1 in 5 veterans found with mental disorder

[Breeze54]

1 in 5 veterans found with mental disorder

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/04/18/1_in_5_veterans_found_with_mental_disorder/

Depression, stress called under treated


Jackie Smith welcomed her husband, Staff Sergeant Steven Smith
of the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 3d Infantry Division, at a
homecoming ceremony at Fort Stewart in Georgia.
(John Carrington/Savannah Morning News via Associated Press)

By Julian E. Barnes
Los Angeles Times / April 18, 2008

WASHINGTON - The latest and most comprehensive study of veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has concluded that nearly 1 in every 5 veterans is suffering from depression or stress disorders and that many are not getting adequate care.

The study shows that mental disorders are more prevalent and lasting than previously known, surfacing belatedly and lingering after troops have been discharged into civilian and family life.

An estimated 300,000 veterans among the nearly 1.7 million who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan are battling depression or post-traumatic stress disorder. More than half of those people, according to the study conducted by the Rand Corp., are slipping through the cracks in the bureaucratic system, going without necessary treatment.

The Rand study underscores one of the hard lessons of modern counterinsurgency conflicts: Such wars might kill fewer soldiers than traditional fights but can leave deeper psychological scars.

Screening techniques for stress disorders are vastly improved from previous wars, making comparisons with Vietnam, Korea, or World War II difficult or impossible. But a chief difference is that in Iraq and Afghanistan, all service members, not just combat infantry, are regularly exposed to roadside bombs and civilian massacres. That distinction subjects a wider swath of military personnel to the stresses of war.

"We call it '360-365' combat," said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense. "What that means is veterans are completely surrounded by combat for one year. Nearly all of our soldiers are under fire, or being subjected mortar rounds, or roadside bombs, or witnessing the deaths of civilians or fellow soldiers."

Military officials praised the Rand study yesterday, arguing that its findings were consistent with their studies and said it would reinforce their efforts to try to improve mental health care. Veterans Affairs officials, while questioning the study's methodology, said their department has intensified efforts to find discharged service members suffering from mental disorders.

The Rand Study was undertaken for the California Community Foundation, which has funded other programs for returning veterans. Lieutenant General Eric Schoomaker, the Army surgeon general, said the study would help draw the nation's attention. "They are making this a national debate," Schoomaker said.

The Army previously has said that an estimated 1 in 6 service members suffers from a form of post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, a slightly lower rate than Rand's study found. In addition to PTSD rates, the Rand study found that 19.5 percent of people who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan suffered a concussion or another traumatic brain injury during their combat tour, a number similar to Army estimates.

Taken together, the study shows that 31 percent of those who have served in combat have suffered brain injuries, stress disorders, or both.

Combat-related mental ailments and stress can lead to suicide, homelessness and physical health problems. But more mundane disorders can have long-term social consequences.

"These conditions can impair relationships, disrupt marriages, aggravate the difficulties of parenting, and cause problems in children that may extend the consequences of combat trauma across generations," the study says.

Failure to treat disorders adequately can cost the government billions of dollars, said Lisa H. Jaycox, another of the study's authors.

Some service members avoid a diagnosis of a mental health problem, fearing negative consequences, according to the study. These troops worry about damage to their military careers and relationships with co-workers. "When we asked folks what was limiting them from getting the help that they need, among the top barriers that were reported were really negative career repercussions," said Terri Tanielian, one of the study's authors.

The study suggests two key changes. It suggests ways to allow service members to get mental health care "off the record" to avoid any stigma. And since some soldiers and Marines fear that seeking treatment will prevent their redeployment, the study recommends that fitness-for-duty reports not rely on decisions to seek mental health care.

[midnight]

1. Bless them, and know that those of use who are now reliant on

any medical treatment can and will be scrutinized if and when we are considered a threat to the government. Now can you imagine the stigma that is faced by a soldier who has needs. I believe they are considered "animals by one republican administration". Unfortunately the folks in need the most are prevented from seeking help. It is a travesty. "Some service members avoid a diagnosis of a mental health problem, fearing negative consequences"

[Breeze54]

2. It's been reported before that those that seek treatment are treated

badly by their superiors and they are redeployed anyway. :grr:

This has to stop, they need to destigmatize this.

I suspect many that have died in Iraq but not in combat, have committed suicide.

[bdamomma]

3. just look at the numbers of those who have these mental health disorders

and brain injuries, and yet we still have these giggling murderers in the WH, this is shameful to treat these young people like this. When will someone or alot of somebodies hold these murderers accountable? oh, nevermind.

[paparush]

4. Well, its not like any of these guys are gonna blow up a government building or anything..

:sarcasm:

(edited to include sarcasm tag)

[Breeze54]

5. More like increased suicide, homelessness and family and drug abuse

:grr:

[usaftmo]

6. Exactly

I'm very worried that for the next 30 years or so somebody in the States will go bonkers and do a shooting spree in a public gathering place (mall, restaurant, etc.)...and it will be blamed on a spaced-out Gulf War veteran :-(

I'm active duty military, have never been deployed to the Middle East...and I've been diagnosed with depression and PTSD! Staying back to make sure things are running smooth at the base out of harm's way is so destructive (physically and mentally) can also take it's toll.

[bdamomma]

35. it has happened, Timothy McVeigh and John Mohammad

and if they keep on treating those vets the way the are, no decent healthcare, no job, no housing and no family that would give many of them cause to "go off". Coming back to face homelessness, and seeing your country go down the tubes can't be comforting either.

Thank you for your duty and stay safe.:patriot:

[AngryAmish]

7. Why would a mental disorder be helpful in finding a veteran?

Go to the VFW or just ask them.

[Breeze54]

9. I don't understand what you are asking....

:shrug:

[AngryAmish]

10. The headline is poorly written

One reading could be that mental disorders could be used to find veterans. That way it makes no sense yet is grammatically feasable. Thus, humor is found.

[Breeze54]

12. ... only in your world... I think it's pretty straight forward.

:shrug:

And I fail to see any humor.

[AngryAmish]

15. I'll run at this one more time

Changing some words, the following headline makes sense: "Water is found with dowsing rods". Thus, the grammatical structure allows for two readings of the same headline in the OP.

In humor, a non-sequitor "is a conversational and literary device, often used for comical purposes (as opposed to its use in formal logic). It is a comment which, due to its lack of meaning relative to the comment it follows, is absurd to the point of being humorous or confusing. Its use can be deliberate or unintentional. Literally, it is Latin for "it does not follow". In other literature, a non sequitur can denote an abrupt, illogical, unexpected or absurd turn of plot or dialogue not normally associated with or appropriate to that preceding it."


<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28humor%29>

There are other examples that can be provided of non-sequitors if the concept is new to you.

[Breeze54]

17. I'm not interested and you are attempting to take this sad fact off track

Give it a rest.

If you have anymore complaints then contact the author.

[woo me with science]

8. Just about the same as the general population.

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/chapter2/sec2_1.html

"Adults

The current prevalence estimate is that about 20 percent of the U.S. population are affected by mental disorders during a given year. This estimate comes from two epidemiologic surveys: the Epidemiologic Catchment Area (ECA) study of the early 1980s and the National Comorbidity Survey (NCS) of the early 1990s. Those surveys defined mental illness according to the prevailing editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (i.e., DSM-III and DSM-IIIR)...."

[Breeze54]

11. The suicide rate among recent veterans is double the general population!

Suicide Epidemic Among Veterans

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/13/cbsnews_investigates/main3496471.shtml

A CBS News Investigation Uncovers A Suicide Rate For Veterans Twice That Of Other Americans

(CBS)

They are the casualties of wars you don’t often hear about - soldiers who die of self-inflicted wounds.
Little is known about the true scope of suicides among those who have served in the military.

But a five-month CBS News investigation discovered data that shows a startling rate of suicide, what some
call a hidden epidemic, Chief Investigative Reporter Armen Keteyian reports exclusively.

“I just felt like this silent scream inside of me,” said Jessica Harrell, the sister of a soldier
who took his own life.

"I opened up the door and there he was," recalled Mike Bowman, the father of an Army reservist.

"I saw the hose double looped around his neck,” said Kevin Lucey, another military father.

"He was gone,” said Mia Sagahon, whose soldier boyfriend committed suicide.

Keteyian spoke with the families of five former soldiers who each served in Iraq - only to die
battling an enemy they could not conquer. Their loved ones are now speaking out in their names.

They survived the hell that's Iraq and then they come home only to lose their life.

Twenty-three-year-old Marine Reservist Jeff Lucey hanged himself with a garden hose in the cellar
of this parents’ home - where his father, Kevin, found him.

"There's a crisis going on and people are just turning the other way,” Kevin Lucey said.

Kim and Mike Bowman’s son Tim was an Army reservist who patrolled one of the most dangerous places
in Baghdad, known as Airport Road.

"His eyes when he came back were just dead. The light wasn't there anymore," Kim Bowman said.

Eight months later, on Thanksgiving Day, Tim shot himself. He was 23.

Diana Henderson’s son, Derek, served three tours of duty in Iraq. He died jumping off a bridge at 27.

"Going to that morgue and seeing my baby ... my life will never be the same," she said.

Beyond the individual loss, it turns out little information exists about how widespread suicides are among
these who have served in the military. There have been some studies, but no one has ever counted the numbers nationwide.

"Nobody wants to tally it up in the form of a government total," Bowman said.

Why do the families think that is?

"Because they don't want the true numbers of casualties to really be known," Lucey said.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., is a member of the Veterans Affairs Committee.

"If you're just looking at the overall number of veterans themselves who've committed suicide,
we have not been able to get the numbers,” Murray said.

CBS News’ investigative unit wanted the numbers, so it submitted a Freedom of Information Act
request to the Department of Defense asking for the numbers of suicides among all service members
for the past 12 years.

Four months later, they sent CBS News a document, showing that between 1995 and 2007, there were
almost 2,200 suicides. That’s 188 last year alone. But these numbers included only “active duty” soldiers.

CBS News went to the Department of Veterans Affairs, where Dr. Ira Katz is head of mental health.

"There is no epidemic in suicide in the VA, but suicide is a major problem," he said.

Why hasn't the VA done a national study seeking national data on how many veterans have committed suicide in this country?

"That research is ongoing,” he said.

So CBS News did an investigation - asking all 50 states for their suicide data, based on death records,
for veterans and non-veterans, dating back to 1995. Forty-five states sent what turned out to be a mountain
of information.

And what it revealed was stunning.

In 2005, for example, in just those 45 states, there were at least 6,256 suicides among those
who served in the armed forces. That’s 120 each and every week, in just one year.

Dr. Steve Rathbun is the acting head of the Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department at the
University of Georgia. CBS News asked him to run a detailed analysis of the raw numbers that
we obtained from state authorities for 2004 and 2005.

It found that veterans were more than twice as likely to commit suicide in 2005 than non-vets. (Veterans committed suicide at the rate of between 18.7 to 20.8 per 100,000, compared to other Americans, who did so at the rate of 8.9 per 100,000.)

One age group stood out. Veterans aged 20 through 24, those who have served during the war on terror.
They had the highest suicide rate among all veterans, estimated between two and four times higher
than civilians the same age. (The suicide rate for non-veterans is 8.3 per 100,000, while the rate
for veterans was found to be between 22.9 and 31.9 per 100,000.)

"Wow! Those are devastating," said Paul Sullivan, a former VA analyst who is now an advocate
for veterans rights from the group Veterans For Common Sense.

More.....

:(

[woo me with science]

16. No, because CBS did a crappy job and compared to the total population.

The valid comparison would be to a similar demographic group, because suicide rates vary significantly depending on age and sex. The army is overwhelmingly young and male, and the statistics for young males are very close to these. According to the AMerican Association of Suicidology, 20.84 per 100,000 males ages 20-24 commit suicide, which is essentially the same as or even higher than the figure you cite.

This story was extremely flawed, and there were several news reports about the flaws when it came out.

[Breeze54]

18. They got the numbers directly from the VA. - Veteran Suicides: How We Got The Numbers

They used the FOIA

"Dr. Steve Rathbun is the acting head of the Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department at the
University of Georgia. CBS News asked him to run a detailed analysis of the raw numbers that we
obtained from state authorities for 2004 and 2005.

----------

Veteran Suicides: How We Got The Numbers

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/13/cbsnews_investigates/main3498625.shtml?source=related_story

How The CBS News Investigative Unit Got The Statistics And The Story

(CBS) Since CBS News first aired our veteran suicide report on November 13, we have received several questions from viewers wanting more information. In order to provide as much information as possible and to fully answer all questions, this is a summary of the methodology and results of the data we presented.

When CBS News began looking into veteran suicide, we found that no federal organization or agency tracks the number of veteran suicides nationally. To our knowledge, no one is keeping count. We wanted to know how many veterans are committing suicide nationwide and how the rate of suicide for veterans compares to non-veterans.

Looking for Data
CBS News first approached the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in June and July asking for suicide data for those who have served in the military.

We were told the DoD only tracks suicides committed by military personnel who are on active duty. The VA said they had no suicide data on file at the time. The NCHS (which is the federal organization responsible for maintaining most of the nation's health statistics and is a center within the CDC) does not monitor the military status of those who have committed suicide. Finally, the CDC’s Injury Center (also known as the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control) started a program in 2003 called the National Violent Death Reporting System which has collected some veteran suicide data from state death records but does not currently have nationwide counts. The CDC told CBS News that the information they have about veteran suicides “cannot be generalized to draw conclusions about the entire country.”

Finding the Numbers
CBS News learned that state vital statistics departments keep count of suicides based on information obtained from death records which can be separated by military status.

Therefore, over the course of five months, we contacted all 50 states asking them to provide us with their suicide data. Most of the states were able to tally the counts from their databases while some states had to go through death records counting suicides by hand.

Some states charged us a fee for the time and labor involved in gathering the data. In total, CBS News paid about $3,000 in processing fees to the states.

Privacy Issues
Obtaining suicide data from the states involved more than just a basic public records request.

Initially, several states refused to provide the data to CBS News for privacy concerns. Here’s why: the suicide numbers in some categories are small enough that individuals could be identified, violating state privacy policies. For example, one state could have two non-white females between the ages of 30-34 committing suicide in 2004 who had served in the armed forces. Because of the small number in that category, those individuals could be identified and the cause of their death would then be made public.

Therefore, in order to get the data, CBS News had to give assurance to the states that we would keep the raw data confidential. Some states insisted upon written agreements to this effect. The data, however, can be obtained upon request from the files of each individual state.

Gathering Data - Stage 1
CBS News collected the data in two stages over the course of several months.

First, we asked all 50 states to provide us with veteran and non-veteran suicide counts from 1995 to 2005 broken down by year, age, race, gender and manner of suicide. (Note: The most recent year most states have suicide data available is for the year 2005.)

Forty-five states responded to this initial request which resulted in a massive amount of varied raw information.

Five states did not provide us with raw data and total counts for suicides because they said it was not available. Those states were Georgia, Kentucky, Nebraska (only had 2004 data), Nevada and North Carolina.

In looking at the 2005 suicide counts, among 45 states that shared data, there were a total of 6256 suicides by those who served in the military for both men and women of all ages and races.

Consulting Experts
While gathering the data, CBS News consulted with several leading epidemiologists and biostatisticians from across the country including experts at the NCHS, CDC, Harvard, the University of Illinois and Columbia University to name a few.

We learned that in order to present suicide data accurately and appropriately it needs to be analyzed by adjusting the rates of suicide for age and gender as described below.

What are Adjusted Rates?
A “rate of suicide” is a type of analysis that shows how many suicides occurred per 100,000 people in a given population.

There are two basic types of suicide rates: "crude" and "adjusted." Crude is a basic calculation that does not take into consideration the make-up of the population. Adjusted rates are a more sophisticated statistical calculation (beyond simple mathematics) that take into consideration variables unique to a particular population like age and gender. The veteran population, for example, is mostly made up of older males, so the data had to be statistically adjusted state by state in order to accurately compare with the non-veteran populations.

Important Note: All of the rates of suicide that CBS News presented are adjusted. The overall rates are adjusted for age and gender in both the veteran and non-veteran populations. The male and female rates are age adjusted. And, the age breakdowns are adjusted for gender.

Gathering Data - Stage 2
CBS News decided to do a more in-depth analysis of the years 2004 and 2005 because those are the two most recent years most states had data available.

In order to do a rate of suicide analysis, we went back to the states and asked them to provide us with the ‘resident’ suicide counts for the years 2004 and 2005 in a uniform ‘cross classified’ format. (‘Cross classified’ means data is formatted in such a way that variables like age, gender can be matched by one another.)

Important note: A ‘resident’ suicide is one committed by a person who is a resident of the state as opposed to an ‘occurrence’ which is a suicide that occurs in the state by a non-resident.

Forty states provided us with ‘resident’ ‘cross classified’ data for the years 2004 and 2005, which was used to statistically calculate rates of suicide for the entire country. The states that did not provide us with cross classified data for the years 2004 and 2005 (because it was not available or they refused for privacy reasons) were: Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota and Rhode Island. Nebraska could only provide 2004 data; and, the state of California only had 2005 data available.

Finding an Expert
In order to calculate rates of suicide, we needed to find a reputable independent biostatistician. We consulted with several experts from across the country and approached the University of Georgia’s Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department.

The acting head of the department, Prof. Steve Rathbun, agreed to do the analysis for CBS News. He did this as a public service entirely free of charge. We choose Prof. Rathbun because of his expertise in statistics and because he had no ties with any federal agency that could pose a conflict of interest in looking at military suicide data. For example, he had no paid relationship with the DoD or the VA.

CBS News did not pay Prof. Rathbun, the University of Georgia or any of its employees for the analysis.

To avoid bias, a protocol for statistical data analysis was specified to Prof. Rathbun prior to obtaining the data. This protocol included specific questions posed by CBS News like "what is the rate of suicide for veterans versus non-veterans," specification of the statistical model that was to be fit to the data, and the methods for computing age and gender adjusted suicide rates. All subsequent analyses were conducted according to this pre-specified protocol.

Population Sources
The population data that was used to calculate rates of suicide came from the following sources:

Veteran population numbers were obtained by CBS News from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The non-veteran population numbers came from subtracting the veteran population from the general population numbers the U.S. Census Bureau provided to CBS News.

Important Note: Suicide death rates that are publically available (by going to the CDC’s Wisquar’s website) are for the general U.S. population. The general population includes both veterans and non-veterans together. The rates CBS News presented will look nothing like those for the general population because we compared “veterans” to “non-veterans.” Comparing veteran suicides to the general population is misleading and an inaccurate analysis because, the general population includes veterans. Furthermore, the CDC general population suicide rates are age-adjusted only. The CBS analysis is adjusted for both age and gender.

Assuring Accuracy
CBS News took extreme care in collecting the data and took all measures possible to make sure the results would be accurate.

more....

[woo me with science]

19. You did not pay attention to my point.

Yes, they used a good source, but they used the wrong numbers. They did not control for demographics.

[Breeze54]

20. Read more and what is your point? Vets are committing suicide!

We asked each state to provide us with veteran and non-veteran suicide data. The military status of an individual who dies is typically filled out on death certificates by coroners or funeral directors. While most states assured us that the veteran counts they provided us did not include suicides by active-duty service members, we were concerned that some states many have inadvertently included such suicides in the data they provided us. So, CBS News asked the Department of Defense to provide us with the total number of active duty suicides that took place in the United States in 2004 and 2005 (including those on reserve and in the National Guard) broken down by age and gender. In an effort to prevent any over count, we then analyzed the data both with and without subtracting the DoD active-duty suicides from the state veteran counts. The results are reflected as a range in the data we reported.

Results 2004

Overall Rates
Veterans: 17.5 to 21.8 per 100,000
Non-Veterans: 9.4 per 100,000

Male Rates
Veterans: 30.6 to 38.3 per 100,000
Non-Veterans: 18.3 per 100,000

Female Rates
Veterans: 10.0 to 12.5 per 100,000
Non-Veterans: 4.8 per 100,000

Results 2005

Overall Rates
Veterans: 18.7 to 20.8 per 100,000
Non-Veterans: 8.9 per 100,000

Male Rates
Veterans: 31.5 to 35.3 per 100,000
Non-Veterans: 17.6 per 100,000

Female Rates
Veterans: 11.1 to 12.3 per 100,000
Non-Veterans: 4.5 per 100,000

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/13/cbsnews_investigates/main3498625.shtml?source=related_story

[woo me with science]

21. They have not considered age,

and most of the comparisons they put out in the article are just silly. This is bad journalism. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you to comprehend. This study was roundly criticized as misleading when it came out, because the demographics used are not equivalent in the groups. Methodology matters, and throwing out misleading statistics does not help in this argument.

[Breeze54]

23. They did consider age.

It's right there and they had an expert doing the numbers.

First, we asked all 50 states to provide us with veteran and non-veteran suicide counts
from 1995 to 2005 broken down by year, age, race, gender and manner of suicide.
(Note: The most recent year most states have suicide data available is for the year 2005.)

Are you trying to say that it's no big deal that vets are committing suicide?

I don't get why you are making a big deal out of numbers as the point is

THEY AREN'T GETTING THE HELP THEY NEED!!!

[woo me with science]

24. No, they give a series of silly comparisons

that have no meaning, instead of making the groups equivalent to begin with. This is Methodology 101. Of course, they can count on the general public not to see this, because science education in this country has devolved to the level that people cannot analyze a simple study.

Not to mention that much PTSD treatment in this country is essentially unvalidated garbage and needs a serious overhaul before we start inflicting it widescale on veterans.

[Breeze54]

25. The Vets need help with PTSD... period.

You seem to have other issue's though.

[woo me with science]

26. Nice response.

Your personal attack would be more effective if it didn't prove that your English education was not much better than your science education. Just for future reference, the plural doesn't take the apostrophe.

Trauma treatment in this country is a disgrace. We now have emerging evidence that people funneled to trauma therapists after a disaster are more likely to have PTSD symptoms a year later than those who are not.

You are hollering for something based on emotion, not facts. It is a shame you are not interested in the actual facts.

[Breeze54]

27. You seem overly senitive if you see that observation as an "attack."

Your ridiculous criticism about a typo proves my point. :eyes:

I posted the facts and it is a subject close to my heart; as the mother of an OIF Vet.

Step off.

[woo me with science]

28. It is obviously a subject close to your heart.

The problem is that your heart does not make the statistics valid. You quoted a garbage study; the statistics you throw out are misleading and inflammatory. That is all I am saying. These discussions get clouded with emotion, and people put their fingers in their ears and refuse to consider that they may be wrong, even when facts are provided.

You are right that vets deserve good care. I would be all for trauma therapy for all vets, if the industry weren't infested with garbage myths and "treatments" that can harm rather than help. We actually have the same goal, believe it or not. The difference is that you are operating on emotion here.

You may have the last word, as it is clearly so important to you. Believe it or not, I do empathize with your passion on this.

[Breeze54]

29. Step off....you can't see the forest for the tree's...

and you keep referring to that CBS study but the article in the OP is NEW!

[woo me with science]

30. Um, I refuted that one, too,

in my very first post. At first I thought you were purposely ignoring it, but now I see you are still having trouble with that apostrophe, too. I guess things just take a while to sink in...

Step off. Is that a military term? I salute you!:patriot:

Seriously, I hope you can calm down and have a nice day. We really are on the same side here, believe it or not.

[Breeze54]

31. You can refute all you want... doesn't change the facts.

Have a really crappy day a hole.

[woo me with science]

32. Um....facts?

That was my whole point. :rofl:

[Breeze54]

33. You are no expert and you clearly have an emotional problem and an agenda.

[woo me with science]

34. Once again,

a breathtaking argument, full of facts and compelling evidence.

I did try to be civil. I gave you an argument and explanations, and all you come back with is this. I am sorry that this is, as you put it, so close to your heart that you can't see straight.

[Breeze54]

39. I DON'T WORK FOR RAND CORP. !!!!!

CALL THEM AND DISCUSS THEIR FINDINGS!!!!!

Invisible Wounds

Mental Health and Cognitive Care Needs of America’s Returning Veterans

http://rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9336/index1.html

[woo me with science]

43. Calm down, please. There is no need to scream here.

Thank you for the very interesting link. A few points, if you are finally interested in having a rational discussion about this:

First, please review our discussion. I never stated that vets should not receive any care. I objected to your use of misleading and inflammatory statistics, attempting to prove that the mental health of veterans is in crisis and much worse than that of other Americans. There is nothing in the information you provide here to address this issue, so my issue with your original post still stands.

Please note that my argument has never been that vets should not receive good care. My argument is with using emotional arguments and inflammatory statistics to mislead and demagogue the issue. Health care is extremely expensive, and this country is in the middle of a health care crisis. This PTSD argument not only concerns the care of veterans, but will also be tied very closely into the larger argument about mental health care parity and the insurance industry. The stakes are extremely high, and as a result it is critical that we be scrupulously honest about the need that exists, and also scrupulously careful that the solutions we suggest are responsible both fiscally and medically. Demagoguing the argument and throwing out misleading statistics does not help this process. Demanding PTSD treatment while shutting your ears to people who have grave concerns about both the level of need for and the quality of such treatment as it exists today is not helpful.

I am actually heartened by this RAND brief, for a couple of reasons. One is the high priority paid to head injuries and their aftermath. Even the PTSD-related sections are encouraging at least for the reason that they are very clear about the need for "evidence-based care." Those three words are extremely important and signal that someone at RAND is aware of the issues of quality in PTSD treatment. You may recall the uproar at Johns Hopkins University some years back when Dr. Paul McHugh took over the Department of Psychiatry and tried to reorganize it to ensure that all care was evidence-based. If you recall, it was the trauma therapists who went ballistic, because they are the ones steeped in garbage theories and treatments (e.g., EMDR, "body memories," energy therapies, repression/dissociative amnesia, narrative rehearsal of trauma approaches) that have little basis in science and are beginning to be shown to be more harmful than helpful. Since the uproar at Johns Hopkins, research into trauma has come a long way, and at least in the universities, many of these approaches and beliefs are being seen for what they are. In our sick health system, though (i.e., in the hospitals, mental health clinics, and VA centers where our soldiers will actually be seen), the charlatans and well-meaning incompetents are still rampant. Most insurance companies would still rather pay an underqualified master's level therapist who did her thesis on "Sybil" than someone more expensive who has actually studied what neuroscience teaches us about trauma. If you truly care about the health of veterans, you will be just as concerned that the care they receive is evidence-based.

It heartens me that people who understand these issues appear to have had a hand in creating this document. If these words stand up, and "evidence-based" becomes not just a suggestion but a requirement for the standard of care, then we are on the right track.

Thank you for the article.

[Breeze54]

44. I never said in my OP I wanted to discuss the statistics in detail...

I posted the article for information purposes about the soldiers and PTSD.

Whether or not you agree with the numbers CBS or RAND used isn't my issue, IT'S YOURS!

You need someone to yell at you... you're thick as a brick. Go start your own thread

and post your own statistics and numbers but I'm willing to bet you don't have any.

Now take your little agenda somewhere else. This thread is about soldiers and PTSD, not you.

[woo me with science]

48. Why are you yelling at me?

It is a public board. If you don't like people to respond to what you post, start your own board where you can control the content. These are important issues. I am even wondering if you read what I wrote, because you sound so angry, and you seem to think that I am disagreeing with RAND. If you read what I wrote again, you will see that I was quite complimentary toward what you posted.

I am not the one having angry outbursts here. I am sorry that my responses bother you so much, but it is important to inject facts into this argument.

[Breeze54]

49. Go away psycho.

:eyes:

[woo me with science]

52. The quality of your argument is at least consistent.

I hope you feel better soon.

[Breeze54]

53. Good bye

[Blue_In_AK]

13. The half-sister of my husband's neice just returned from Iraq...

and promptly committed suicide. I'm sure she will not be counted as a casualty, but she most surely is. It's very, very sad.

[Breeze54]

14. I'm sorry to hear that.

And I'm sure her family will have to fight tooth and nail to have her listed among those KIA.

[bdamomma]

36. oh that's terrible, the system is just lacking and inadequate and

no one seems to care. Just putting these once vibrant young people into a meat grinder for bush and cheney, I only wish the * and cheney someday will meet their fate.

[fascisthunter]

22. I'm Not Surprised Considering What Soldiers See

I don't care how tough one thinks they might be, seeing death day in and day out and being in fear of dying on a daily basis has a toll on the human spirit and mind.

[bdamomma]

37. especially seeing innocent chidren and women getting killed.

and your own buddies.

[fascisthunter]

38. I Could Imagine

and that's just from imagining. I think I'd be struggling...

You know: contrast this with some corporate sleaze using our military for their own profit. Ruining lives for nothing....weird.

[bdamomma]

40. for your last comment

all the more reason why we must not stay silent, and say well "this does not affect us/me", cause all this killing and criminal acts will bite us back, not wishing for it, but we will not be immuned, we are in a way, seeing our own country dismantling in front of us. sad very sad. Again, where is the outrage??????

[fascisthunter]

41. I Agree....

I do what I can to spread information far and wide. Also talking about this when I can with people I know and don't know helps.

My father served in the military for about 15 years and he is sickened with rage at the amount of sacrifice average American have made for nothing more than some elitist pansies pushing economically tied agendas.

[genie_weenie]

42. This isn't that bad of a statistic since 1 in 1

service members who join are f***ed up already!

[Breeze54]

45. Why are you insulting all the DUers whom are and have served?

Why are you insulting all the DUers that have sons and daughters
and DUers that are enlisted and have served in the past??

You are trash.

[genie_weenie]

51. Yeeouch...

Just ask your son about barracks humor. But, I apologize for not expressing my tone more clearly in my original post. :hug:

FWIW, I'm glad your son made it out okay...

[Breeze54]

46. So you consider yourself fucked up?

"Comment (from your Profile)

Atheist, Anti-War, Anti-State, Gen-Xer who refuses to give up slacking,

even if no one cares to make me...

I've been in Afghanistan & Iraq not that it really matters..."

At least you admit it.

[genie_weenie]

47. It was an attempt at gallows humor.

Tone is so difficult to convey via printed word...

[Breeze54]

50. Ok....

But that's why there are emoticons. ;)

I'll take your word for it.