Purple Hearts for PTSD? Report from Congressional Research Service

[ChrisW]

The US Congressional Research Service recently published a report on the debate over awarding the Purple Heart for PTSD. This link takes you directly to the pdf.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42704.pdf

[W McSwiggan]

Not that anyone has asked but... I don't like it.

I am a combat veteran.

I do not have a Purple Heart and I do not want one. (Not to imply that I disrespect this award because I hold it in high regard).

I am a disabled veteran.

My disability is related to my combat experience and is not PTSD.

PTSD ruined my best friend's life following Vietnam.

I am a retiree of the US Army (28 years but who's counting).

I know of people (by their own admission) who have been coached as to what to say to the Veterans' Administration in order to be compensated for PTSD.

VA compensation for disabilities related to PTSD should suffice.

The Purple Heart should be sustained as an award for combat wounds.

If the Armed Forces begin awards for PTSD they will be (without necessary expertise in my opinion) making eligibility determinations for the VA - a really bad idea. As it is, the VA is subjuct to fraudulent claims for PTSD and this will not help.

Let the VA do its job to the best of its ability and where compensation is awarded, that is symbolic of a grateful nation.

We need not sully a proud decoration and its recipients with this proposal.

Two cents for what it is worth.

Edited September 15, 2012 by W McSwiggan

[Paul R]

I am against it as well, and for some of the reasons that the Col stated.

There are special benefits for those who are war wounded, and I can foresee a flood of those faking the condition in order to fraudulantly obtain the additional benefits that come with being award the Purple Heart(employment points and etc). The VA does take care of those who are disabled with PTSD, and I am glad to see that. PTSD is very real and can be a very debilitating condition, however, I do not agree with a Purple Heart being awarded for it.

[Paul C]

This is just another example of the US Congress sticking their nose where it does not belong. They spend more time doing what they should not be doing, rather then what they should be doing. Very, very few members of Congress have worn the uniform of America so what could they know. The entire issue of PTSD grew out of the Vietnam War. For anyone who wants to know the real story of PTSD from the Vietnam era you must read the book "Stolen Valor".

Edited September 18, 2012 by Paul C

[Obergefreiter]

Absolutly not. Purple Hearts should be awarded for wounds received in combat; nothing else. Otherwise you might as well start handing them out to anyone who ever got a nosebleed, or a broken finger, or VD.

[Paul R]

You can get them for field related illnesses that require hospitaliztion(although I do not know how many of them occur these days).

[Chris Boonzaier]

I think it should be for wounds recieved.

There is however one thing to take into account.

I read an interesting article that The new Generation (post 9/11) have issues that the older Generation never had to deal with. It has a lot to do with Modern Body Armour, Helmets etc.

Whereas an Older generation guy would have an explosion go off near him, would get some concussion/Shock and a shell splinter... go to hospital for a month or two then come back fresh and ready to fight.... the modern generation are sometimes next to 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 explosions over a period of months, suffer the concussion/Shock a number of times... but are saved "bleeding wounds" due to body armour... and as a result never leave the unit.

This means they will be a generation that suffers more brain and psychological damage than the older generation.

I dont know how to factor that into the equation, but it needs to be kept in the back of your head.