PTSD, and the Military

[Army Guy]

Sorry for the delay in posting this post, I was caught up in in my job. This week the Regiment is busy buring another one of it's comrads, he was respected soldier by all in the Regiment, my only regret was i did not know him. I won't mention his name out of respect for the family, as they are suffering enough with his loss.

He took his own life because he could not deal with his pain. Which must of been incredible for him to end it all, leaving behind his family and friends must have been a painful decision in itself.

There was a time i used to think sucide was the easy way out, a way for cowards,who were not tough enough... Today i know that is not true, Stories from those who did know him affirm that he was a warrior, a soldier who had seen combat and lead his troops in battle, never once waivering from his duties.

He is not alone his name is on a long list of names of Warriors, Canadian soldiers who answered our nations call on more than one occasion that could not live with the pain they are suffering with. These men and women have brought their own piece of the war back home with them. Suffering from various forms of PTSD. This week i'm told there are 2 addition soldiers who have taken their lifes, and one more attemted suicide.

I don't know much about this sickness, or condition, but i am going to make it a priority to find out. I not sure what triggers it, why some get it and others do not maybe we all have it and just have better coping skills again i'm not sure, i do know that everyone that has been on a tour has come back changed, enough that there loves ones notice right away. War has that effect on you.

I wish all of the families my heart felt best wishes. And to my comrads in arms... We have overcome all obsticles placed in our paths be from our enemies or friends, we've done this by sticking together, fire team partners for life my Sgt Major used to say, lean on us, were brothers and sisters with a bond that is hard to shed. your never alone....

[GostHacked]

When people talk about supporting the troops, rarely is it talking about when they get home. We are told to support them on the field, but when they get home that is the support they need the most when they need it the most.

[jacee]

Thanks for opening this topic, Army Guy.

My stepdad, a WWII vet, fought wild animals in his nightmares for over 50 years, until the day he died.

PTSD is not new.

Soldier solidarity and mutual support is strong during service, but often soldiers are on their own to deal with the aftermath.

I read an article about some US vets who served together and through some program they reunited to do whitewater and other types of adventure activities together. It was a lifeline for them and, imo, should be routinely made available to all vets after service.

The old vets had the Legion.

The new vets aren't comfortable there.

Their wars are different.

They need something new.

If we are going to allow our governments to send young people to fight dirty wars for corporate profits, we are also responsible for their care after they come back.

If we're not willing to take full responsibility for the damage, then we shouldn't let our governments send them.

.

Edited December 5, 2013 by jacee

[cybercoma]

Looks like you're living near me now, Army Guy. Welcome to the province. Hope you got your winter tires put on.

[Moonlight Graham]

Here's a major problem with mental illness in the military:

As the military comes to grips with the suicides of four soldiers in less than two weeks, advocates for members of the armed forces say stepping forward to admit psychological distress often leads to a discharge. The military has a policy that says all soldiers, sailors and airmen must be fit enough to deploy to a war zone.

But Defence Minister Rob Nicholson told Parliament on Thursday it is “completely false” that soldiers will lose their their jobs and their pensions by getting treatment for mental problems. Mr. Nicholson urged the New Democrat MP who raised the matter in the daily Question Period “not to alarm those individuals who are thinking of coming forward.”

Veterans, on the other hand, say there is simply no protection offered to military personnel who take that step.

“They can’t come forward and they can’t tell the doctors because, as soon as they tell the doctors, the doctors have to report to their senior officers,” Mike Cole, a former Air Force pilot who suffers from PTSD, told a news conference on Thursday. The senior officers then say the person with the mental illness is “no longer fit for service, see you later,” Capt. Cole said.

Captain Wayne Johnston, a 41-year veteran of the military who was the repatriation officer for soldiers who died in Afghanistan, told The Globe and Mail that, “once you stick your hand up for mental health, I don’t know the numbers, but in most cases you are going to get released.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/defence-minister-denies-claims-that-soldiers-risk-losing-jobs-for-mental-health-care/article15797898/

I just don't know how you'd fix this. The military understandably doesn't want people with serious mental health problems in the field, and soldiers understandably then don't want to reveal their problems and get help.

[Big Guy]

Suicide is always a sad way to end one's life. I do understand that it is more common in stress related jobs. Before I am able to have a valid opinion on this topic I would be interested to see the comparison of suicide statistics in military, medical, law enforcement etc. fields before deciding if this is an unexpected and concerning issue or it is an expected result of the nature of the job. I would assume that those deciding to enter careers in law enforcement, firefighting, military etc do so understanding the possible dangerous outcomes of their choice.

PTSD is a recent label associated with a mental illness that had been diagnosed many times in the past under different descriptions. I hope that it does not become a "catch-all" illness de jour and end up losing its relevance by being claimed by those not afflicted but seeking inappropriate pensions and other entitlements.

[Remiel]

Is there no way to accomodate soldiers with PTSD with homefront deployments? I understand the principle that the military wants people who can be deployed overseas, but other logics are available. If there ever were an actual military attack on Canadian soil would anyone be saying that the diagnosis of PTSD alone was enough to bench a soldier?

[Guest Derek L]

I honestly don’t see this as a new issue , but one that both is further understood and spoken about. Has PTSD all of a sudden just happened? Of course not. I think the two key differences between vets today and from past operations is two fold, first support organizations like the Chaplaincy are not utilized by many members like they were in the past, and second, (as mentioned above) groups like the Legion no longer offer the same sort of benefits to retired personal and this, in my view, is attributed to the Legion opening their doors to the public.

Also another very real generational difference is the entry process to the Armed Forces, fore several decades ago, Basic training & BOTC were a “initial barrier” used to weed out those susceptible to a potential mental break……I think a recruit on very little sleep, over worked and berated by a Master Corporal, well being forced to contend with purposeful high stress environments would feel less a lasting impact on a individual then actual emotional trauma found in a combat environment.

[Peter F]

Might I suggest an interesting book on the subject:

On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society.

review here: http://www.citizen-soldier.org/On-Killing.html

[Army Guy]

When people talk about supporting the troops, rarely is it talking about when they get home. We are told to support them on the field, but when they get home that is the support they need the most when they need it the most.

I hope that something changes for the better, as more and more people come out and yalk about this.

[Army Guy]

Thanks for opening this topic, Army Guy.

My stepdad, a WWII vet, fought wild animals in his nightmares for over 50 years, until the day he died.

PTSD is not new.

Soldier solidarity and mutual support is strong during service, but often soldiers are on their own to deal with the aftermath.

I read an article about some US vets who served together and through some program they reunited to do whitewater and other types of adventure activities together. It was a lifeline for them and, imo, should be routinely made available to all vets after service.

The old vets had the Legion.

The new vets aren't comfortable there.

Their wars are different.

They need something new.

If we are going to allow our governments to send young people to fight dirty wars for corporate profits, we are also responsible for their care after they come back.

If we're not willing to take full responsibility for the damage, then we shouldn't let our governments send them.

.

I think the nightmares everyone has, an old korean vet told me over a few beers, Son your always going to have them dreams, what you have to do is make friends with those ghosts...because they are never going away...Since then i still have my dreams they are not as violent as they used to be, or as frequent.

No it's not new, it's been around since the first days of combat, it's been called lots of things, but it has for a long time been considered a cowards sickness, or sheer laziness, Gen Paton actually slap a pte in the face that was suffering from Shell shock called him a coward etc etc....it's always been considered a weak, unmannly, sickness...i remember joking about it with the troops in Afghan "saying if i came down with PTSD for someone to shoot me"....what an idiot i was....Because they're may of been someone there struggling with this, and i was making sick jokes....

your right solidarity is strong in the military, police and EMS, because we all go through the same stuff, and yet we fight this sickness alone for some reason. I think that is one of the main factors right there. doing it alone....

There are many programs in the Military, the one you mention does have Canadians on it, it is normally reserved for those with amputations but it is paid for by the military , some other programs is and i forget the name but it has to do with Dogs, this program as simple as it is has help dozens of soldiers return to some what normal life...One of the main issues the Military is having is getting the amount of doctors and nurses trained in mental illiness, many of the shrienks are civilians and offer their time free of charge, but that only goes so far, wait times can be months, and with treatment taking years this problem compounds daily.

I hope the government and people take notice, before more die, and not just military, but police fire fighters ,EMS techs, everyone that suffers with this affiction.

[Army Guy]

Looks like you're living near me now, Army Guy. Welcome to the province. Hope you got your winter tires put on.

Thanks CC, Born and bred here, it's good to be back. and yes i just got them on during our last snow storm.

[Army Guy]

Here's a major problem with mental illness in the military:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/defence-minister-denies-claims-that-soldiers-risk-losing-jobs-for-mental-health-care/article15797898/

I just don't know how you'd fix this. The military understandably doesn't want people with serious mental health problems in the field, and soldiers understandably then don't want to reveal their problems and get help.

This is a major problem, Gen Hillier had a policy, if a wounded soldier could be retained he would, even if DND had to retrain them. This was done to give the soldier some hope, because most soldiers love what they are doing, losing a leg or mental illiness meant having to leave....Now since Hillier departure this policy is not followed, why because we are getting ready for huge cuts...with smaller numbers in DND you need to have all of them fighting fit...everything has a price...

I talked to a freind who works down in JPSU, a military organization that helps wounded soldiers, he says that there is dozens upon dozens of mental health cases here in Gagetown alone, some are working with civilian companies, some are just sitting at home, some are going back to school to get retrained....and while you are right some what there are numbers that will never return to DND , but there is a number that do return to DND.

[Army Guy]

Is there no way to accomodate soldiers with PTSD with homefront deployments? I understand the principle that the military wants people who can be deployed overseas, but other logics are available. If there ever were an actual military attack on Canadian soil would anyone be saying that the diagnosis of PTSD alone was enough to bench a soldier?

PTSD has many levels, but yes a person suffering from a severe form is side lined, as they are not functional.

[Army Guy]

Might I suggest an interesting book on the subject:

On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society.

review here: http://www.citizen-soldier.org/On-Killing.html

Lt Col David grossman , Read serveral of his books the one you mentioned and "on Combat" in fact just before we went on tour he was a guest speaker i'd seen him twice, and the man can speak and knows everything there is to know about this topic. It did prepare me for certain things , but other things you just had to live through to understand. 'I know there was a few times the light came on and i had said to myself thats is what he was trying to explain"

[Spiderfish]

Also another very real generational difference is the entry process to the Armed Forces, fore several decades ago, Basic training & BOTC were a “initial barrier” used to weed out those susceptible to a potential mental break……I think a recruit on very little sleep, over worked and berated by a Master Corporal, well being forced to contend with purposeful high stress environments would feel less a lasting impact on a individual then actual emotional trauma found in a combat environment.

Interesting perspective, I never considered this but it makes sense.

[Army Guy]

Interesting perspective, I never considered this but it makes sense.

Derek makes a very valid piont here. all Standards have been changed to reflect the next generation a more touchy feelly, gamer type, while true tech has pushed us into a much different generation, Gamers are needed. but so are kids that are healthy, and fit, perhaps we should not have taken out the mental aspect of the old training.

[Big Guy]

Also another very real generational difference is the entry process to the Armed Forces, fore several decades ago, Basic training & BOTC were a “initial barrier” used to weed out those susceptible to a potential mental break…

There was and continues to be an extensive screening or filtering process for potential candidates for stressful careers like law enforcement, firefighting et al. Many candidates "wash out" because of the large number of people interested in those careers and those organizations can afford to be selective. I understand that during the Afghanistan war, Canadian military recruitment was having difficulty meeting targets and needs. I wonder if the selection process for military jobs was "shortened" in an effort to reach targets and some candidates not suited for this kind of career were allowed to slip through. I hope that is not the case but agree that it is a good idea to put more effort into the front end of the process by establishing a more intense filtering process to discourage those not suited for this kind of career.

I also understand that most of those deployed asked for assignment to the war zone - for a variety of reasons. Perhaps those asking for deployment should have been screened more thoroughly.

With the very large number of physical and mental disabilities that were caused by our decision to get involved in Afghanistan, this war will be costing us tens of billions of dollars. Considering the current move in Afghanistan back towards Taliban rule, I hope that we have learned something from our mistakes.

[Army Guy]

Actually recruit numbers were up for most of the Afghan war. recruits were not the issue, as for the most part you had to be a QL 5 or Cpl ( someone with min of 4 years training) to ask,so recruits never got to go, you had to have some training it was not until the later end of the war, that they started taking senior ptes someone who has 2 to 3 years experience. All that being said there was extensive training that each soldier had to complete and pass.(work up training prior to deploying normally 6 or more months.)

Screening was done every month or so through out, but training for battle and combat are 2 separate worlds, don't get me wrong training was very realistic, but at the end of the day, the dead stood up, and nobody got blown apart. I know in the Combat units the cock was belt feed, meaning stress levels were as hard as someone could make them, it was never the easy way, always the hard way. nobody complained because the vets in the crowd would would tell us this is easy, wait until you get there....

Screening can only go so far. One thing you have to observe is training is like training for an olympic event, you train hard and long for 4 years , you want to see or validate your training, soldiers are for the most part type A personalities, they would sell their grand mothers to prove they're training. and in doing so could tell screening officials everything they wanted to here plus giving grannies address and phone number.

It should also be noted, that within the Combat arms you can find guys with 8 or more tours, and easily find dozens with 4 or more, and it is common to find 2 or more. Canada has a small Army, almost everyone within the army has atleast one tour.

Don't get me started on todays Basic training standards.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Army Guy

[Guest Derek L]

There was and continues to be an extensive screening or filtering process for potential candidates for stressful careers like law enforcement, firefighting et al. Many candidates "wash out" because of the large number of people interested in those careers and those organizations can afford to be selective. I understand that during the Afghanistan war, Canadian military recruitment was having difficulty meeting targets and needs. I wonder if the selection process for military jobs was "shortened" in an effort to reach targets and some candidates not suited for this kind of career were allowed to slip through. I hope that is not the case but agree that it is a good idea to put more effort into the front end of the process by establishing a more intense filtering process to discourage those not suited for this kind of career.

The selection process and initial training now and 30+ years ago is as stark as night and day……..The encumbrance of “political correctness” and “sensitivity” started to creep into the Forces in the 80s, but the flood gates were opened in the 90s under the Liberals once reports of “cruel hazing” and “abuse” (in namely the Airborne Regiment) were reported to the general public.

Ultimately the recruiting and initial training process is letting down those who join the Forces today and go onto serve, when it is quite obvious that they would not have lasted over a week in Basic 30+ years ago…..As I said above, in my view, it would be better if we “hurt the feelings” of individuals in the first couple of weeks, then let them go on to serve in a war zone and they return with mental health issues.

As to “loosened standards”, in times of need for the filling of certain positions within the Forces, often Educational requirements will often be postponed for trades/positions where possible……For a potential Infantry Officer the requirement to hold University Degree can be deferred, where as a Doctor or Engineer will obviously still require said training to carry on in the Forces.

[Guest Derek L]

Don't get me started on todays Basic training standards.

I agree fully and to expand on that, I would also add ongoing physical and mental fitness standards for serving members…..Ultimately with the coming cuts to personal, overweight members that wear a jacket or pant size made of enough material to cover a Howitzer should be given ~6 months to sort themselves out or be shown the door……..

[Topaz]

Anyone knows the answer , I was wondering if the soldiers that do have PTSD are on medications when they do decide to end their life? In the public, we heard about teens on certain medications, especially males, will lead them down this path and if so, its a double whammy having PTSD too. I listened to one soldier on "The Agenda" and he said many experience where they just want to go back to Afghanistan because there's no pressure, they just do what they are told to do and back home THEY have to be responsible to themselves and can't handle it.

[waldo]

Also another very real generational difference is the entry process to the Armed Forces, fore several decades ago, Basic training & BOTC were a “initial barrier” used to weed out those susceptible to a potential mental break……

The selection process and initial training now and 30+ years ago is as stark as night and day…….. Ultimately the recruiting and initial training process is letting down those who join the Forces today and go onto serve.

As I said above, in my view, it would be better if we “hurt the feelings” of individuals in the first couple of weeks, then let them go on to serve in a war zone and they return with mental health issues.

I would also add ongoing physical and mental fitness standards for serving members…..

you suggest recruitment, selection and a lack of an ongoing mental fitness assessment of serving members is a contributor to... "mental breaks... mental health issues, within serving members". Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) position/statements do not appear to align with your personal opinion/assessment. Rather, the CAF provides numerous statements/documents that attest to ongoing regular mental health screening procedures, suicide prevention and awareness programs, along with multiple mental health focused assessments of members returning from deployment (immediately after return and longer-term assessment). I've not found anything that directly speaks to a mental health impact relative to recruitment screening/standards; rather, by indirect inference, one might surmise the following speaks to recruitment/selection not being a factor:

- (2013) Surgeon General report: "Suicide in the Canadian Forces 1995 to 2012": (caveat on small sample size highlighted)

Suicide rates in the CF did not increase over time, and after age standardization, they were lower that those in the Canadian population. History of deployment was not a risk factor for suicide in the CF.

- From 1995 to 2012 there has been no statistically significant change in male CF suicide rates.

- The rate of suicide when standardized for age and sex is lower than that of the general Canadian population.

- History of deployment is not a risk factor for suicide in the Canadian Forces.

- (2010) Canadian Forces Cancer and Mortality Study (CF personnel, both serving and released, who enrolled in the CF between 1972 and 2006):

- The overall risk of suicide for males and females with a history of military service was not different than the Canadian population.

- However, the study showed that males who were former CF members were 1.5 times more likely to die from suicide than men in the Canadian population.

and... for what it's worth in referencing the largest sample size study of U.S. military personnel, a JAMA published study of current and former military personnel observed July 1, 2001-December 31, 2008: "Risk factors associated with suicide in current and former US military personnel":

- suicide risk was independently associated with male sex, mental disorders (depression, manic-depressive disorder), alcohol-related problems, but not with military-specific variables

- none of the deployment-related factors (combat experience, cumulative days deployed, or number of deployments) were associated with increased suicide risk

[Guest Derek L]

you suggest recruitment, selection and a lack of an ongoing mental fitness assessment of serving members is a contributor to... "mental breaks... mental health issues, within serving members". Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) position/statements do not appear to align with your personal opinion/assessment. Rather, the CAF provides numerous statements/documents that attest to ongoing regular mental health screening procedures, suicide prevention and awareness programs, along with multiple mental health focused assessments of members returning from deployment (immediately after return and longer-term assessment). I've not found anything that directly speaks to a mental health impact relative to recruitment screening/standards; rather, by indirect inference, one might surmise the following speaks to recruitment/selection not being a factor:

- (2013) Surgeon General report: "Suicide in the Canadian Forces 1995 to 2012": (caveat on small sample size highlighted)

- (2010) Canadian Forces Cancer and Mortality Study (CF personnel, both serving and released, who enrolled in the CF between 1972 and 2006):

To clarify, you’re alright with the current and recent past levels of mental illness within the Canadian Forces? IOW, it's frequency, in your view, has not increased above past institutional norms and current programs are more then enough to deal with current challenges?

[waldo]

To clarify, you’re alright with the current and recent past levels of mental illness within the Canadian Forces? IOW, it's frequency, in your view, has not increased above past institutional norms and current programs are more then enough to deal with current challenges?

the OP thread focus is on a mental health influence as may contribute to CAF member suicide. With your wording emphasis on, "mental break, mental health, mental fitness" references, are you saying you were not speaking to these references as contributors to a potential suicide outcome? Were you speaking to a suicide outcome, or not?