Congressional Public Law 95-26: Denying Benefits to Veterans

Ed Note: I met Rick Staggenborg at the Veterans For Peace National Convention in Portland, Oregon this past August. He was a panel member on a VA Benefits workshop being put on by Coffee Strong, a Veteran Owned, Pro G.I., Anti-war Veterans' advocacy and outreach  project located in Lakewood, Washington. Jan Ruhman had keyed me up on Rick, and asked me to get in touch with him. Rick had recently made a unsuccessful  run at the US Senate. He had also been a VA Psychiatrist and is well versed in the elusive diagnosis called by the medical community, PTSD. Here he addresses one of it's more debilitting manifestations; Bad Discharges. WH

THE “LEAVE SOME VETS BEHIND” LAW: A NATIONAL DISGRACE

In 1995, Congress codified as Public Law 95-126 the VA policy denying benefits to veterans who receive less than honorable discharges, including those who served in combat in Vietnam and subsequent wars of choice. These veterans can only receive services by going through a difficult, painful and often unsuccessful process requiring them to debase themselves by begging their former military Service to upgrade their discharge status. 
x
In the process, they have to relive their combat trauma and in some cases have to contact those with whom they served. This drags up horrific memories that they have struggled to suppress, often through drugs, alcohol and promiscuity. This is the reason they acted out through drunkenness, disobedience or desertion of their posts stateside after return from combat. I know this because it has been the case in every veteran I have met who falls under the provisions of this Catch-22 implemented by a group of chicken hawks who were too busy setting the country up for economic destruction to consider the consequences of their actions on our veterans.

The men and women affected by PL 95-126 volunteered or were compelled by our own government to serve the interests of the corporations who our elected representatives feel they need to serve to maintain their positions of power. After all, they reason, someone has to pay for the propaganda campaigns that confuse the general public, justifying unnecessary wars and the real reasons for them, as well as lining the pockets of the rich by subverting democracy worldwide in the name of America. Many of the members of Congress responsible for this outrage shamelessly lied to the young, patriotic men and women who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as their parents about the reasons they were sent to kill and die. 

Now that these service members have done their duty, many of those most in need of help from the VA have been casually discarded, as were the Vietnam veterans before them. The ordeal of seeking help causes flare-ups of PTSD symptoms and reminds these veterans of the fact that their government chose to dishonor them rather than treat the wounds of war and the economic devastation that these politicians themselves inflicted on these combat veterans. The same is true when any of the estimated 30% of female OEF vets are erroneously told that they are not entitled to VA services to treat the psychological damage from the devastating psychological trauma of being raped in the service.

x
These women are often among the worst affected by symptoms of PTSD. A high proportion of them were sexually abused in childhood but were functioning well enough to serve until being re-traumatized during their terms of service by the very men who were supposed to guard their backs. Almost to a woman, they were then ostracized by their peers, often even if they chose not to report the crime. This has led to a gross underestimate of the actual incidence of this form of trauma, which is magnified by the abuse and neglect that followed from their command, in the name of “maintaining unit cohesion.”

I suspect that most veterans falling under PL 95-126 choose not to engage in this fight, knowing that even if they succeed in obtaining an upgrade of their discharge, they then have to argue that they suffer “mental illness” as a result of their service. PTSD is not a mental illness, leaving the VA to decide whether or not to resort to semantic gymnastics in order to provide the services that most of us in the VA dedicate our professional lives to providing. What they do not know if they choose to engage in this long battle is that they only stand a 50% chance of success at each step, according to unofficial sources with whom I have consulted.

What is worse, the law does not even have a provision to allow the VA to conduct evaluations of those who win the lottery in the first step. They are required to somehow obtain independent psychiatric evaluations in order to make their case. Fortunately or unfortunately, those who need the help most are generally impoverished by their circumstances, so they could get these exams through programs set up for the poor, if they are lucky enough to realize that such services are often available in the community. Because these individuals most often have divorced themselves from society in their shame, anger and despair, I suspect that few even try to navigate the labyrinth of steps required to obtain services, if they are lucky enough to succeed.

This crime against the youth of our nation, many now having grown up and producing a new generation of alienated and disaffected youth, is unacceptable. The VA may play a role because of the communication problems endemic in such a large organization, but the real fault lies with our complacent Congress. All of us who want to truly honor our veterans must demand that the members of the Veterans Committee in the Senate act at once to atone for this sin against our nation. Please call Senator Webb, Senator Tester or other members of the Veteran Affairs Committee at 866-220-0044 and demand action. I do not believe that either of these diligent and hardworking senators is aware of the problem, despite my attempts at asking for help through their aides.

When I spoke to Phillip Brady, Veteran Affairs aide to Senator Webb, he made inquiries, speaking to the DOD and VA about the problem. As the only office in either organization authorized to speak to Congress is presumably the office of public affairs, both predictably denied that it was a problem. If you are as outraged at this whitewash, please let these Senator Webb in particular know.  As a decorated Vietnam veteran and father of an Iraq war veteran, he may be willing to dig deeper and speak to someone more appropriate at the VA Central Office.  I suggested to Phillip that he start with the then-VA director of Mental Health Services, Dr Ira Katz. Dr Katz was a dedicated public servant who has been unfairly maligned by the media in the past but who has privately expressed his concern about this law as well.

Please contact every veteran group and veteran advocacy group that you can locate.   Let them know that you share my anger at this continuing mistreatment of combat veterans and sexually abused female veterans who only wanted to serve their country while in fact being used as tools by a cynical, cowardly Congress to serve the interests of their corporate Puppetmasters. While you are at it, Let them know that the men and women who joined the military  from other countries are our brothers and sisters and that we will not stand by while they are deported because of problems stemming from PTSD.

Rick Staggenborg, MD

Captain, USA (Ret)
Former VA Psychiatrist, North Bend, OR

Some Additional Research, Information, and Resources:

"Does it Hurt on the Inside? Post Vietnam Syndrome". The First Casualty Vol 2, Number 1. VVAW. Chicago (1972)

http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=319&hilite=Post+Vietnam+Syndrome

Seiberling, John. "Secret Discharge Codes". Winter Soldier, Vol 4 Number 4. VVAW. Chicago (1974)

http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=1158

Ford, Diane. "Are We Still missing The Point". The Veteran, Vol 37, Number 1. VVAW. Chicago (2007)

http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=724&hilite=

Overview of Discharge Upgrading re DOD 

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fctveteranslegal.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F04%2FCh-1.pdf

What You should Know About How to Upgrade Your Military Discharge re US Army Trial Defense Service

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.monterey.army.mil%2Flegal%2Ftrial_defense%2Fhow_to_upgrade_your_discharge.pdf

Swords To Plowshares Veterans Advocacy

https://sites.google.com/a/stp-sf.org/swords-team/

Vietnam Veterans Against The War: Veteran Resources and Military Counseling Service

http://www.vvaw.org/resources/


www.VetSpeak.org

Four Dead In Ohio...Kent State - May 4th, 1970...

We Kill Our Own
The 40th Anniversary of the Kent State Massacre

By Chuck Palazzo, Danang, VN

Agent Orange & Vietnam Affairs Editor

www.VetSpeak.org

On May 4, 1970, at Kent State University, in the city of Kent, Ohio, members of the Ohio National Guard fired 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis. These were unarmed college students who were exercising their constitutional rights to speak their mind, to demonstrate peacefully, and to protest openly against the then recent incursion by US combat forces into Cambodia.


Richard Nixon had been elected President in 1968. He promised to end the Vietnam War. Instead of doing so, he was part of the cover-up of the My Lai massacre and freed Lt. Calley, stating that Calley had “served enough time.” The premeditated murder of over 500 unarmed civilians, many of whom were elderly, women and children was hushed up by our government – the murderer himself freed after serving only 1 day at the Ft. Leavenworth prison and transferred to serve house arrest upon orders given by Nixon.


On December 1st, 1969, the Selective Service of the US held a lottery to determine the order of draft into the Army for the Vietnam War. This was the first draft lottery instituted since World War II.


On Thursday, April 30th, 1970, President Nixon announced the attack into Cambodia using the justification of “a necessary response to North Vietnamese aggression”. A promise to end the Vietnam War? A campaign promise that was yet another lie committed by this pathological lying and criminal US President. Just one of many that eventually forced Nixon to resign, the only United States President to do so, after impeachment hearings had commenced in 1974.


On Friday, May 1st, 1970, a peaceful demonstration with about 500 students was held at Kent State. The Cambodian Incursion, the draft lottery, the continued escalation of the Vietnam War – all issues being protested against. The crowd dispersed at 1 PM to attend classes, but not until another rally was planned for May 4th. As peaceful, symbolic protests continued, one student burned a copy of the US Constitution. Another burned his draft card.


During the evening of May 1st, 1970, trouble occurred around midnight as people left a bar and began throwing beer bottles at cars and broke downtown store fronts in Kent. This crowd was made up of several outsiders and a handful of students – all of whom were indeed angered by the escalation of the war. The police intervened and they restored order.


On Saturday, May 2nd, 1970, the Mayor of Kent declared a state of emergency and asked the Ohio Governor to send the National Guard to Kent to “help maintain order”. The National Guard arrived in town that evening to find a fire had been started by an arsonist at an unoccupied and scheduled to be demolished building. The National Guard made numerous arrests and used tear gas as a large demonstration occurred at the Kent State campus and near to that same building.


On Sunday, May 3rd, 1970, Ohio Governor Rhodes called the protestors un-American and referred to them as revolutionaries set on destroying higher education in Ohio. "They're worse than the brown shirts and the communist element and also the night riders and the vigilantes," Rhodes said. "They're the worst type of people that we harbor in America. I think that we're up against the strongest, well-trained, militant, revolutionary group that has ever assembled in America." Rhodes can be heard in the recording of his speech yelling and pounding his fists on the desk. These were students exercising their right to protest and to be heard. Vigilantes? More of the paranoia exhibited by our government and its leaders.  During the day some students came into downtown Kent to help with cleanup efforts after the rioting, which met with mixed reactions from local businessmen. Kent’s Mayor Satrom, under pressure from frightened citizens, ordered a curfew until further notice.


Around 8:00 p.m., another rally was held on the campus Commons. By 8:45 p.m. the Guardsmen used tear gas to disperse the crowd, and the students reassembled at the intersection of Lincoln and Main Streets, holding a sit-in in the hopes of gaining a meeting with Mayor Satrom and Kent State President White. At 11:00 p.m., the Guard announced that a curfew had gone into effect and began forcing the students back to their dorms. A few students were bayoneted by Guardsmen.


On Monday, May 4, a protest was scheduled to be held at noon, as had been planned three days earlier. University officials attempted to ban the gathering, handing out 12,000 leaflets stating that the event was canceled. Despite this, an estimated 2,000 people gathered on the university's Commons, near Taylor Hall. The protest began with the ringing of the campus's iron Victory Bell (which had historically been used to signal victories in football games) to mark the beginning of the rally, and the first protester began to speak.


Fearing that the situation might escalate into another violent protest, Companies A and C, 1/145th Infantry and Troop G of the 2/107th Armored Cavalry, Ohio Army National Guard (ARNG), the units on the campus grounds, attempted to disperse the students.

Just before noon, the Guard returned and again ordered the crowd to disperse. When most of the crowd refused, the Guard used tear gas. Because of wind, the tear gas had little effect in dispersing the crowd, and some protestors launched a volley of rocks toward the Guard's line, too distant to have any effect, to chants of "Pigs off campus!" The students lobbed the tear gas canisters back at the National Guardsmen, who wore gas masks.


When it was obvious the crowd was not going to disperse, a group of 77 National Guard troops from A Company and Troop G, with bayonets fixed on their weapons, began to advance upon the hundreds of protesters. As the guardsmen advanced, the protesters retreated. The guardsmen pursued the protesters and the protestors showed signs of retreat, as they waited motionless for the end of the protest. Here they remained for about ten minutes. During this time, the bulk of the students congregated off to the left and front of the guardsmen. Others were scattered between Taylor Hall and the Prentice Hall parking lot, while still others – perhaps 35 or 40 – were standing in the parking lot, or dispersing through the lot as they had been previously ordered.


The guardsmen generally faced the parking lot which was about 100 yards away. At one point, some of the guardsmen knelt and aimed their weapons toward the parking lot, then stood up again. For a few moments, several guardsmen formed a loose huddle and appeared to be talking to one another. The guardsmen appeared to be unclear as to what to do next. They had cleared the protesters from the Commons area, and many students had left, but many stayed. At the end of about ten minutes, the guardsmen began to retrace their steps back up the hill toward the Commons area.


At this point, at 12:24 p.m., a number of guardsmen at the top of the hill abruptly turned and fired their M1 Garand rifles at the students. In all, 29 of the 77 guardsmen claimed to have fired their weapons, using a final total of 67 bullets. The shooting was determined to have lasted only 13 seconds, although a New York Times reporter stated that "it appeared to go on, as a solid volley, for perhaps a full minute or a little longer." The question of why the shots were fired remains widely debated.


Many guardsmen later testified that they were in fear for their lives, which was questioned partly because of the distance between them and the students killed or wounded. Time magazine later concluded that "triggers were not pulled accidentally at Kent State". The President's Commission on Campus Unrest avoided probing the question regarding why the shootings happened. Instead, it harshly criticized both the protesters and the Guardsmen, but it concluded that "the indiscriminate firing of rifles into a crowd of students and the deaths that followed were unnecessary, unwarranted, and inexcusable."


The shootings killed four students and wounded nine. Two of the four students killed, Allison Krause and Jeffrey Miller, had participated in the protest, and the other two, Sandra Scheuer and William Knox Schroeder, had been walking from one class to the next at the time of their deaths. Schroeder was also a member of the campus ROTC chapter. Of those wounded, none was closer than 71 feet to the guardsmen. Of those killed, the nearest (Miller) was 265 feet away, and their average distance from the guardsmen was 345 feet.


This week, we continue to seek the truth of exactly what happened at Kent State. Noted filmmaker and activist, Michael Moore will be broadcasting live, via his website, the Kent State Truth Tribunal which started yesterday in Kent, Ohio.


http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/04/30-6


http://www.michaelmoore.com/


Another very sad chapter in American History. No matter what the tribunal uncovers, absolutely nothing will bring back the students who were killed. America and its National Guard murdered innocent students that day in 1970. American citizens who were merely exercising their constitutional rights to express their concerns regarding our involvement and escalation of the Vietnam War.


References:
1. Wikipedia
2. CommonDreams.org
3. Michael Moore


www.VetSpeak.org