I’ve heard several secondhand reports of people claiming PTSD from basic. I haven’t personally seen it, but I have met a soldier who said they couldn’t participate in any combat training because they’d have panic attacks. If someone like that deployed, freaked out because they heard a firefight, claimed PTSD and received a PH for it, I’d be f’kn pissed.

Your father’s generation had a much different mentality that today’s. Your father’s generation survived the Depression, and generally understood that life was tough. I think we’ve lost that today. The “Entitlement Society” pretty much believes that they’re owed something, forever. I know that doesn’t apply to all of this generation’s vets, but it’s way too common.

And yeah, I think in a few decades we will be drowning in disability payments.

Major Tupper did mention in his article that it may be possible to “see” PTSD with an MRI or other medical technology. I’m still unsure on that, though. It would have to be identifiable beyond a shadow of a doubt, just like a physical injury.

Glad to hear you worked through your problems. Combat service leaves a mark on all of us.

I had an argument about what “real” PTSD is with my former company commander. He’s a great officer, and is very sympathetic to soldiers who are having problems. I made the point that “post trauma” requires “trauma” to begin with; people claiming PTSD because they heard a rocket explode a kilometer away haven’t really experienced trauma. He responded with the stock Army answer, “Everyone responds differently to trauma, and just because something didn’t bother you that doesn’t mean it wasn’t traumatic for them.” So I came back with this: a soldier in Iraq claims PTSD because he heard on the news that Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber broke up, and he just can’t handle that. So would that be a legitimate PTSD claim? I repeated his “everyone responds differently to trauma” quote right back to him. He didn’t have a good answer to that one.

Unfortunately, not many people seem to share our view on that. I didn’t try for any disability because I’m not disabled, and whatever help is available needs to go to those who really need it. Plenty of others just see free money, and dive right in.

By the way, when did you go to boot? I also served in the Marines for six years and got out in 95.

I don’t believe PTSD gets reported to NCIC. There’s a lot of worry about that happening, but as far as I know there’s no provision for reporting mental health status. I know that as a cop I never saw any reference to mental health on an NCIC return. I’m familiar with one incident where a gun owner was ordered to turn over his weapons due to a mental health issue, but as far as I know that was reported and handled entirely at the local level. Although I get your worry about it.

In regards to your last comment, I’ve also heard that present vets are claiming many more problems than previous vets did. One figure I heard was that WW2 vets who made a disability claim reported an average of two service-connected issues, while present vets have an average of seven. Don’t know if that’s true or not, but it’s believable. And I definitely agree, much of the quest for free VA handouts shows a breakdown of morality.

I served 6 years in the U.S. Army from 1985 to 1991, and did a tour in the first gulf war, I did have an exciting army career( For as long as it lasted). I and a lot like me will not ever claim PTSD, even if we had it, we will not talk to the VA about it. Once you talk to the VA, your name goes into NCIC and if you want to later buy a pistol…? forget it..you will not pass the expanded background check. and depending on the state that you live at, the police will come for your other firearms. I know of people that got 100% disability using the PTSD and other stuff with the claims and to me, it is a hustle for “Free” money. It shows a breakdown of morality. They say that 1 out of 2 present vets will try to claim something whereas the percentage of “older” vets are much less.

I didn’t. It just didn’t seem honorable.

I’m with you on not giving out the Purple Heart for PTSD. Yes, PTSD exists, and people with it should be able to get help. I’m all for that. But a metal? no.

s

Giving it away to someone who was scared when some native kid jumps out and yells “Boo!” would be the inevitable result of such a foolish debasement of the award.

The criteria right now work just fine. It also helps to make it a medal no one really wants to earn, which is why more than a few wounded combat vets refer to it as the “enemy marksmanship award”.

Many years ago I had issues. Intending to make a career of service, there was no way I was going to have a mental health section in my medical records unless things got out of hand and I had to. Maybe not the smartest thing to do, but I handled it outside the fence. PTSD? I have no idea, but I don’t think so, it was just some things that needed working out. Looking back on it, it was nothing more than mentally moving back to where the rest of me was, doing a job every day in uniform. It didn’t take a lot and things worked out. Nightmare only occasionally and certain feelings for a while, but nothing that interfered with daily life. Should that merit a Purple Heart? What if nightmares were slightly more frequent? Where is the line drawn? What is the objective standard? It sure can’t be the magic stamp of PTSD because we know that is no truly objective standard.

Treat PTSD, even if there may be a degree of fakery, because much like seat belts, the treatment is as much for the rest of us as it is for the individual. But base an award on it? No. I applaud the major’s interest, research, and thoughts. I appreciate the time he has invested in the subject — it is certainly one worth exploring. But I cannot agree with his conclusions.