as fearing a traumatic event even if it doesn't occur. That could discriminate against female troops prohibited from serving on front lines and against other service members who don't experience combat directly. In his weekly radio and online address, President Obama said the new regulations are part of the country's "solemn responsibility to provide our veterans and wounded warriors with the care and benefits they've earned when they come home." A study last year by the RAND Corp. think tank estimated thatnearly 20 percent of returning veterans, or 300,000, have symptoms of PTSD or major depression. A senior official at the Veterans Administration said the department doesn't expect the number of veterans receiving benefits for PTSD to rise dramatically, as most veterans with legitimate applications for benefits do eventually get claims. The goal is simply to make the claims process less cumbersome and time-consuming, said the official, who would speak only on condition of anonymity ahead of the VA's announcement. From article: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/10/politics/main6664695.shtml?tag=topnews |
|
