Posted on Dec 10, 2017
CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana
40.5K
583
330
73
73
0
Fighting against his poor and negligent leadership, on each and every step of his assignment, in almost a decade and a half of active service, an officer was errantly discharged to cover-up the mistakes of his leadership, clear thru to GOs. Fighting the system; this officer was diagnosed with PTSD. Was this diagnosis another cover-up or can PTSD develop in peacetime?
Avatar feed
Responses: 112
SGM Erik Marquez
22
22
0
The problem many have with stories like this, is they understand the shear number of disinterested parties that have nothing to gain and every thing to loose in such a purported wide spread collusion, it seems impossible to see it as real..Add to that, most times, like here we have but one side of the story, and third party told at that.
So is such a story possible? Yes, as anything is possible, its just most things are unlikely.

Are some susceptible to Post traumatic Stress disorder from non combat trauma? Yes
Has a person, or group gone to great lengths to cover up or discredit someone? Absolutely, and it almost always comes crashing down, because of my very first point. " shear number of disinterested parties that have nothing to gain and every thing to loose in such a purported wide spread collusion"
Eventually, the lie comes apart when someone, just one is no longer willing to further the lie, not even to ignore it.
There is no such thing as a secret..Only a truth that has not yet been told. The only perfect secret is when it is known only to one, and that one person dies having never told, written, emailed, phone called another.

Do people who jump behind a single, third party story often find them selfs later wishing they had not, when "The Rest Of The Story" comes out? Yes, all too often.

With the current administration there is no better time to have your comrade (what an interesting choice of terms) to come forward and seek justice. If it is as you say "the evidence proves that all the information provided by the service was totally false and that the service had eliminated my comrade to cover-up the mistakes within."
It should be a slam dunk case, the media will eat it up, a public trial will no doubt agree totally with your comrades evidence that proves that all the information provided by the service was totally false and that the service had eliminated my comrade to cover-up the mistakes. That is after what happens when there is such evidence.
Being vindicated will likely go a long way in your comrades recovery,,or at least certainly cant hurt I would think.. If it is the false allegations that caused the PTSD, having those allegations proven false by the "totally false" information your comrade now has evidence of...
(22)
Comment
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
SGM Erik Marquez
>1 y
SFC(P) (Join to see) - "How do you justify the unit spending the money and time to train a Medically Non Deployable (MND) Soldier"
You misunderstand the comment.. Justify, as in provide a regulation cite that supports (justifies) Medically Non Deployable Service members should continue to participate in Annual Training, or field IDTs.

As for "2. What kind of SGM puts the burden of proof on a whistleblower, instead of looking up the information and SUPPORTING the fight, themselves?"
The kind that has been down this road many times and 99% of the time found the SM making the complaint is not founded in their complaint for many reasons, mostly driven by their own personal bias and second, because it is the responsibility of the person making a statement and a discussion to provide the support (info, documentation, ect) IOW justify the points made in their statement.

So, please provide the REG and a cite from that reg that supports your position. That is what I asked.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC(P) Chief Public Affairs NCO
SFC(P) (Join to see)
>1 y
SGM Erik Marquez "Train" is a broad word, and commanders have a responsibility to see their Soldiers in general, but including MND's, are tasked IAW at least the following Army regulations..
AR 40-501 paras 5-14b.,d.,f.; 7-3e(2), (3); 7-12a.
AR 600-20 paras 1-5c.(4)(c); (d)4; d.

That was about all I could find in the time I allotted. Now that regs back me up, does that mean I can count on your support? Or is this the part where you let me know you knew all along, and this was for my benefit?

I have concerns in your treatment of Soldiers if you've done or allowed to be done, the "bullying" (AR 600-20 para 4-19) behaviors I described being done to me by now two separate commands, none of which adhere to the Army Values.

Most Soldiers won't know or possibly haven't been trained, to find the correct regulations to describe the 'wrongs' they may be suffering, and as senior leaders, it's our duty to listen to Soldiers, and with our breadth of experience, determine what actions are necessary to help, train, or otherwise guide Soldiers, in general.

My fight was never to get out of duty, I was forced to fight to be allowed to perform my duty, even when and after, my MND status in no way prevented any aspect of my service. Any Soldier anywhere, should see the 'wrong' in that.. and you demand proof.. Consider that for a moment.

MG Haskins, abused his authority and my battalion commander used the unlawful order, to stop my career progression where I'd already accepted an offered E-8 position, and was later demoted.. The levels of 'wrong' objectively viewed, by any ethical commander, would've been corrected. In this case, the incoming commander rescinded the unlawful order, and still allows the 'wrong' to continue, and so far, hasn't provided me the means to take my complaint further up the chain for investigation and set aside of an Article 15 that never should've happened.

That's all a small piece of what they got up to later, but making false statements to DoD CAF is one that'll take the matter out of their corrupt Chains of Command.. eventually.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
SGM Erik Marquez
>1 y
SFC(P) (Join to see) - "Now that regs back me up,"
Do they? you cited nothing that states MND will be included in AT or excluded.
Further Id wonder the further categorization of non-deployable for a sub-group that should not attend training would be a likely thing?
I spent 28 years in the active-duty Army, I have little experience in general of NG regulations, policies, ect. So I do not have a definitive answer, I was hoping you had done your due diligence and had a regulation cite that supported your position. Something like "SM who are medically nondeployable but not yet determined if separation is imminent or likely shall be required to attend all scheduled training" or "Commanders shall determine if SM in MND status will attend unit training"
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC(P) Chief Public Affairs NCO
SFC(P) (Join to see)
>1 y
SGM Erik Marquez -
If you want a 'definitive answer', you'd need to actually read the cited regs. I did the leg work for you.
"Applicability" of cited regs is AD as well.
I'll break it down.. If you're in an 'active' status, you're expected to perform duty unless legitimately precluded for some reason, MND's are based on a Dr's direction and a treatment plan is derived from the prognosis.. Contractually, you're going to be tasked and perform some duty as prescribed by the commander. If a Soldier is 'broken', there's regs to cover courses of action to get them RTD within specific amounts of time, if it takes more than a year, they're med-boarded out.
A commander issuing a blanket denial without medical reason, violates the regs and completely reverses the entire concept of both the commanders duty, and the contractual duty of Soldiers in general.. Further, by denying those AD opportunities the commander also deprives Soldiers access to medical treatment they may be entitled to. There's a reason the incoming commander 'fixed' it.. That recognition of the unlawful nature of that order, would drive an ethical commander to correct the 'wrongs' that were causally linked to it..

Except in the CA Army National Guard.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC (Other / Not listed)
20
20
0
Yes, PTSD is well documented outside of combat situations. It is also well documented as a non-permanent disorder.
(20)
Comment
(0)
AN Eric Lewis
AN Eric Lewis
6 y
SFC (Join to see) - Please cite your, "modern science disagrees," sources. I'm betting there are just as many sources who disagree with your sources. It is a very controversial issue. I asked some psychologists about it and they said it is one of the most contested issues in modern psychology.
(0)
Reply
(0)
AN Eric Lewis
AN Eric Lewis
6 y
SFC (Join to see) - Resorting to bullying or degrading tactics in a conversation doesn't prove your point to be right. In this case, it actually brings doubt to the premise you are supporting by making you appear less intelligent, though we know from your previous statements that you are not. I bring you this free bit of advice from a social media communications class I used to teach to my peers. No one appreciates the bullying comments.
(0)
Reply
(0)
AN Eric Lewis
AN Eric Lewis
6 y
SPC Edwin Savoy - God bless you, too, Mr. Savoy. If it wasn't for Jesus, I wouldn't be here now and, as you so well put it, we're all just waiting on our final orders. :-)
(0)
Reply
(0)
SP5 Michael Cates
SP5 Michael Cates
6 y
I second Lewis!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CW5 Ivan Murdock
14
14
0
PTSD is overdiagnosed - just like ADD ADHD we have allowed our medical field to look at the causes and fail to teach coping mechanisms, look at the current events another young shooter filled with drugs. It is a culture of big pharma in the name of helping us giving these drugs and a culture of acceptance. We have to make sure that you fill the narrative that everyone has PTSD, now it is almost a stigma for our returning soldiers. I served 35 years and saw lots of combat. With that lots of things that just part of the job. I currently am a full-time student getting another Grad degree, I talk to young soldiers all the time on campus, they are in school telling me about their rating and their benefits. I almost always have to ask what caused it, but it does lose some of its shine when I hear "we had a mortarman who had a tube blow up, so every time I fired a mortar I kept waiting for it to blow up" He now is receiving PTSD as a disability. He never saw it, and it never happened to him. There is a point where it would be a temporary issue, but we damage these young men and women by crippling them for a lifetime. There are real cases and they should be given EVERY treatment available but they are clouded by the large numbers of those who have learned the system and have a financial reason to simply never get better. Maybe temporary adjustments and re-evaluations would be part of a system to help our veterans, again care vs. a check. Combat isn't necessary at all, 1st responders, hospital workers, and many others are subjected to trauma. But we can cripple our soldiers by letting this be used for a lifetime. The care is available for a lifetime, but if they would take away the disability rating for most cases after an adjustment period they would empower these young heroes more often than not. I will share, that I do know what PTSD is, my father was a WW2 POW and I saw a man at almost 70 years old that you still couldn't touch when he was asleep, he masked it with booze for a decade and 2 divorces. When he finally met my mom and time had passed he was able to live the rest of his life normally. I never saw the effects but his ability to tell the stories and recover was inspiring. Personally, I had a daughter killed in a car accident, I was at the scene that night and identified her and my daughter in law. I see her in my mind almost every day in the back of the ambulance but we have to learn to cope. I was offered things to help (drugs) and I chose running and cycling to get myself where I could sleep. We need to engage and help our young soldiers, but we need to be honest too, we have allowed our political correctness in our society stop us from a little tough love. I liked to use the "Buck" example from the Band of Brothers mini-series. After diagnosed with combat fatigue he was treated and sent back, he returned after WW2 to prosecute the Robert Kennedy murderer and served on the California Court of Appeals as a judge.
(14)
Comment
(0)
CW5 Ivan Murdock
CW5 Ivan Murdock
>1 y
CPT Lawrence Cable - They don't wait anymore, or during the height of OIF/OEF - I deployed dozens of times and conducted combat missions hours before getting on a plane to return home more than once.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
CPT Lawrence Cable
>1 y
CW5 Ivan Murdock - They haven't since Vietnam. There is more than a little evidence that the time to "decompress" before entering back into the civilian world was a big part of reducing the effects of PTSD. I know that the Marine were trying a program that brought a unit back and segregated them for some time period before releasing them back to the civilian world. Haven't seen any real critique of that program and I don't know if they still follow it.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SFC Robert Wheeler
SFC Robert Wheeler
>1 y
CW5 Ivan Murdock - Obviously you have read the DSM V. You should know this stuff. You came off in your initial post with a real attitude against some PTSD survivors. Hence my reference to your channeling Patton. As for the x/y exercise, it is straight peer accepted and practiced doctrine. What would I know, I was only a Behavioral Science NCO for twenty years. Hooah?
(0)
Reply
(0)
CW5 Ivan Murdock
CW5 Ivan Murdock
>1 y
Your time doesn't equate to a resume - Your reference to Patton, again wasn't a compliment and I doubt you know the context of the event or him outside a 2-minute youtube video. I always love the smarter than someone's opinion - key phrases like, "you should know this stuff", "what would I know". So you have been in combat? - As the Behavioral science NCO, you treated patients? My comments aren't about anyone with PTSD - my comments are about the over-diagnosis because we throw money at it we begin to have people who never had a trauma make the claims. Not sure why you want to reengage.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close