Were the Problems at Walter Reed Identified in 2004?

Meet Michael Kussman, the man Bush is slated to promote to Undersecretary for Health at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Today Salon’s Mark Benjamin takes a look at a survey, designed to identify problems in veterans’ health care, that was completed back in 2004. (A complete copy of the survey report is posted in pdf format at Salon.) The survey reveals thorough familiarity with the conditions at Walter Reed three years ago—and consequently, that the Bush administration’s claims that it simply didn’t know are not true.

Paul Sullivan, who until March 2006 was a project manager at the VA in charge of data on returning veterans, told Salon that Kussman’s role troubles him. “Kussman knew in 2004 that Walter Reed was a disaster,” fumed Sullivan, “and thousands and thousands of veterans have needlessly suffered long delays.”

Sullivan questioned why the military and the VA apparently did not address these problems two and a half years ago. “The VA had clear and unambiguous warning that Walter Reed was a fiasco in 2004,” Sullivan said. “There is no way they can say they did not know . . . The question is, did they share this with the Department of Defense [which runs Walter Reed] in 2004?”

The VA shares responsibility for treating and compensating wounded soldiers with the Department of Defense. Both the Department of Defense and the VA provide outpatient health care. Both provide long-term benefits through complex evaluation systems designed to weigh the value of service-connected health problems. The Seamless Transition Task Force was created to coordinate and streamline the two agencies’ overlapping healthcare and benefits programs and help soldiers navigate the bureaucratic jungle.

A review of the survey itself leaves no doubt as to the magnitude of the unhappiness and indignation expressed by soldiers housed at Walter Reed. It makes clear that Kussman would have known about this. Yet he appears to have done nothing. George Bush and his team love to talk about support for the troops. The conditions at Walter Reed invite serious question as to whether this is anything more than hollow rhetoric.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Were the Problems at Walter Reed Identified in 2004?

How the U.S. Is Failing Its War Veterans

March 5, 2007 issue – After returning from Iraq in late 2005, Jonathan Schulze spent every day struggling not to fall apart. When a Department of Veterans Affairs clinic turned him away last month, he lost the battle. The 25-year-old Marine from Stewart, Minn., had told his parents that 16 men in his unit had died in two days of battle in Ramadi. At home, he was drinking hard to stave off the nightmares. Though he managed to get a job as a roofer, he was suffering flashbacks and panic attacks so intense that he couldn’t concentrate on his work. Sometimes, he heard in his mind the haunting chants of the muezzin—the Muslim call to prayer that he’d heard many times in Iraq. Again and again, he’d relive the moments he was in a Humvee, manning the machine gun, but helpless to save his fellow Marines. “He’d be seeing them in his own mind, standing in front of him,” says his stepmother, Marianne.

Schulze, who earned two Purple Hearts for wounds sustained in Iraq, was initially reluctant to turn to the VA. Raised among fighters—Schulze’s father served in Vietnam and over the years his older brother and six stepbrothers all enlisted in the military—Jonathan might have felt asking for help didn’t befit a Marine.

But when the panic attacks got to be too much, he started showing up at the VA emergency room, where doctors recommended he try group therapy. He resisted; he didn’t think hearing other veterans’ depressing problems would help solve his own. Then, early last month, after more than a year of anxiety, he finally decided to admit himself to an inpatient program. Schulze packed a bag on Jan. 11 and drove with his family to the VA center in St. Cloud, about 70 miles away. The Schulzes were ushered into the mental-health-care unit and an intake worker sat down at a computer across from them. “She started typing,” Marianne says. “She asked, ‘Do you feel suicidal?’ and Jonathan said, ‘Yes, I feel suicidal’.” The woman kept typing, seemingly unconcerned. Marianne was livid. “He’s an Iraqi veteran!” she snapped. “Listen to him!” The woman made a phone call, then told him no one was available that day to screen him for hospitalization. Jonathan could come back tomorrow or call the counselor for a screening on the phone.

When he did call the following day, the response from the clinic was even more disheartening: the center was full. Schulze would be No. 26 on the waiting list. He was encouraged to call back periodically over the next two weeks in case there was a cancellation. Marianne was listening in on the conversation from the dining room. She watched Jonathan, slumped on the couch, as he talked to the doctor. “I heard him say the same thing: I’m suicidal, I feel lost, I feel hopelessness,” she says. Four days later Schulze got drunk, wrapped an electrical cord around a basement beam in his home and hanged himself. A friend he telephoned while tying the noose called the police, but by the time officers broke down the door, Schulze was dead.

How well do we care for our wounded and impaired when they come home? For a country amid what President Bush calls a “long war,” the question has profound moral implications. We send young Americans to the world’s most unruly places to execute our national policies. About 50,000 service members so far have been banged up or burned, suffered disease, lost limbs or sacrificed something less tangible inside them. Schulze is an extreme example but not an isolated one, and such stories are raising concerns that the country is failing to meet its most basic obligations to those who fight our wars.

The question of after-action care also has strategic consequences. Iraq marks the first drawn-out campaign we’ve fought with an all-volunteer military. In practice, that means far fewer Americans are taking part in this war (12 percent of the total population participated in World War II, 2 percent in Vietnam and less than half of 1 percent in Iraq and Afghanistan). Already, the war has made it harder for the military to recruit new soldiers and more expensive to retain the ones it has. If we fall down in the attention we provide them, who’s to say volunteers will continue coming forward?

The issue of veterans’ care jumped into the headlines last week when The Washington Post published a series about Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C. The stories revealed decay and mismanagement at the hospital, and provoked shock and concern among politicians in both parties. “The doctors were fantastic,” a Walter Reed patient, 21-year-old Marissa Strock, tells NEWSWEEK. “But some of the nurses and other staffers here have been a nightmare.” Strock suffered multiple injuries, including broken bones, a lacerated liver and severely bruised lungs, when her Humvee rolled over an improvised explosive device on Nov. 24, 2005. She later had both her legs amputated. “I think a big part of [Walter Reed’s problems] is they just don’t have enough people to adequately handle all the wounded troops coming in here every day,” she says. (Walter Reed did not respond to requests for comment about Strock’s case.) The Pentagon responded swiftly to the Post series. It vowed to investigate what went wrong and immediately sent a repair crew to repaint and fix the damage to the aging buildings.

The revelations were especially shocking because Walter Reed is one of the country’s most prestigious military hospitals, often visited by prominent politicians, including the president. But it is just one part of a vast network of hospitals and clinics that serve wounded soldiers and veterans throughout the country. A NEWSWEEK investigation focused not on one facility but on the services of the Department of Veterans Affairs, a 235,000-person bureaucracy that provides medical care to a much larger number of servicemen and women from the time they’re released from the military, and doles out their disability payments. Our reporting paints a grim portrait of an overloaded bureaucracy cluttered with red tape; veterans having to wait weeks or months for mental-health care and other appointments; families sliding into debt as VA case managers study disability claims over many months, and the seriously wounded requiring help from outside experts just to understand the VA’s arcane system of rights and benefits. “In no way do I diminish the fact that there are veterans out there who are coming in who require treatment and maybe are not getting the treatment they need,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto tells NEWSWEEK. “It’s real and it exists.”

The system’s shortcomings are certainly not deliberate; no organization is perfect. Some of the VA’s hospitals have been cited as among the best in the country, and even in extreme cases, the picture is seldom black-and-white. Before he killed himself, Schulze was seen by the VA 46 times, VA Secretary James Nicholson told Congress this month. (He did not elaborate on what care Schulze received.)

Yet, as the number of veterans continues to grow, critics worry the VA is in a state of denial. In a broad sense, the situation at the VA seems to mirror the overall lack of planning for the war. “We know the VA doesn’t have the capacity to process a large number of disability claims at the same time,” says Linda Bilmes, a Harvard public-finance professor and former Clinton administration Commerce Department official. Last month Bilmes released a 34-page study on the long-term cost of caring for veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. She projects that at least 700,000 veterans from the global war on terror (GWOT) will flood the system in the coming years.

As it is, for some veterans the wait can be agonizing. Patrick Feges was on hold for 17 months until his first disability check from the VA came through. An Eagle Scout from Sugar Land, Texas, Feges enlisted in 2003 and found himself in Ramadi a year later. In October 2004, a mortar exploded on his base about 50 yards from him, spraying him with shrapnel, slicing his intestines and severing a major artery. Feges lost consciousness and was flown to Walter Reed, where he underwent surgery. Long scars trail down his legs and midsection. At the hospital a fellow Texan came to visit: President Bush stood by his bed and chatted with him.

Feges is a polite 22-year-old with a military manner. He addresses strangers by last name and an honorific, even when prodded to drop the formality. “I was brought up right, sir,” he explains. But his voice rises slightly when he describes his ordeal with the VA. A case officer in Houston processed Feges’s request for disability in September 2005, then lost his application. Feges was summoned to repeated medical evaluations at the Houston center, but a year later he was still waiting for a check. By then, Feges had been accepted to culinary school in Austin and did not want to put off his studies. His mother, an elementary-school teacher, took a second job at a local McDonald’s to help support him.

For discharged service members, the VA serves two functions: it provides medical care for service-related conditions at its clinics and hospitals across the country, and it reviews claims for disability benefits—chiefly, the monthly payments wounded veterans get for the rest of their lives. The review process can be complicated. It requires veterans to prove, through documents and sometimes through the testimony of fellow soldiers, that their afflictions are a result of their time in the military. Feges listed on his application all the ways he’d been affected by the wounds: he’d lost mobility in his ankles and knees, he suffered regular stomach cramps from the intestinal wound, he lost sensation in his hands and legs, he had trouble standing for long periods. NEWSWEEK presented the VA with the names and details of the veterans whose stories are told here, but a spokesman for the agency declined to comment on individual cases, citing doctor-patient confidentiality. Speaking generally, Dr. Michael Kussman, the VA’s acting under secretary for health, tells NEWSWEEK that the department is trying to reach veterans earlier, as they approach their date of discharge, and that he does not believe Iraq and Afghanistan are straining resources severely. “The impact on the VA so far has been relatively small,” Kussman says. “It has not kicked the system over in our budget and in our ability to absorb it.”

Still, a jump in disability claims in recent years has created a bottleneck. Daniel Cooper, the VA’s under secretary for benefits, confirmed his department was coping with a backlog of 400,000 applications and appeals; 75 percent of them were still within a “reasonable” reviewing time frame, he says. Yet, most of those claims were filed by veterans of previous wars (a veteran can file or appeal a claim even decades after discharge). As more servicemen and women return from Iraq, the backlog is likely to increase. Cooper says the average waiting time for a benefits claim is about six months. NEWSWEEK turned up a number of veterans who’d waited longer. Keri Christensen, a National Guard veteran and a mother of two, says the VA in Chicago took 10 months to process her application. Rory Dunn, who nearly died in an IED attack outside Fallujah, says his application was delayed because, among other things, the VA mixed up his file with that of a Korean War veteran.

Feges’s claim was finally approved last month: after NEWSWEEK and the advocacy group Veterans for America began looking into his case, he got a call from a VA official in Waco, Texas, with the news that his money would come through. Last week he received back pay to the date of his application.

The compensation is not huge. A veteran with a disability rating of 100 percent gets about $2,400 a month—more if he or she has children. A 50 percent rating brings in around $700 a month. But for many returning servicemen burdened with wounds, it is, initially at least, their sole income. “When I started school, that’s when it became really hard not to have that money,” says Feges.

One reason to worry about a crush of new vets at the VA has to do with the proportion of wounded to dead Americans in Iraq. Though we tend to mark the grim timeline of the war by counting fatalities, what really distinguishes this conflict is how many soldiers don’t die, but suffer appalling injuries. In Vietnam and Korea, about three Americans were wounded for every one who died. The ratio in WWII was nearly 2-1. In Iraq, 16 soldiers are wounded or get sick for every one who dies. The yawning ratio marks progress: better body armor and helmets are shielding more soldiers from fatal wounds. And advanced emergency care is keeping more of the wounded alive. The VA’s Kussman says that soldiers who survive the first few minutes after an explosion have a 98 percent chance of surviving altogether. But that means an increased burden on the VA’s health-care system.

Two such survivors are Albert and Connie Ross. Albert lost a leg when a rocket-propelled grenade landed close to him in August 2004 while he was on patrol in Baghdad. Connie lived through a 2004 suicide bombing in Mosul but suffered multiple fractures and burns. When the two met in a hallway at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas, Connie thought she noticed a certain swagger in Albert’s walk. “He had this weird dip in his walk, so I asked him, ‘Why are you pimp-walking in a hospital?’ And he said: ‘I’m not pimp-walking, I’m an amputee.’ I was so embarrassed.” The two married earlier this year and are expecting a child.

Though he’s been in the VA system for more than two years now, Albert still doesn’t have a primary-care doctor. Without one, getting appointments with specialists can be difficult. “You’re supposed to be assigned one right away,” says Albert, who now lives in San Antonio. “I’m not frustrated so much as worried—worried if and when something does go wrong, something will happen with one of my legs … They [primary-care doctors] are the ones who have to fill out a work-order form; it’s impossible to do anything without them.”

One thing Albert desperately wants to do: get a new prosthetic. He’s one of the early African-American amputees of the war. But the fake limb he’s been given matches the skin tone of a Caucasian. It so embarrasses Albert that he always wears a sock over it—even if he’s in sandals. “He’s very self-conscious about it,” says Connie. “It really bothers him.”

Albert’s situation is probably atypical. The VA says a huge majority of veterans get primary-care doctors within 30 days. But people inside the system do concede there’s a shortage of mental-health workers at many of the VA’s hospitals and clinics across the country. And Schulze is not the only veteran to commit suicide after being turned away. In a similar case in 2004, the VA twice neglected to treat Iraq veteran Jeffrey Lucey for posttraumatic stress disorder (the second time because he was told alcoholics must dry out before being accepted to an inpatient program). By the time a VA counselor tracked down a bed in a New York facility with a built-in detox program, Lucey had already hanged himself. “The system doesn’t treat mental health with the same urgency it treats general health care,” says a senior VA manager who did not want to be named talking about shortcomings in the agency.

Even when veterans get to the right doctors, understanding how to leverage what they need from the system can be mind-bending. Tonia Sargent, whose husband, Kenneth, nearly died in a sniper attack in Najaf in 2004, says no one ever sat her down and explained the benefits and how to access them. Her husband’s brain injury made him often incapable of understanding his own care. Key decisions fell to her alone. It’s a “don’t ask, don’t tell system,” she says.

Kenneth is a Marine master sergeant who’d been in the Corps for nearly 18 years. He was on his second tour in Iraq when a sniper bullet ricocheted off the metal hatch on his vehicle and hit him directly below the right eye, grazing the front of his brain and exiting near his left ear. Among other things, he was diagnosed with traumatic brain injury, which has become the signature wound of the Iraq war. Tonia had to fight the Marine Corps to keep him from being discharged, figuring he’d get better medical care if he remained in active service. But some of his treatment has been outsourced to the VA.

One of the tricks she learned early on was to demand photocopies of her husband’s records—every exam, every X-ray, every diagnosis—and personally carry the file from appointment to appointment. “I don’t know if there is a more formal protocol for transferring documents, but I know that what I brought … was definitely put to use.” When Sargent was transferred to the VA’s lauded Polytrauma Center in Palo Alto, Calif., doctors there encouraged her to go home to Camp Pendleton near San Diego and treat his stay at the hospital as if it was a deployment. “After two weeks, they asked me how long I was planning to stay with my husband,” she says. “They said it was his rehab, not mine. But I needed to learn how to care for him, and he suffered from extreme anxiety without me.” She pushed back, staying in Palo Alto until he completed his care.

How can the system improve? Bilmes, who authored the Harvard study, proposes at least one drastic change—automatically accepting all disability claims and auditing them after payments have begun. (The VA says that would be an irresponsible use of taxpayer money.) Other critics have focused on raising the VA’s budget, which has been proposed at $87 billion for 2008. More money could go toward hiring more claims officers and more doctors, easing the burden now and preparing the VA for the end of the Iraq war, when soldiers return home en masse.

But veterans’ support groups and even some former and current VA insiders believe there’s a reluctance in the Bush administration to deal openly with the long-term costs of the war. (All told, Bilmes projects it could cost as much as $600 billion to care for GWOT veterans over the course of their lifetimes.) That reluctance, they say, trickles down to the VA, where top managers are politically appointed. Secretary Jim Nicholson, a decorated Vietnam War veteran who was chosen by Bush in 2005, tends to be the focus of this criticism.

The senior VA manager who did not want to be named criticizing superiors told NEWSWEEK: “He’s a political appointee and he needs to respond to the White House’s direction.” Steve Robinson of Veterans for America levels the accusation more directly. “Why doesn’t the VA have a projection of casualties for the wars? Because it would be a political bombshell for Nicholson to estimate so many casualties.” The VA denies political considerations are involved in its budgeting or planning. Nicholson declined to be interviewed but Matt Burns, a spokesman for the VA, called Robinson’s comments “nonsensical and inflammatory,” adding: “The VA, in its budgeting process, carefully prepares for future costs so that we can continue to deliver the quality health care and myriad benefits veterans have earned.”

Fratto, the White House deputy press secretary, says money is not the problem. He points out the VA has had a hard time filling positions in some remote parts of the country. “You need to find people who are trained in PTSD and other disorders that are affecting veterans and find those who are willing to go to places where they are needed.”

As is often the case in America when government institutions falter, however, community groups are already stepping into the void. Veterans of Foreign Wars has advocates helping vets negotiate the VA bureaucracy, much the way health facilitators in the private sector help consumers get the most from their health insurance. Robinson, of Veterans for America, has pulled together teams of volunteers—physicians, psychologists, lawyers—who give vets free services when the local VA branch falls down. At his office recently, he was coordinating a traumatic-brain-injury screening with a private doctor for a veteran who’d been denied access to VA care. The fact that Americans are coming forward doesn’t absolve the VA of its obligation to provide first-rate care for veterans. Most of the wounded’s problems just can’t be solved by private citizens and groups, no matter how well meaning. But it does serve to remind us that we should take better care of veterans wounded in the line of duty as they make their way home, and try to remake their lives.

With Jamie Reno, Eve Conant, John Barry, Richard Wolffe, Karen Springen, Jonathan Mummolo and Ty Brickhouse

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged | Comments Off on How the U.S. Is Failing Its War Veterans

Poplar Bluff VA Responds to Plight of Local Iraq and Afghanistan War Veteran

June 13, 2007 – The John J. Pershing VA Medical Center in Poplar Bluff, Mo., took several steps in the last week to make sure newly discharged veterans don’t miss out on promised medical benefits, hospital administrator Nancy Arnold said Tuesday.

The effort is a response to the case of Jolani McCanless, a Marine from Oak Ridge enduring a frustrating round of misplaced paperwork and miscommunication with the Department of Veterans Affairs. Following a Southeast Missourian article on McCanless on June 2, the Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran received five calls June 4 and since has had several visits with VA doctors, said his father, Terry McCanless.

Jolani McCanless was unavailable to comment because he is still adjusting to new medications prescribed for the mental and physical issues that resulted in his discharge, Terry McCanless said. But the family is pleased with the response from VA officials.

“It was an excellent response,” Terry McCanless said. “By Wednesday morning, he was in for an appointment for a full physical” at the Cape Girardeau Veterans Affairs clinic, “and the next day he was down at the hospital.”

Steps taken to ensure veterans don’t get confused by or lost in the system include the designation of three hospital workers as the primary contacts for new enrollees, Arnold said. In addition, she said, directives have been sent to each clinic detailing the actions that should be taken when a veteran who is not being served at a location such as the Cape Girardeau clinic comes in for services.

“We are hiring additional staff to support the incoming veterans,” Arnold said. “But we took three existing staff who work with the veterans who come in and identified them by name to everyone.”

Initially the hospital had named two staff for the job, but at times both are busy and a third was needed, she said. “At the present time, we are getting a very manageable number of new veterans,” she said. “We are getting an increase, but it is not a flood.”

Terry McCanless attributes many of the problems associated with his son’s care to a lack of experience dealing with new enrollees with war-related issues. No other conflict since the Vietnam War has had the same number of wounded veterans being discharged.

“They are being hit with a whole new swarm of wounded,” he said. “I can understand that.”

Raising awareness within the system of issues for new veterans will be a satisfying result of the delays and difficulties Jolani McCanless dealt with, Terry McCanless said. “There are going to be other guys coming in right behind him and saying, ‘Where are we going to go from here?’ He is looking out for the other guys.”

Arnold didn’t deny McCanless was dealt with poorly but said the hospital and the entire VA system wants improvements. “As long as we have human beings doing business, there are going to be things that slip through the cracks, and we do everything we can to identify the issues,” she said.

rkeller@semissourian.com

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged | Comments Off on Poplar Bluff VA Responds to Plight of Local Iraq and Afghanistan War Veteran

Iraq War Veteran Pleads Guilty in Death of Infant Son

June 8, 2007 – VISTA, California —- A two-time Iraq war veteran with a history of domestic violence is likely to spend seven years in prison after pleading guilty Thursday to reduced charges in connection with the death of his 7-month-old son.

Jared Terrasas, 26, admitted to one count of child endangerment and to an allegation that his neglect caused the baby, Alexander, to suffer great bodily injury.

In exchange for the plea, prosecutors dismissed the murder charge the former Marine faced, and agreed that he should serve a seven-year prison term.

Terrasas and his wife, Lucia Terrasas, were living in an apartment on Mesa Drive in Oceanside when they rushed Alexander to the hospital at Camp Pendleton on Oct. 4, 2005, and told doctors he’d fallen out of a baby bouncer, according to testimony at a preliminary hearing in September.

Alexander was in cardiac arrest, according to court documents, but was resuscitated and remained in a coma until he died three days later. The medical examiner deemed the child’s death a homicide.

According to court filings, Alexander had brain swelling, skull fractures, bruises on his head and torso, and lacerations to his liver, spleen and kidneys. He also had rib fractures that were weeks old, according to a doctor who treated him.

The couple were both arrested three months later and accused of murder. In the interim, Terrasas, who was a sergeant, left the Marines with an honorable discharge and the couple moved to his hometown in Central California.

At the time of the baby’s death, Jared Terrasas was on probation after pleading guilty to beating Lucia Terrasas in 2003.

He had been ordered to complete 16 weeks of military domestic violence classes, but according to court documents, was deployed to Iraq before completing the course.

At least two judges who have reviewed evidence in the case called into doubt whether his wife played a direct role in the baby’s death. And, in January, one of the judges dismissed the murder charges against Lucia Terrasas.

On Thursday, Jared Terrasas’ defense attorney said the prosecution also could not prove that Jared Terrasas was responsible for the boy’s death and that he was not the baby’s primary caregiver.

Sherry Stone said her client maintains his innocence, but the risk of being convicted at trial and sentenced to life in prison was too great.

“He did not admit to giving the fatal blow, and he did not admit to abusing the child,” the lawyer said.

A statement in court documents said the defendant permitted his son “to be in a situation where his health was endangered.”

A phone call to the prosecutor was not immediately returned Thursday afternoon.

North County Times wire services contributed to this report. Contact staff writer Teri Figueroa at (760) 631-6624 or tfigueroa@nctimes.com.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged | Comments Off on Iraq War Veteran Pleads Guilty in Death of Infant Son

Area Veterans Coping with PTSD

June 9, 2007 – GLADSTONE, Michigan — Robert Stade, 59, Gladstone, says he is working hard to get his life together. After decades of living with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the Vietnam veteran has sought help for his symptoms and encourages other people do the same.

According to the National Institute of Mental Health, PTSD is an anxiety disorder that can develop after exposure to a terrifying event or ordeal in which grave physical harm occurred or was threatened. Traumatic events that may cause PTSD include violent personal assaults, natural or human-caused disasters, accidents or military combat. Veterans, like Stade, have struggled with the disorder for years — previously regarded as “soldier’s heart,” “shell shock” and “battle fatigue.”

“We’ve had PTSD around for a long time, especially in war veterans,” said Pamela Balentine, Ph.D. of Gray Matters counseling in Escanaba. Balentine has counseled several veterans with the disorder. Symptoms, she said, are both physical and psychological and include severe panic attacks, anxiety, nightmares, flashbacks (recurrent and vivid recollection of a traumatic experience, sometimes with hallucinations) and avoidance of particular people, places, smells, sounds or objects that trigger flashbacks. “The spectrum (of PTSD) is wide, from minor annoyance to completely debilitating,” she said.

“PTSD screwed up my whole damn life,” said Stade. At 19, he served as a M-60 machine gunner in the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault). “It was pretty gruesome,” he said. “You see all this stuff and it makes you lose a part of yourself. It took a part of my soul that I’ll never get back.”

Following a 12 month tour in Vietnam, Stade returned home, angry and emotional. He fell into a deep depression and suffered from low self-esteem. At night, he was plagued by nightmares; during the day, certain sounds and smells would cause horrific flashbacks.

Stade’s symptoms made it difficult to for him to find work, manage stress and mend relationships — his marriage ended after just six months and he’s still attempting to re-connect with his only child, a son.

“(People) didn’t know as much about PTSD when I came home (from Vietnam). Other guys and I were left to basically fend for ourselves,” he said.

Today, thanks to group therapy and antidepressant medication, Stade has a new lease on life — one he hopes other veterans struggling with PTSD can achieve also.

Treatment for the disorder varies from person to person, added Balentine. “I cannot stress enough that one size does not fit all,” she said. Individuals suffering from PTSD may receive help via group therapy and medication like Stade, or cognitive behavioral therapy, desensitizing to certain triggers and developing better coping skills. Regardless of the type of treatment, “the American Psychological Association recommends people (get help) as soon as possible.”

Some individuals may be hesitant or embarrassed to seek treatment for PTSD. “They may believe only the weak get help but that could not be farther from the truth,” said Balentine.

“People need to be aware of what vets are going through,” agreed Stade. “We need to help them in any way we can. (PTSD) is not something to be ashamed of. It’s not their fault.”

Julie Knauf, (906) 786-2021, ext. 152

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Area Veterans Coping with PTSD

Concerns Grow About War Veterans’ Misdiagnoses

Brain injuries can defy easy detection

June 10, 2007 – As the medical community learns more about the brain impairments afflicting troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, concern is growing back home that these battle-weary soldiers may be facing yet another obstacle: misdiagnosis.

Traumatic brain injury has become a high-profile condition, thrust into the national spotlight now that thousands of troops who have left the war zone continue to struggle with the consequences of combat. Better known as TBI, the ailment is a physical wound caused by the head-rattling shockwaves associated with bomb explosions that tear brain cells apart.

But TBI shares many of the same symptoms with a common battlefield psychological condition known as post-traumatic stress disorder. Both are often marked by depression, mood swings, irritability, problems concentrating, and memory dysfunction. The similarities can cause healthcare professionals to overlook mild traumatic brain injuries, especially when a patient lacks visible wounds, according to doctors and veterans advocates familiar with the issue.

“Mild brain injuries are really difficult to evaluate because there are a lot of overlapping symptoms with post-traumatic stress disorders,” said Jordan Grafman, a neuroscientist who studies the effects of TBI on Vietnam veterans at the National Institutes of Health. “Doctors are likely to default to psychological diagnoses especially when they see a lot of PTSD.”

Officials at the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs say that misdiagnosing mild TBI as PTSD is especially problematic because the two conditions are treated differently. Stress disorders are usually treated with counseling and anti anxiety or anti depression medications, while brain injuries typically require some combination of occupational, physical, and cognitive therapy.

“The difficulty in sorting the two out is there are common features [between] them,” said Dr. Steven Scott, director of the VA’s Tampa Polytrauma Rehabilitation Center . “If you have a better idea what’s wrong with the individual and make a diagnosis, you will have better outcomes.”

The earlier treatment begins, the better the results, Scott said.

When left unchecked, TBI can disrupt the basic functions of everyday life, making it difficult to perform even simple tasks like getting ready for work or grocery shopping. Most TBIs affect the frontal lobes, which account for about 40 percent of the brain and control a person’s ability to structure their day-to-day living.

One of the challenges in diagnosing TBI is that mild brain damage is difficult to find, particularly since it can take months for the initial symptoms to manifest, Scott said. Patients with both a psychological disorder and mild brain injury present an even bigger challenge because in these cases, the brain damage may be masked and therefore go undetected, he added.

The same is true in the civilian world, said Dr. Gregory O’Shanick, national medical director for the Brain Injury Association of America. Though there are some differences in TBI and PTSD symptoms, brain injury cases continue to slip through the cracks because the signs are easy to miss, he said.

“Misdiagnosis happens all of the time,” said O’Shanick, who has seen dozens of TBI patients originally diagnosed with depression.

“You see somebody in the military when their lives are organized for them, you may not notice mild traumatic brain injury in [its] fullest form when they’re on active duty,” O’Shanick said. “But when they come back home and their external structure isn’t there, that’s where you may see things become much more evident in terms of traumatic brain injury.”

Exactly how many TBI cases there are among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans is unknown because neither the Pentagon nor the Department of Veterans Affairs has systematically screened returning troops for the disorder. The lack of a comprehensive plan to deal with brain injuries has provoked harsh criticism from lawmakers and veterans advocates, who accuse the government of neglecting the troops they sent into battle.

With troops deploying for their second, third, even fourth tours of duty, head injuries and stress disorders are becoming more widespread, said Representative Bob Filner, Democrat of California, chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee. For every year in the war zone, combat units encounter dozens of potentially brain-injuring blasts, each one doing more harm because the damage is cumulative.

“We don’t have the resources in place, and they’re scrambling now [to deal] with something that could have been predicted and planned for,” Filner said. “TBI is one of the major things coming out of the war we haven’t taken care of, and it’s going to have long-range effects on our society for years to come.”

The psychological wounds associated with combat are well documented. However, little is known about how explosions affect the brain, and the military has been slow to address soldiers’ medical needs, often leaving ailing troops and their families to sort out the symptoms, Filner said.

Statistics compiled by the VA show that more than 83,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have sought care for psychological disorders. The department does not track the number of TBI cases, according to spokesman Terry Jemison, who noted that they do know of at least 369 traumatic brain injury patients because they’ve been treated for other acute conditions.

The Defense Department also does not have figures on the number of brain injuries, but Pentagon officials estimated that they have found about 2,500 potential cases so far.

The government’s inability to track TBI cases has angered many veterans advocates who say the lack of attention is another example of how the military failed to prepare for the troops who are now coming home injured. Critics point to long waits for appointments and the squalid conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

“The number of people who have suffered from mild traumatic brain injury could be in the thousands, but we just won’t know about it unless we screen everybody who comes back,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “The system as it stands right now really depends on [veterans] to self-diagnose and then navigate the bureaucracy of red tape to get help.”

Diagnosing brain injuries requires thorough clinical evaluation that includes memory and response-time tests. Whether the VA and the Pentagon have the resources to do this for the millions of veterans who have deployed remains to be seen, Rieckhoff said.

“Maybe it’s politics, maybe it’s negligence, maybe it’s incompetence,” Rieckhoff said. “I don’t know. I just know that it’s taking too long to take things like brain injury seriously.”

Scott and others at the VA believe the department will start finding more cases because of a four-question screening tool that was put into place in April. Every veteran who visits a VA facility for treatment will be asked whether they’ve been near a blast, and if so, whether they experienced any difficulties afterward .

This month, the Pentagon expects to add similar questions to its post-deployment health questionnaire, which is given to all troops returning from the war zone.

However, the lag in adopting a screening tool has prompted Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, and Senator Hillary Clinton, Democrat of New York, to propose a computer-based test that would assess an individual’s cognitive functioning before and after deployment. Their legislation would provide $3.75 million to institute the program.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged | Comments Off on Concerns Grow About War Veterans’ Misdiagnoses

Congressional Hearing — Investigators: Improve VA bonus process

WASHINGTON —  June 12, 2007, The VA needs to do a better job of handing out department bonuses based on performance after it awarded $3.8 million to senior budget officials who put health care at risk, investigators said Tuesday.

Testifying at a congressional hearing, the Government Accountability Office said the Veterans Affairs Department was taking additional steps to link hefty bonus payments more closely to the department’s overall success in treating veterans.

But confusion still exists within the VA on the proper criteria, and executives based in Washington consistently outpaced their counterparts elsewhere in the size of payments – $19,439 compared with $15,268 to officials outside Washington.

In a report to a House Veterans Affairs subcommittee, the Office of Personnel Management said its review of VA practices found inconsistency in the awarding of bonuses.

“Discussions within the VA performance review boards should center on measurable results achieved and the awards scoring form … should more clearly focus on results,” said OPM director Linda Springer.

The subcommittee hearing comes after The Associated Press reported last month that 21 of 32 officials who were members of VA performance review boards charged with recommending bonuses received more than half a million dollars in payments themselves.

Among them: nearly a dozen senior officials who received bonuses ranging up to $33,000 to senior officials involved in crafting a budget that came up $1.3 billion short by repeatedly failing to anticipate needs of growing numbers of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also rewarded was the deputy undersecretary for benefits, who manages a system with severe backlogs of veterans waiting for disability benefits. The current wait for veterans averages 177 days, two months short of the VA’s strategic goal of 125 days.

Gordon Mansfield, the VA’s deputy secretary, defended the bonuses as appropriate. He said the hefty payments were necessary to retain hardworking officials who might otherwise leave for the more profitable private sector.

But the bonuses drew fire from lawmakers from both parties, who decried the payments as evidence of improper favoritism. All bonus recommendations must be approved by VA Secretary Jim Nicholson, who declined to testify before the subcommittee.

“When the backlog of claims has been increasing for the past few years, one would not expect the senior-most officials to receive the maximum bonus,” said Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz., who chairs the House subcommittee on oversight. “Indeed, it appears the bonuses in the central office were awarded primarily on the basis of seniority and proximity to the Secretary.”

Florida Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, the top Republican on the panel, said she wanted to make sure the bonuses were awarded based on VA officials’ “actual performance, and not just performance on paper.”

“The federal government should not be in the practice of awarding bonuses to people who permit failure on their watch,” Brown-Waite said. “It should be limited only to the very best, particularly in time of war.”

On the Net: House Veterans Affairs Committee: http://veterans.house.gov/

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Congressional Hearing — Investigators: Improve VA bonus process

Report: Veterans Affairs significantly overstates its success over ‘appointments’

WASHINGTON –  June 12, 2007 – The Department of Veterans Affairs continues to significantly overstate its success in getting patients to see doctors for timely appointments, undercutting one of its key claims of success, according to a draft report obtained by McClatchy Newspapers.

While top VA officials told Congress earlier this year that 95 percent of appointments are scheduled within 30 days of a patient’s requested date, the true number is about 75 percent, according to the analysis by the department’s inspector general.

The report hasn’t been released and is stamped “Draft – For Discussion Only.” It’s in the final stages of preparation and could be revised.

In a statement, VA spokesman Matt Smith said the department was reviewing the report and remains “committed to ensuring our veterans are seen in a timely manner.” The VA said it will visit facilities in need of improvement and will hire a contractor to review the department’s scheduling procedures.

Some medical centers performed far worse than average. In Columbia, S.C., and Chillicothe, Ohio, only 64 percent of VA appointments were within 30 days of a patient’s request, the report said. The high score among centers studied was Detroit at 84 percent.

The inspector general’s report is an update of a similar report from 2005. It’s based on an analysis of 700 medical appointments and 300 referrals at 10 VA medical centers, as well as interviews with 113 VA schedulers.

Waiting times for veterans to get in to see doctors are closely watched by Congress and veterans’ advocates. In February, the VA’s top health official, Michael Kussman, told a congressional committee that the VA provides 39 million appointments a year – and 95 percent of them are done within 30 days of the patient’s request.

“We want to make it 100 percent,” he said. “We are going to work hard to do that. But all told, I think we are providing pretty good service for people when they need it.”

In its annual report, the VA broke those numbers down further, saying that 96 percent of primary-care appointments were within 30 days, as were 95 percent of specialty-care appointments.

The inspector general’s assessment was far different.

Looking at appointments that the VA said took place within 30 days, the inspector general found that only 78 percent of primary-care appointments and only 73 percent of specialist visits were within 30 days.

As it did in 2005, the inspector general found that VA schedulers weren’t following department procedures when making appointments.

The VA calculates waiting time as the difference between the appointment date and the patient’s “desired date.” But the report said schedulers often mistakenly recorded the first available appointment as the desired date, thus understating waiting time.

In another type of error, the inspector general found that at one hospital, a veteran was referred for a specialty appointment in April 2006. On Sept. 20, the scheduler set an appointment for Oct. 20 – 185 days after the requested date of April 18. But the scheduler recorded Sept. 20 as the desired date, which gave a reported waiting time of 30 days.

Schedulers used the wrong desired dates 72 percent of the time for the bulk of visits analyzed, according to the report.

Beyond that, schedulers failed to follow VA rules and keep up-to-date waiting lists for patients needing appointments. Such electronic waiting lists are “instrumental in making sure no veterans go untreated,” but none of the 10 medical centers investigators looked at properly maintained the lists, the report said.

Another continuing problem: lack of proper training. Schedulers told the inspector general that they didn’t have time to take available training. “Their managers agreed, saying that medical facilities were short of staff and training was not a high priority,” the report said.

In a May 18 meeting between VA officials and the inspector general’s office to discuss the findings, a deputy undersecretary for health, William Feeley, said he was concerned about the inspector general’s conclusion that the VA “overstated” the number of veterans seen within 30 days.

According to an internal report summarizing the May 18 meeting, Feeley said that “such a statement could easily be misconstrued by readers of the report to imply that VA was being deliberately deceptive, when there was no evidence to that effect,” the report said. “He went on to say that this is a situation where honest people are trying to do the right thing, but that processes are breaking down.”

Last month, McClatchy reported on the VA’s tendency to exaggerate its accomplishments; among the examples was that VA Secretary Jim Nicholson told Congress about the VA’s “exceptional performance” in getting veterans in to see doctors.

The VA told McClatchy it had largely fixed its prior scheduling problems, although this latest report shows that the department has yet to make all the improvements it promised after the 2005 inspector general’s report.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Report: Veterans Affairs significantly overstates its success over ‘appointments’

Study Says Suicide Risk Double Among Male U.S. Veterans

(CNN) — The risk of suicide among male U.S. veterans is double that of the general population, according to a study published Monday.

“We need to be more alert to the problem of suicide as a major public health issue and we need to do better screening among individuals who have served in the military, probe for their mental health risk as well as gun availability,” said Dr. Mark S. Kaplan, professor of community health at Portland State University in Oregon, lead author of the study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

For 12 years, Kaplan and his team of researchers followed more than 104,000 veterans who had served in the armed forces at some time between 1917 and 1994 and compared them with more than 216,000 non-veterans.

In all, between 1986 and 1997, 508 of them committed suicide — 197 veterans and 311 non-veterans.

After adjusting for a host of potentially compounding factors, including age, time of service and health status, the study showed that those who had been in the military were 2.13 times more likely to die of suicide over time.

At biggest risk were veterans who were white, those who had gone to college and those with activity limitations, according to the study, which was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health.

‘Life is too complex’

Still, Kaplan would not say that the study proves that military service itself results in an increased risk of suicide. “I never feel comfortable claiming a causal relationship,” he said. “Life is too complex.”

No surprise was the finding that veterans were more likely to use guns to end their lives than were their non-veteran counterparts.

One unanticipated finding was that being overweight appeared to confer protection from suicide by more than 50 percent, the study found.

Kaplan cited a paucity of data on the subject, but said it might have to do with the fact that people who are underweight are more likely to smoke, and smokers are more likely to be depressed.

Though the study did not include veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, “We can say quite confidently that, regardless of the era when they served, that veterans’ status alone seems to be a risk factor for suicide,” he told CNN.

“With the projected rise in functional impairments and psychiatric morbidity among veterans of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, clinical and community interventions directed towards patients in both VA and non-VA health care facilities are needed,” the authors concluded.

Kaplan said officials in the Veterans Administration were surprised by the findings, but welcomed them, “because it does point to a problem that they need to be addressing.”

The VA has recently begun expanding its mental health screening facilities, but that may not solve the problem, said Kaplan, because three-fourths of veterans do not receive their care from VA hospitals. “Our concern is that that only touches a fraction of all veterans; that most of the veterans are not being perhaps properly screened outside the VA facilities.”

About 1.3 percent of deaths in the country are estimated to be suicides, Kaplan said. But the true rate may be off by 25 percent, given that suicide has long been shrouded in stigma.

“Health care facilities don’t like to talk about suicide,” he said. “It’s often viewed as a failure of the system. … Many physicians feel, if you even mention suicide, that might prompt the behavior.”

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Study Says Suicide Risk Double Among Male U.S. Veterans

Fort Leavenworth Chaplains Accused of Anti-Semitic Publishing

June 11, 2007 – At the Fort Leavenworth, Kansas Army base, military chaplains have been holding Bible classes for US soldiers using study guides that appear to be anti-Semitic.

The Fort Leavenworth chaplains have posted these lesson plans on the Internet under a web address that is maintained by the federal government, giving off the appearance that the religious materials in question are endorsed by the Pentagon. Moreover, disseminating the ideology via a government funded web site may violate the law mandating the separation between church and state.

The nonprofit watchdog group, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an organization that seeks to enforce the law mandating the separation between church and state in the US military, discovered the documents late last week. The anti-Semitic materials are posted as PDF files at the web site, Command Chaplain Bible Studies, which is maintained by the US Army’s Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth.

The Officers Christian Fellowship Neighborhood Study Guides quote portions of the New Testament and were written by Major George Kuykendall, the leader of Fort Leavenworth’s Officer’s Christian Fellowship (OCF) who died in 1998, according to Chris Rodda, a senior researcher at the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. Rodda said, “The study guides also encourage soldiers to engage in an unconstitutional level of proselytizing to fellow military personnel in the Fort Leavenworth Community.”

In one of the study guides, Galatians, posted on the Fort Leavenworth chaplain web site, the materials refer to Jews as “Judaizers” – persons who without being Jews follow in whole or in part the Jewish religion or claim to be Jews – and claim that “the Judaizers were zealous people much like the zealous Moslems have become today.”

The 34-page Galatians study guide deals primarily with “Paul,” who the Jews “persecuted,” according to the study guide.

“Why did the Jews persecute Paul? Because of his teachings,” the study guide says. “The cross was an offense to the Jews. Jesus had victory over the cross (death).”

The study guide then says that anyone who turns from Christianity to Judaism “should be condemned to spiritual death and hell.”

“The Judaizers attempted to destroy the two foundations of the Christian religion: a. The Grace of God, and b. The Death of Christ,” the Galtatian study guide says, adding that Judaism is a religion of “bondage” and Christianity a religion of “freedom.”

In discussing modern day Jerusalem, chaplains ask soldiers to provide an answer to the following question: “How does the present Jerusalem represent slavery?”

A person who answered the telephone at the Fort Leavenworth chaplains’ office refused to disclose his name when contacted for comment. The individual, a male, said there have not been prior complaints to the Bible study guides and that “I would not characterize the material as anti-Semitic.”

“I guess if you’re Jewish you may see it that way, but we’re discussing the gospels as it appears in the New Testament,” this person said, who added that there was no plan to remove the study guides from the web site. Messages left at the public affairs office at Fort Leavenworth were not returned. Calls to a Pentagon spokesperson were also not returned.

But for Mikey Weinstein, the founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, the religious teachings are not only blatantly anti-Semitic, but he believes disseminating it over the Internet tramples upon the Constitution.

“It’s illegal for an arm of the federal government to push this ideology,” Weinstein, who is Jewish, said in an interview. “This is the official web site of the US Army, and this is here for everyone to see. Anyone would easily come away with the belief that the US Army endorses these teachings. The last time someone talked about a Jewish problem the way these chaplains are talking about it was in Europe in the 1930s. What these Bible teachings say to me or to anyone participating in these classes is that the US government loves the military but Jews are bad.”

Weinstein said he intends to file a lawsuit against the US Army alleging Constitutional violations.

“I’m sick of writing letters,” Weinstein said. “This type of fundamentalism needs to stop. This particular violation propagates every vile and wretched stereotype of the Jewish faith.”

Weinstein, a former White House counsel who defended the Reagan administration during the Iran-Contra probe, has been waging a one-man war against the Department of Defense for what he says is a blatant disregard of the Constitution. He recently published a book on the issue: “With God on Our Side: One Man’s War Against an Evangelical Coup in America’s Military.” Weinstein is also an Air Force veteran and a graduate of the Air Force Academy. Three generations of his family have attended US military academies.

Since he launched his watchdog organization 18 months ago, Weinstein said he has been contacted by more than 4,000 active duty and retired soldiers, many of whom served or serve in Iraq, who told Weinstein that they were pressured by their commanding officers to convert to Christianity.

Weinstein said a right-wing fundamentalist Christian agenda under President Bush has hijacked the military.

“The rise of evangelical Christianity inside the military went on steroids after 9/11 under this administration and this White House,” Weinstein said in an interview. “This administration has turned the entire Department of Defense into a faith-based initiative.”

Over Memorial Day weekend, Weinstein lashed out at the Air Force for co-sponsoring, along with evangelical Christian organizations, a three-day event celebrating the Air Force’s 60th anniversary.

The event, sponsored by Task Force Patriot USA, an evangelical organization, and LifeWay Christian Resources, the publishing house of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), was described by the official publication of the Robins Air Force Base as “an official US Air Force 60th Anniversary event.” The paper stated that the religious groups and the United States Air Force “have joined together to create a three-day celebration….”

Plans for the event prompted a forceful response from watchdog groups. In a letter to Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne and Acting Secretary of the Army Peter Geren, the Reverend Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU), called the event “a stunning display of the federal government using vast resources to trumpet a religious celebration.”

Lynn added: “Military personnel and veterans come from many religious traditions and no religion at all. So it is wholly disingenuous for the organizers of this evangelical Christian gathering to promote it as a salute to all our troops. It is anything but.”

Weinstein is quick to point out that the issues his organization is tackling are not about “Christianity versus Judaism.” Rather, they’re about keeping rampant fundamentalism out of the military.

But the Biblical teachings at Fort Leavenworth certainly appear to lean heavily on an anti-Semitic and pro-Christian agenda.

In the 14-page study guide Nehemiah, chaplains discuss a portion of the Sanballat, the first high priest of the temple at Samaria, who, according to the Bible study, had to deal with a “Jewish problem.” He mocked the Jews’ efforts to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem in the hopes that they would give up.

The study guide then poses the following questions for soldiers: “How do you interpret Sanballat’s reaction to the Jews progress? Anxiety and fear? In light of what we know about the Jews performance today, were his fears reasonable?”

Another question in the same study guide asks soldiers to offer suggestions on a title for the portion of the scripture discussing Nehemiah.

“How would you short-title this portion of scripture?” the study guide asks. “Jews take advantage of Jews?”

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Fort Leavenworth Chaplains Accused of Anti-Semitic Publishing