Pentagon Grapples to Understand How Yet Another Insider Threat Went Undeterred

Outlaw,
As a veteran of OIF I, II and III (2003-2005) I feel I must respond to your post on this issue. I’ve seen you make this comment (or similar to this) on here before:

” When originally PTSD was awarded by VA it had to do with the massive sustained combat and experienced brutality of actual 365 days a year of war 24X7---so just what is triggering PTSD in this war generation and has the VA and the Army actually wanted to truly understand the reasons behind the current PTSD wave.”

First, let’s take a look at how the National Institute of Mental Health defines PTSD:

“When in danger, it’s natural to feel afraid. This fear triggers many split-second changes in the body to prepare to defend against the danger or to avoid it. This “fight-or-flight” response is a healthy reaction meant to protect a person from harm. But in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), this reaction is changed or damaged. People who have PTSD may feel stressed or frightened even when they’re no longer in danger.
PTSD develops after a terrifying ordeal that involved physical harm or the threat of physical harm. The person who develops PTSD may have been the one who was harmed, the harm may have happened to a loved one, or the person may have witnessed a harmful event that happened to loved ones or strangers.
PTSD was first brought to public attention in relation to war veterans, but it can result from a variety of traumatic incidents, such as mugging, rape, torture, being kidnapped or held captive, child abuse, car accidents, train wrecks, plane crashes, bombings, or natural disasters such as floods or earthquakes.”

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-pt…

Notice in the NIMH definition not once does it say “…massive sustained combat and experienced brutality of actual 365 days a year of war 24X7…” but it does say “…it can result from a variety of traumatic incidents…” In other words, it doesn’t take prolonged, repeated exposure to a series of events, but rather a singular traumatic incident can result in PTSD. I suppose one could argue the severity of the PTSD due to the length and repeated exposure to the traumatic event, but even that becomes a slippery slope because many singular traumatic events can trigger a lifetime of PTSD symptoms just as severe as someone who was exposed to combat. Also, studies have shown that individuals handle stress completely different, so a traumatic event experienced by one person may have completely different symptoms than by someone else who experienced the same or similar event.
My point in all this is this; you are trying to compare apples to oranges. Using your analogy of Vietnam, one could argue that Vietnam veterans never experienced the kind of combat that soldiers on the Eastern Front of WWII did. I mean, after all, did American Vietnam soldiers experience the kind of operations and battles like Stalingrad, Kursk, Kharkov, Leningrad and Berlin (a quick study of the operational losses that the Germans and Soviets suffered in these operations is mind boggling for the average Westerner)? No, but that’s a moot point. Also, most Vietnam veterans did one tour and were done. I did two (2003 and 2004/05) and consider myself one of the lucky ones. Personally, I know people who have done over 5 deployments to both Iraq and Afghanistan. I don’t even think we completely know the long term effects this is having on our force quite yet but over the next 20-30 years I think we will start to see what this constant state of deployment to our war fighters will be when they start to hit retirement age and these problems manifest themselves in ways not yet envisioned.

I will agree with you that there are those that “take advantage of the system” but what else is new? Do you honestly believe there aren’t any Vietnam veterans who were “in the rear with the gear” who are now drawing big fat disability checks because the government changed its standards and now any veteran can file a claim for PTSD? By the way, you can also be connected for PTSD due to “military sexual trauma” because MST fits the definition of PTSD.

I’d also like to point out another misleading concept regarding this issue. Not all veterans who have actual PTSD are being treated or compensated for it. The first and most obvious is that there are many veterans out there who don’t seek help or file claims. The second is that of those who do file a claim, often they get denied or get service connected at a low compensable rate. It can then take years after a disagreement gets filed to get the claim re-examined. In fact, it isn’t uncommon for claims to get denied or get approved at low compensable rates. So when you actually look at the system, the ones who are willing to “game the system” are the ones most likely to draw the large disability check for it. We can argue about it all day long but that’s just the way it works. No system is ever going to be “fair”.

Another important point to consider is that today military members are required by law to go through separation classes prior to discharge from active duty. These classes inform the veterans what they are eligible for (VA, GI Bill, etc) plus it’s also supposed to help prepare them for their transition to the civilian world (resume prep, interview skills, etc) so today’s service members are coming out armed with a lot of knowledge that the “older generations” didn’t get. When you combine that with the readily available knowledge (such as NIMH) it doesn’t take a genius to realize that the “smart ones who want to game the system” can pretty much figure out what they need to do to “strengthen their claim”. Yes, it’s a sad and frustrating thing, but nothing is going to change this.

One more thing to keep in mind, conditions like PTSD can’t be quantifiably measured; the decision ultimately has to be made by a mental health worker whether someone is telling the truth or not. Conditions like hearing loss and hypertension are much easier to determine because they can be quantifiably measured and recorded, not so with mental health conditions unless the person is at the debilitating stage and they just can’t function (kind of like the WWI ‘shellshock’ veterans).

Yes, this person was already in "treatment" and it did not work, that is the really scary portion of this ordeal. Mandatory hospitalization in order to prevent such events
may be an option that needs to looked at.

Curmudgeon:

It seems to me if a guy wants to kill himself with a gun he can do it off post, or he can just lie about having it and do it on post.

Regarding this particular incident it will be interesting to see if this killer was taking anti-depressant drugs or some other drug prescribed by the head shrinkers. The use of those drugs is, if I recall correctly, something that pops us rather frequently with these guys.

First, I think it is too early to make any assessment on what contributed to this incident. But the last part of your comment raises some concerns with me. "Until the right to carry aboard military installations & other so-called Gun Free zones is returned, we had better stock up on body bags." This kind of attitude show up a lot after an active shooter. But the reality is that there are many times more deaths on military installations from suicide than from active shooters, and the method of choice is the gun. From a 2012 article: "But this year, the numbers are on track to outpace the 2009 figures, with about 270 active-duty service members, half of them from the Army, having killed themselves as of last month. According to Defense Department statistics, more than 6 of 10 military suicides are by firearms, with nearly half involving privately owned guns." http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/08/us/with-military-suicides-rising-new-…

In the same article you will note that Congress inadvertantly prohibited Commanders from asking their Soldiers whether they had a gun. A somewhat paradoxical rule since you are required to register it on post.

In any case, regardless of what we ultimately determine was the cause of this tragic incident (if in fact we ever do), don't rush to the conclusion that arming everyone on post is the solution.