The VA Continues to Abandon Returning Vets

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By Joshua Kors, The Nation

Sgt. Juan Jimenez had one of the most dangerous jobs in Iraq, ushering top Administration officials through the war-torn streets of Baghdad. He returned home with two Purple Hearts and shrapnel lodged in his right arm. Today he is gravely ill.

What Jimenez didn't realize is that before he could receive benefits for his wounds, he'd have to prove that those wounds came from war. Three and a half years later, the sergeant is still making his case. The Department of Veterans Affairs isn't convinced. And it won't give him his benefits until it is.

The VA requires all veterans to prove their wounds are "service-connected" before it writes them a check. Jimenez thought that hurdle was merely a formality. The Army sergeant had been struck by two roadside bombs. The first sliced into his arms; six months later, a second bomb sprayed scrap metal into his face, knocking him unconscious and leaving him brain damaged. He began having seizures and suffering from memory loss. The blast left a persistent ringing in his right ear. The stress sparked nightmares, flashbacks and acid-reflux disease.

"I'm a different person now," Jimenez says glumly. "I come home; I lock myself in my room. I don't really talk to anyone. I used to be fun." Now, he says, he can't even have a bowl of cereal. It gives him heartburn for days. "That second bomb, it killed me -- it just left my body." Sick, suicidal, the sergeant sought help from the VA.

The VA's diagnosis: too much caffeine. "They said I was drinking too much Red Bull. That's what was causing my problems."

Jimenez got mad. At that point, he did something few veterans even consider: he sued the VA. The sergeant is a member of Veterans for Common Sense (VCS), one of the most prominent veterans' groups in the country. In July 2007, executive director Paul Sullivan filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of Jimenez and the thousands of veterans in his organization who were wounded in Iraq and, he says, were rebuffed by the VA when they sought disability and medical benefits.

"The VA needs more than a few minor changes at the margins. It needs a massive overhaul," says Sullivan. His organization's lawsuit asked Judge Samuel Conti to do exactly that: radically restructure the VA and the way it processes veterans' claims. The VA moved immediately to get the case dismissed, asserting that Sullivan's organization didn't represent the nation's wounded vets and had no standing to demand an overhaul of a $94 billion government organization.

Judge Conti disagreed. The 86-year-old World War II veteran scheduled the trial for the end of April, and he demanded VA's top officials appear and take the stand. Over seven days VCS's lawyers would press them to explain internal e-mails and studies, statistics and videos, all suggesting that high-ranking officials purposely deceived Congress and the public, twisted data to cloak the VA's poor care of the ill and injured, and fired a prominent doctor who decided to expose the problems.

The Firing of Dr. Murphy

April 24, the fourth day of the VA trial. A crowd of wounded veterans sit in the San Francisco Federal Courthouse in stunned silence. On the courtroom's TV screen, a woman is explaining how her career fell to pieces. There is an unmistakable look of defeat on her face. As she pushes forward in her testimony, she slumps a bit in her white-striped pantsuit, and her voice begins to crack.

Dr. Frances Murphy had been one of the VA's shining stars. In 2004 she helped draft the Mental Health Strategic Plan, a blueprint for overhauling the VA. The plan called for 265 changes to the organization, among them: installing a tracking system to stay in touch with suicidal veterans, creating rehabilitation programs that involve veterans' families and streamlining the benefits process to resolve wounded veterans' immediate needs.

The plan was hailed by military leaders and veterans' groups. VA officials extolled it to reporters and members of Congress, citing it as proof of the organization's rapid transformation.

There was just one problem: the VA had done little to put the plan into practice. A recent Inspector General report found that 70 percent of VA facilities don't have a system to track suicidal veterans. Only a handful of VA hospitals have rehab programs that include families. And soldiers injured today face a benefits waiting list more than 650,000 veterans long.

Dr. Murphy knew it. She decided to speak out. And she had the perfect platform to do so: on March 29, 2006, almost two years after the plan's release, a group of prominent mental health organizations asked the doctor to address them in Washington. Following her speech, she would be given the Leadership in Government Award before an audience of high-profile figures: Senator Ted Kennedy, Surgeon General Richard Carmona, 60 Minutes's Mike Wallace and former First Lady Rosalynn Carter.

Dr. Murphy was blunt. Right now, she said, wounded veterans must climb over "a number of barriers" to receive their benefits. "It can be very confusing for veterans and family members to understand the services available to them and to navigate the systems." The VA promises veterans high-quality care. But "the promise of our state-of-the-art programs and scientific research is a hollow one if veterans who are struggling with the aftermath of severe trauma do not have equitable and timely access to quality mental healthcare near their homes. In some communities, VA clinics do not provide mental health or substance abuse care -- or waiting lists render that care virtually inaccessible."

Dr. Murphy's portrait of the VA was dramatically darker than the official version put forward by the organization's other top officials. As recently as March 2007, as waiting lists surged, Dr. Michael Kussman, head of the VA's health department, stepped before a Congressional committee and said, "We are ideally poised to be able to take care of the patients as they transition out" of the Army.

Dr. Kussman's comments meshed well with the warmer depiction of the VA put forward by Dr. Ira Katz. Katz, the VA's head of mental health, has become a key spokesman for the organization in recent years, underlining its success with the wounded and suicidal. With an MD and a PhD, soft speech and a gentle lisp, Katz has the credentials and the demeanor to paint a convincing image of a thriving VA.

In July 2007, after The Nation revealed that military doctors were purposely misdiagnosing soldiers wounded in Iraq as being mentally ill, the VA tapped Dr. Katz to appear before the House VA Committee and explain. The doctor had assuring words for the disgruntled legislators. "We have seen the press reports about that happening and are very concerned about those tragedies," he said. Dr. Katz said VA officials felt a "paternal" devotion to veterans' care and were committed to improving "the quality of care as well as access to care."

In November Dr. Katz was on camera again, this time on CBS News. Reporter Armen Keteyian had produced a groundbreaking report on veteran suicides. His five-month investigation found that in 2005 alone, more than 6,250 soldiers had committed suicide -- 120 deaths each week, eighteen suicides every day. Again, Dr. Katz was reassuring. "We are determined to decrease veteran suicides," he told Keteyian. But "there is no epidemic of suicide in the VA."

Keteyian's report sparked a second Congressional hearing. There Representative Steve Buyer, a Republican from Indiana, pressed Dr. Katz to explain his views. Dr. Katz used the opportunity to publicly attack CBS's suicide figures. "Their number is not, in fact, an accurate reflection of the [suicide] rate," he told the committee.

Privately, however, the doctor's views were very different. In an internal e-mail written days after his testimony, Dr. Katz embraced CBS's findings as a flat fact. "There are about 18 suicides per day among America's 25 million veterans," he told Dr. Kussman. "[This] is supported by the CBS numbers."

Three months later Dr. Katz returned to his computer, this time to express dire concerns about the growing number of veteran suicides. "Our suicide prevention coordinators are identifying about 1,000 suicide attempts per month among the veterans we see in our facilities," he told his department's chief of media relations. It was information Dr. Katz did not want the public to see. He began the e-mail by writing, "Shh!" and concluded it by asking, "Is this something we should (carefully) address ourselves in some sort of release before someone stumbles on it?"

It was information the doctor didn't want Keteyian to find either. Dr. Katz titled his e-mail: "Not for the CBS News Interview Request."

Dr. Murphy was intent on taking a different path. Speaking to the mental health leaders gathered in Washington at the 2006 conference, she concluded her comments by highlighting the danger of creating ambitious plans, then failing to enact them. "Government likes to begin things, to declare grand new programs and causes," she told the audience. "But good beginnings are not the measure of success, in government or any other pursuit. What matters in the end is completion. Performance. Results. Not just making promises."

Days later Dr. Murphy was fired. A few weeks after that, the VA brought in a new official to be the public face of the organization: Dr. Ira Katz.

In the San Francisco courtroom, on the TV screen, Dr. Murphy's eyes are near tears. "[i was] very surprised," she says. She asked her boss to explain the VA's decision. He "chose not to answer that question." Dr. Murphy approached Dr. Kussman about other VA positions that had become available. "[Kussman] said he'd be happy to give me an early retirement."

'Jail or the Military'

You might think that when soldiers return wounded from Iraq, it is assumed that they were wounded in Iraq. Not so. Under current VA policy, all soldiers have to prove that their wounds are the result of military service, even if they come home missing a leg or, like Sergeant Jimenez, with an arm heavy with shrapnel. Those who fail to make a convincing case cannot collect disability benefits.

To begin, veterans are asked to gather proof that they were wounded. The injured come to the VA carrying Purple Hearts and combat medals, folders thick with medical evaluations created in Iraq following their injuries. They are asked to provide the date and time they were wounded, to describe the circumstances surrounding the mortar or rocket blast. Veterans are often asked to contact those who witnessed the attack, to gather "buddy statements" that confirm the veracity of their stories.

"The system really pisses me off," says Bob Handy, chair of Veterans United for Truth. "These soldiers are seriously injured and emotionally traumatized, and when they get home, they make them jump through hoops to get their benefits." Handy's organization joined VCS in its lawsuit against the VA. He says he's especially disturbed by cases like Sergeant Jimenez's. "When you go into the VA with two Purple Hearts and X-rays show that you have shrapnel in your body, and you still can't get your benefits, that's punishing someone who's done a tremendous amount for this country."

....more

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/97284/th...returning_vets/

[almaty 19]

The system really pisses me off," says Bob Handy, chair of Veterans United for Truth. "These soldiers are seriously injured and emotionally traumatized, and when they get home, they make them jump through hoops to get their benefits." Handy's organization joined VCS in its lawsuit against the VA. He says he's especially disturbed by cases like Sergeant Jimenez's. "When you go into the VA with two Purple Hearts and X-rays show that you have shrapnel in your body, and you still can't get your benefits, that's punishing someone who's done a tremendous amount for this country."

so true...

[tmma 467]

By Joshua Kors, The Nation

...................'Jail or the Military'

You might think that when soldiers return wounded from Iraq, it is assumed that they were wounded in Iraq. Not so. Under current VA policy, all soldiers have to prove that their wounds are the result of military service, even if they come home missing a leg or, like Sergeant Jimenez, with an arm heavy with shrapnel. Those who fail to make a convincing case cannot collect disability benefits.

To begin, veterans are asked to gather proof that they were wounded. The injured come to the VA carrying Purple Hearts and combat medals, folders thick with medical evaluations created in Iraq following their injuries. They are asked to provide the date and time they were wounded, to describe the circumstances surrounding the mortar or rocket blast. Veterans are often asked to contact those who witnessed the attack, to gather "buddy statements" that confirm the veracity of their stories.

"The system really pisses me off," says Bob Handy, chair of Veterans United for Truth. "These soldiers are seriously injured and emotionally traumatized, and when they get home, they make them jump through hoops to get their benefits." Handy's organization joined VCS in its lawsuit against the VA. He says he's especially disturbed by cases like Sergeant Jimenez's. "When you go into the VA with two Purple Hearts and X-rays show that you have shrapnel in your body, and you still can't get your benefits, that's punishing someone who's done a tremendous amount for this country."

....more

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/97284/th...returning_vets/

This is not new for the VA handling of disability claims........I myself had to jump through the hoops.. Even though there could not possibly be any doubt my injuries were directly related to my service....... It's a nightmare that they can and do drag out as long as possible. It doesn't matter what medals and awards are listed on your DD214 or service records. I have ribbons out the whazoo, loads of medals, and awards and certificates, flags everywhere for me etc etc etc, but when it came to my injuries ...it turned into a nightmare.

I know from first hand experience that the VAs handling of wounded/disabled veterans is deplorable. You do indeed have to PROVE your injuries are service connected-no matter what those injuries are ( wether it's shrapnel, landmine explosions, exposure to poison gas...whatever....). Problem is depending on your job, some of work is classified, very little documentation and that counts against you when filing a claim.

My advice to current AD folks is to document...document...document...everything you can...Plan for the worst and hope for the best, be your own best advocate. Research and keep a copy of everything...Especially your med records....

My advice to veterans dealing with the VA ......don't give up. Hook up with an advocacy organization like the VFW, DAV or others.

Best of luck to all AD and veterans out there! Don't give up and watch your back!!

Edited September 4, 2008 by tmma

[alienlovechild 75]

If you like what the Federal government and the VA did for veterans, you'll love a national health care plan with millions of more patients.

[Ban Hammer 13,356]

If you like what the Federal government and the VA did for veterans, you'll love a national health care plan with millions of more patients.

that's what i've been trying to tell them. i'm under the military retiree health care.

[natty bumppo 297]

If you like what the Federal government and the VA did for veterans, you'll love a national health care plan with millions of more patients.

that's what i've been trying to tell them. i'm under the military retiree health care.

but ... but .... it will be different with NHC because there are so many more people involved

[Ban Hammer 13,356]

If you like what the Federal government and the VA did for veterans, you'll love a national health care plan with millions of more patients.

that's what i've been trying to tell them. i'm under the military retiree health care.

but ... but .... it will be different with NHC because there are so many more people involved

[HAL 9000 96]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

[Ban Hammer 13,356]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

[HAL 9000 96]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

Yes there is quite a bit of irony involved isn't it?

Then again, leadership could mandate efficiency. Heck if PHS can do it with bad management, so could a well-managed NHS.

[Ban Hammer 13,356]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

Yes there is quite a bit of irony involved isn't it?

Then again, leadership could mandate efficiency. Heck if PHS can do it with bad management, so could a well-managed NHS.

i'm not going to hold my breath on that one. i can't think of a single government project that came in under budget.

[HAL 9000 96]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

Yes there is quite a bit of irony involved isn't it?

Then again, leadership could mandate efficiency. Heck if PHS can do it with bad management, so could a well-managed NHS.

i'm not going to hold my breath on that one. i can't think of a single government project that came in under budget.

That tends to happen when the defense budget is pushed towards blank-check status.

But yes... if we don't try it then there's really nothing to hold our collective breath over.

[Ban Hammer 13,356]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

Yes there is quite a bit of irony involved isn't it?

Then again, leadership could mandate efficiency. Heck if PHS can do it with bad management, so could a well-managed NHS.

i'm not going to hold my breath on that one. i can't think of a single government project that came in under budget.

That tends to happen when the defense budget is pushed towards blank-check status.

But yes... if we don't try it then there's really nothing to hold our collective breath over.

kinda like drilling for more oil?

[HAL 9000 96]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

Yes there is quite a bit of irony involved isn't it?

Then again, leadership could mandate efficiency. Heck if PHS can do it with bad management, so could a well-managed NHS.

i'm not going to hold my breath on that one. i can't think of a single government project that came in under budget.

That tends to happen when the defense budget is pushed towards blank-check status.

But yes... if we don't try it then there's really nothing to hold our collective breath over.

kinda like drilling for more oil?

Sure... when you know you have enough oil to make a significant difference. Hate to make you breathe there buddy... but there ain't enough. Not now, not in 10 years.

Not for our demand.

Now healthcare... well that's what I've been trying to tell ya. If you prevent most problems from coming up, you don't have to deal with expensive medical bills later. Its called being *smart* and well-managed. Not something that is particularly prized these days in the health care system in this country.

[Ban Hammer 13,356]

Or you could just do the system right by actually funding (*novel though*) the needed care instead of wasting it away for insurance companies and ridiculous overhead.

it's funny that you speak of that while talking about a government program.

Yes there is quite a bit of irony involved isn't it?

Then again, leadership could mandate efficiency. Heck if PHS can do it with bad management, so could a well-managed NHS.

i'm not going to hold my breath on that one. i can't think of a single government project that came in under budget.

That tends to happen when the defense budget is pushed towards blank-check status.

But yes... if we don't try it then there's really nothing to hold our collective breath over.

kinda like drilling for more oil?

Sure... when you know you have enough oil to make a significant difference. Hate to make you breathe there buddy... but there ain't enough. Not now, not in 10 years.

Not for our demand.

Now healthcare... well that's what I've been trying to tell ya. If you prevent most problems from coming up, you don't have to deal with expensive medical bills later. Its called being *smart* and well-managed. Not something that is particularly prized these days in the health care system in this country.

i'm not buying that. any increase in domestic production would help.

as for health care, let's just make it real simple and tell everyone not to get sick.