• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New name for PTSD

Connery

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
5,134
Reaction score
6,123
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"It has been called shell shock, battle fatigue, soldier’s heart and, most recently, post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD.

Military officers and some psychiatrists say dropping the word “disorder” in favor of “injury” will reduce the stigma that stops troops from seeking treatment. “No 19-year-old kid wants to be told he’s got a disorder,” said Gen. Peter Chiarelli.

PTSD refers to the intense and potentially crippling symptoms that some people experience after a traumatic event such as combat, a car accident or rape. To Chiarelli and the psychiatrists pressing for a change, the word “injury” suggests that people can heal with treatment. A disorder, meanwhile, implies that something is permanently wrong.

Chiarelli was the first to drop the word “disorder,” referring to the condition as PTS. The new name was adopted by officials at the highest levels of the Pentagon, including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta. But PTS never caught on with the medical community because of concerns that insurers and government bureaucrats would not be willing to pay for a condition that wasn’t explicitly labeled a disease, disorder or injury.

The intensity of the trauma, whether it is a rape, car crash or horrifying combat, is so overwhelming that it alters the physiology of the brain. In this sense, PTSD is more like a bullet wound or a broken leg than a typical mental disorder or disease. “One could have a clean bill of health prior to the trauma, and then afterward, there was a profound difference,” Ochberg wrote in a letter backing Chiarelli’s request for a change.

“The concept of injury usually implies a discrete time period. At some point, the bleeding will stop. Sometimes the wound heals quickly, sometimes not,” said Matthew J. Friedman, executive director of the Department of Veterans Affairs National Center for PTSD. A disorder can stretch on for decades.

A shift to “injury” could make it harder for service members to collect permanent-disability payments for their condition from the government, some experts warned. “When you have an injury, you follow a treatment regimen and expect to get better,” Figley said. “This change is about medicine, but it is also about compensation. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.”
"

New name for PTSD could mean less stigma - The Washington Post

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" ~ William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, 1600

It does not matter what they call it PTSD, Shell shock or battle fatigue. The government is attempting to cut down on compensation which they would normally award a veteran with a service-connected disability. This is just another bad act in a history of bad acts directed at those who gave of themselves to their country and came back with health related issues, many of which do not have the wherewithal to fight for their own rights or entitlements regarding the Veterans' Administration or Veterans' Health Administration.
 
I like it for "reporting" purposes. But yeah, if they are doing it to screw guys over.... well that unfortunately would not be terribly shocking :(.
 
"It has been called shell shock, battle fatigue, soldier’s heart and, most recently, post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD.

Military officers and some psychiatrists say dropping the word “disorder” in favor of “injury” will reduce the stigma that stops troops from seeking treatment. “No 19-year-old kid wants to be told he’s got a disorder,” said Gen. Peter Chiarelli.

PTSD refers to the intense and potentially crippling symptoms that some people experience after a traumatic event such as combat, a car accident or rape. To Chiarelli and the psychiatrists pressing for a change, the word “injury” suggests that people can heal with treatment. A disorder, meanwhile, implies that something is permanently wrong.

Chiarelli was the first to drop the word “disorder,” referring to the condition as PTS. The new name was adopted by officials at the highest levels of the Pentagon, including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta. But PTS never caught on with the medical community because of concerns that insurers and government bureaucrats would not be willing to pay for a condition that wasn’t explicitly labeled a disease, disorder or injury.

The intensity of the trauma, whether it is a rape, car crash or horrifying combat, is so overwhelming that it alters the physiology of the brain. In this sense, PTSD is more like a bullet wound or a broken leg than a typical mental disorder or disease. “One could have a clean bill of health prior to the trauma, and then afterward, there was a profound difference,” Ochberg wrote in a letter backing Chiarelli’s request for a change.

“The concept of injury usually implies a discrete time period. At some point, the bleeding will stop. Sometimes the wound heals quickly, sometimes not,” said Matthew J. Friedman, executive director of the Department of Veterans Affairs National Center for PTSD. A disorder can stretch on for decades.

A shift to “injury” could make it harder for service members to collect permanent-disability payments for their condition from the government, some experts warned. “When you have an injury, you follow a treatment regimen and expect to get better,” Figley said. “This change is about medicine, but it is also about compensation. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.”
"

New name for PTSD could mean less stigma - The Washington Post

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" ~ William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, 1600

It does not matter what they call it PTSD, Shell shock or battle fatigue. The government is attempting to cut down on compensation which they would normally award a veteran with a service-connected disability. This is just another bad act in a history of bad acts directed at those who gave of themselves to their country and came back with health related issues, many of which do not have the wherewithal to fight for their own rights or entitlements regarding the Veterans' Administration or Veterans' Health Administration.

If the only reason why they're going to change it to "injury" is to get more people to report on it, then they should just change the rules so that they get the same compensation for it despite it being labeled an injury.
 
PTSI? Pronounce Pitsy? Great idea. Should solve the problem.
 
The whole idea is a devious way to get a soldier to report thereby having a stigma attached to them and then be presented with hurdle after hurdle in order to get compensation. The VA has a poor record on how they have developed the claim process for PTSD. Now that they have a clear way to establish a claim they want to downgrade the illness as an injury.
 
...and then from an injury to an event. Then from an event to a happening. They'll eventually figure out that the soldiers should pay them.

The whole idea is a devious way to get a soldier to report thereby having a stigma attached to them and then be presented with hurdle after hurdle in order to get compensation. The VA has a poor record on how they have developed the claim process for PTSD. Now that they have a clear way to establish a claim they want to downgrade the illness as an injury.
 
...and then from an injury to an event. Then from an event to a happening. They'll eventually figure out that the soldiers should pay them.

It's not a disease, it's a lifestyle. The government is providing hypervigilance training at great expense to itself.
 
It is a sad thing, but nothing negative the Dems and this adminstration does that affects veterans and military personnel is really a suprise anymore. Something positive from them would indeed be a suprise.

Once upon a time, the government promised free healthcare for life to military personnel and their dependents that reached retirement and free medical care for active duty military personnel and their dependents.

The government renigged on this promise and adopted the Tri-Care system and closed almost all of their hospitals. Unfortunately for military personnel and retired veterans, Tri-Care has co-pay for dependents and Retirees. Retirees now have to purchase a Tri-Care policy for their dependents if the want anything but bare minimum coverage. More recently, OB has suggested raising the co-pay limits for Tri-Care to reduce costs and early in his Regime, he actually even proposed that military members enter a cost sharing for having any coverage. Tri-Care is really private insurance through Humana with the government paying the premiums for active duty, their dependents and retirees. Besides the co-pay, Tri-Care is only supposed to cover emergency room visits for Dependents if there is a danger of loss of life, limb or eye-sight, funny, Humana/Tri-Care gets to decide if your visit meets that standard, not member.

The VA hospitals used to provide free care to all veterans. In an attempt to reduce cost, an attempt was made to make VA Facilities only available to diabled veterans, however, that measure didn't go through completely, instead veterans can now receive free care from the VA only for service related issues or if they rise above a predetermined disability rating from service related disabilities. Using the VA is charged to insurance companies or individuals if they chose to receive care for other than service related disabilities. Receiving the 'service related' finding after a veteran has already left active duty is a very arduous drawn out process.

It is a terrible shame what those who served our country have to go through and the quality of care they receive, especially when it is a service related disability. It is even more shameful when you compare it to what is offered to those on Welfare who have done absolutely nothing and refuse to take jobs available to them because the labor is too hard, demeaning or doesn't pay enough.
 
Back
Top Bottom