Combat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Options

[fameONE]

Should those who suffer from combat PTSD be recognized as casualties? How legitimate is mental illness in comparison to a physical injury? With this, should it be appropriate for a man/woman with PTSD to receive a purple heart?

[sixfive]

Neg, because then the stronger willed or mentally stronger people who go through the same or more even and don't get it will feel short sided.

[fameONE]

^Exactly.

However, what about those who really have a hard time dealing with what they've experienced. You never know what exactly can cause someone to snap.

[karmakiller]

You probably already know where I stand on this, but I think that we should take better care of the people who return, both physically and mentally. My brother's moved away, because there is so many things he can't deal with. He's one of those people that will freak out at the most random things. When he goes to the store he'll start flipping out when people get a cart, because of the noise the basket makes when it falls. If he's in the lower part of a house and someone is dragging their feet on the floor above, he freaks. There's been times that he's actually hit the floor. He isn't on medication, because since he's been medically discharged, they don't want to pay for it. He has shrapnal in his back and chest, which comes with an array of other health issues, and he can't get it removed because he has no way to pay for it. My brother has nine medals, and there are some of them that he is far from happy about having. I suppose it could be argued that people returning with PTSD have the mental scars of the conflict, while people returning with shrapnal and missing limbs have the physical scars of the conflict.

I don't know a whole lot about the Purple Heart, but along with it being awarded to someone who has been wounded or killed, it's also awarded for merit. So couldn't someone say that a person should be awarded the Purple Heart because they show merit and have had to be treated by a doctor (even though it's mental and not physical)?

[sixfive]

^Exactly.

However, what about those who really have a hard time dealing with what they've experienced. You never know what exactly can cause someone to snap.

Weaker people. Being weak doesn't constitute a medal or commendation. Not everyone is created equal, and not everyone deserves to be treated equal. That shit just doesn't work in our society, though it seems some people push for it.

[fameONE]

You can't just equate combat-stress to being weak. If you've never had rounds shot through the windshield of your vehicle, if you've never had your convoy get dismantled by an IED, or if you've never watched a leader you've served under for two years get obliterated right before your eyes; this subject is completely foreign. I fight my own thoughts and emotions on a daily basis to keep a cool head, and it's becoming increasingly difficult.

If a service member encounters small arms, or indirect fire, and is wounded by that, he'll, more than likely, receive a purple heart. I know a lot of guys that despise that medal (I'm one of them). I don't want to get rewarded for being a victim. In a way, awarding a purple heart to those who suffer from PTSD is the same thing. Instead of pouring more salt on the wound, there should be more invested in the treatment of PTSD.

You wouldn't want to break your arm and not allow it to heal, would you?

[sixfive]

My mistake, I didn't mean to call them weak, I just felt that it might affect some easier than others, and for the some to get rewarded for what the others were able to withstand, I don't think would be fair. However, I suppose fairness isn't really something of any worth nowadays.

Idk, I don't want it to seem like I'm saying "To hell with people who get PTSD,"

[fameONE]

Understood.

It's a tough argument for military folk as well. My cousin, who has been to Iraq 3 times and Afghanistan once, has a purple heart. He's been through the worst that war has to offer. He appears to be unaffected by it all and can talk openly. Is it that he's stronger, or that something else could trigger a breakdown? I don't know. And that's the big problem with PTSD; not knowing how to treat it. So the Department of Defense feels the need to just award those who suffer from extreme cases the Purple Heart so they can reap the medical benefits to get outside treatment. That's the wrong answer as well, but no one seems to know the right one.

[karmakiller]

^ Isn't one of the big problems that people returning with PTSD tend to act up and lash out, and end up being dishonorably discharged and therefore lose their veteran benefits?

Also, I'm not too sure about this, but shouldn't the people returning from Iraq and Afghanistan be evaluated after they've returned. I know that they are evaluated before they are "re-introduced into society" once they return, but the effects of PTSD tend to develop over time. There isn't just denial about it within the government, but also within the Marines and soldiers. It's seen as a weakness, so many of them deny that there is anything wrong, or lie about it, because they don't want treatment and further evaluation to conflict their leave time.

[mipadi]

Weaker people. Being weak doesn't constitute a medal or commendation. Not everyone is created equal, and not everyone deserves to be treated equal. That shit just doesn't work in our society, though it seems some people push for it.

I don't like the idea of calling people with mental disorders "weak" and denying them help. That's like telling someone with pneumonia to "just get over it" because "a person with a stronger immune system could just fight off the virus". That's not to say everyone with a stress disorder deserves a medal, but I think they do deserve help.

[sixfive]

I didn't mean to label them as weak. Perhaps it would have sounded less mean if I had said "What about the people who are stronger, not that others are weak, that aren't effected the same way and aren't impacted on a daily basis?"

[mipadi]

I didn't mean to label them as weak. Perhaps it would have sounded less mean if I had said "What about the people who are stronger, not that others are weak, that aren't effected the same way and aren't impacted on a daily basis?"

If you say one group of people is stronger, then you logically imply that the other group is weaker, since the terms are relative anyway (i.e., "weak" and "strong" aren't absolutes).

Is this to say we shouldn't bother offering medical treatment to people who get sick with diseases like pneumonia or hepatitis or the common cold, on the grounds that their immune systems are simply "weak" and a "stronger" person could simply get over the diseases on his own?

[sixfive]

Just because someone is stronger than another, doesn't mean that they're weak. They're weaker than the stronger individual, but whether or not their weak is up to individual definitions.

I'm not saying don't treat PTSD, I'm all for treatment. I'm saying that just because they get PTSD, they shouldn't necessarily get a purple heart.

Take two individuals, one get the strep throat and the other doesn't. Should the one who got strep be rewarded over the person who didn't, outside of being treated/attempted to be cured?

[mipadi]

Just because someone is stronger than another, doesn't mean that they're weak. They're weaker than the stronger individual, but whether or not their weak is up to individual definitions.

Are you arguing, then, that "weak" and "strong" have absolute definitions that are not based on the other term? If so, what is the definition of "weak", and what is the definition of "strong"? And how does saying that Person A is stronger than Person B not imply that Person B is somehow weak?

[brooklyneast05]

i don't think steven is arguing definitions in the first place so i don't think that question will go very far. he's arguing this part, not the part you're nitpicking

I'm not saying don't treat PTSD, I'm all for treatment. I'm saying that just because they get PTSD, they shouldn't necessarily get a purple heart.

Take two individuals, one get the strep throat and the other doesn't. Should the one who got strep be rewarded over the person who didn't, outside of being treated/attempted to be cured?

hmmmm, i don't think i'd reward the strep throat person. it's not like either has control over it really, so idk how it warrants a reward for one or not a reward for someone else. i think the one who gets it should be cured/treated of course, but yeah.

[mipadi]

i don't think steven is arguing definitions in the first place so i don't think that question will go very far. he's arguing this part, not the part you're nitpicking

It's not "nitpicking" -- it's trying to find out the heart of a particular definition that's being used as a basis for reasoning.

hmmmm, i don't think i'd reward the strep throat person. it's not like either has control over it really, so idk how it warrants a reward for one or not a reward for someone else. i think the one who gets it should be cured/treated of course, but yeah.

Riiigghhhttt... I'm not arguing the reward aspect, just the assertion that a person suffering from mental trauma is somehow "weak".

[sixfive]

If two individuals from the same upbringing, same control factors, are exposed to the same thing, and one suffers from PTSD and the other doesn't, then then one who didn't is (in my opinion) stronger.

Are you arguing, then, that "weak" and "strong" have absolute definitions that are not based on the other term? If so, what is the definition of "weak", and what is the definition of "strong"? And how does saying that Person A is stronger than Person B not imply that Person B is somehow weak?

They have subjective definitions. If person A is stronger than B, then B is weak when compared to A. Take someone who can bench 400 lbs and compare them to someone who can bench 500 lbs. Compared to the latter, Mr. 400 is weaker than Mr. 500, but compared to me, he's a hell of a lot stronger. Unless everyone and everything was absolutely the same, there will be people who are weak and people who are strong.

Take two people who can both be mentally strong, but one's stronger than the other and dodges PTSD, the person who got it is, when compared to the one who didn't, weaker.