Reader comments
Pentagon drops ball in handling of fallen soldiers

Marjorie - Thanks for your fitting remarks critical of a government that gives lip service to "honoring the troops" but shows their hypocricy with insensative acts such as the contract with an animal cremetorium. A close friend of ours, a single mother, has a son who recently finished his second tour in Iraq. During that final tour, two of his best friends were literally blown up in front of him, on two separate occasions, when they stepped on IEDs along the roadside. Her son was seriously injured in one of the incidents. That experience brought to light the plight of many soldiers - as many as 20,000 who have served - who have had similar experiences and just as they were about to be released from the Army, with the possibility of experienceing post traumatic stress disorder, have been classified as "mentally unstable" rendering them ineligible to receive medical and psychiatric care once they leave the army. Fortunately her son has not been given such a designation but the fact that many have is just more evidence of a government that honors its soldiers for political purposes only without any action to back up that stated honor.

Thanks, Marjorie. Good story. But, think about it. What's new for this government? Bush et al have been nothing but negative when it comes to our troops, vis a vis Walter Reed Hospital and his intention to cut troop benefits. What a horrible legacy Bush/Cheney will have when they, finally, depart.

Out of curiosity, how on earth are they receiving no care for a "mentally unstable" designation given during military service? I'd suggest they try and find help with a veterans organization, as they should be getting medical benefits and care.

Too often people take the VA's first no as final, and it more often than not can be appealled.

Good luck to your friends.

Mentally unstable?
Are they referring to the present administration?

It might be called "separation because of personality disorder" but it has been used to deny benefits. That is because the designation is retroactive to the time before they enlisted. Not only are the soldiers denied benefits but many have been asked to return the signing bonuses many or most of them were paid to entice them into enlisting in the first place. It is called Pentagon Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13. There is an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 sponsored jointly by Senators Kit Bond and Claire McCaskill to suspend the use of this regulation. I'm not sure how the vote on that amendment came out.