Your lasts two posts in this thread sort of upset me more than posts on this board usually do. Ever do, actually, I rarely remember them. Not to become real-life or anything, but for one second - For what it is worth, I am really sorry your father had poor experiences at VAs. I am in no position to speak for anything or anyone other than myself, but just for me, as someone who works at a VA, I really wish it was not the case. I also wish it were some aberration. But I am afraid that much of the negative rap on the VA was not created out of thin air. Things, systematically, appear to be improving markedly this decade, but this decade is a short amount of time. The best I can do, I think, with a few hours to let it sit, is say I will add your dad to my mental list of veterans who deserved better than they got, and whose unsatisfactory experience should be remembered for future generations of vets - and for his own generation of vets, actually (one thing that gets lost right now is the vietnam-era vets, for instance - no one need give up on them just yet...) I thank him for his service, and will be glad when people can say "my dad swears by the VA" or "he really got outstanding care there."
WashPost editorial said it also received hundreds of complaints regarding the VA hospitals. Looks like they opened a can of worms.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/05/AR2007030501308.html Testimony at Walter Reed It's good that the generals are apologizing, but the Army has a long way to go. Tuesday, March 6, 2007; Page A18 IN A DIM auditorium at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center yesterday, Maj. Gen. George W. Weightman, the recently ousted commander of the facility, turned and apologized directly to the maimed soldiers and their families who had assembled for a House subcommittee hearing. Once during the hearing, Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley, Army surgeon general and former Walter Reed commander, tried to frame the situation as a failure of lower-ranking personnel and characterized an article in The Post as "yellow journalism." Gen. Kiley has reason to be defensive -- he is arguably more to blame for the miserable outpatient conditions described in a recent Post series than is Gen. Weightman but still serves as the Army's top doctor. Nevertheless, he, too, apologized, and he acknowledged that he is ultimately responsible for outpatient facilities. And Gen. Kiley, along with Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army's vice chief of staff, and Maj. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker, the new head of Walter Reed, assured the subcommittee that thorough reviews of outpatient facilities will lead to significant reform. Also encouraging was Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates's swift firing of Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey on Friday after Harvey nonsensically removed Gen. Weightman from his position and placed Gen. Kiley temporarily in charge. Mr. Gates seems to be holding upper tiers of Army management to account. Being sorry is only the first step, however. Since the series was published, Post reporters have received hundreds of accounts of appalling conditions and management practices at both Army outpatient facilities and Department of Veterans Affairs facilities across the country. One mother complained that a room assigned to her son, who had an open wound, was infested with fruit flies and contained overflowing trash and a syringe. A soldier said that wounded veterans had to sign waivers attesting that they understood that their living conditions were below minimum governmental standards. Most disturbing are reports of Army medical review boards trying to pay wounded soldiers as little as possible in disability benefits, sometimes adjudicating veterans' claims while they were heavily medicated and unable to argue their cases effectively. Fixing veterans' outpatient care will take a lot more than putting a new roof on Walter Reed's Building 18. It means revamping buildings and bureaucracies across the country. The generals who testified yesterday made an excellent point: More injured soldiers survive now than ever before because of the quality of the Army's inpatient medicine, and the nature of their physical and psychological wounds often makes those injuries difficult to diagnose and treat. Since American action began in Afghanistan, this country has taken on a large responsibility to care for its wounded service members, for life if needed. It may be expensive, but these men and women deserve clean accommodations and straightforward assistance -- not adversity -- from administrators. If the accounts The Post has received over the past couple of weeks are true, then the Army and Veterans Affairs are both far from achieving that goal.
CB thanks for the very kind post. In no way should you feel guilty or responsible for what my father, or any vet for that matter, has gone through. I think at times I get more upset or angry than my father does. He is from that generation that doesn't question authority and is grateful for the military and what they have done for him. He is proud of his 25 years of service and is a military man through and through. He would never complain about his circumstance. But it upsets me to see a man who is only 68 but has the physical body of an 80 year old. The VA now also cares for both of my parents these days as they are both retired and rely on VA for their main health care. Even though they have Medicare and some private coverage they use the VA for most of their coverage. It is what it is… But if it makes you feel any better, I haven't heard my parents complain about the VA for a number of years now. Most of it came in the 70s and 80s when he was dealing with the wounds he received during his two tours.
I instantly thought of this thread, and CBFC, when I saw this headline... Army Surgeon General Pushed to Retire By Josh White Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, March 12, 2007; 4:14 PM Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley, the Army's surgeon general, was pushed to step down after weeks of public criticism over his handling of the Walter Reed scandal and other health care problems facing veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense officials said today. Kiley on Sunday submitted a request to retire early after Pete Geren, the acting secretary of the Army, sought his removal from the Army's top medical post. Geren assumed his current Pentagon position last week, and removing Kiley was his first major move. Kiley had faced intense scrutiny during hearings on Capitol Hill during the past two weeks, when numerous members of Congress asked him directly if he should resign either because he failed to notice horrid living conditions and a tangled bureaucracy at Walter Reed or because he failed to fix them. Kiley had said he wanted to stay on the job and lead the Army's medical community through systemic change, but he also acknowledged that he was in a tenuous position. In the spotlight since a series of Washington Post stories last month detailed problems with Army care for outpatient veterans at Walter Reed, Kiley submitted his retirement request on Sunday, according to an Army news release. Kiley is departing his post as the Army's top doctor about 2 1/2 years into a standard four-year team. Most Army surgeon generals retire as three-star generals after four years. An Army official said today that Kiley likely will have to retire as a two-star major general -- instead of as a three-star lieutenant general -- because he has not served a full three years in his current grade. "I submitted my retirement because I think it is in the best interest of the Army," Kiley said in a statement released this afternoon, adding that he wants the Army to focus on the way ahead, not the mistakes of the past. "We are an Army Medical Department at war, supporting an Army at war. It shouldn't be and it isn't about one doctor." Kiley is the third career casualty of the Walter Reed scandal. The most recent commander at Walter Reed, Maj. Gen. George W. Weightman, was relieved of command two weeks ago, and Francis J. Harvey was forced to resign as secretary of the Army days later. Army officials initially downplayed reports of rodent infestation, mold and tragic bureaucratic delays that were frustrating soldiers at Walter Reed, but they later sounded a more contrite and concerned note as administration officials -- including President Bush -- focused attention on the problems. The Army has appointed Kiley's deputy, Maj. Gen. Gale S. Pollock, as the acting surgeon general while an advisory board is formed to evaluate candidates for Kiley's replacement. Army officials said today that the board is likely to meet for the first time in April and will then choose an officer from within the Army Medical Command. President Bush would then have to approve the officer, and the Senate would hold confirmation hearings. Geren, the acting Army secretary, said the Army will move quickly to appoint a new surgeon general, citing the position's importance in implementing a new Army plan to address shortcomings in veterans' care across the country. Kiley, who specialized in obstetrics and gynecology, had a diverse career that began in 1976. He deployed to Saudi Arabia as a hospital commander during the first Gulf War, and during fighting in the Balkans he commanded the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, the largest military medical post outside the United States. Kiley also commanded Walter Reed from 2002 to 2004, a contentious issue during the past few weeks because of allegations that he was alerted to problems there and was indifferent to them. Some colleagues have described Kiley as a dogged and aggressive leader, while others have said he has been overly career-minded and focused on personal success. He has said in congressional testimony that he likes to trust his subordinates and steps in when asked; members of Congress criticized his lack of awareness of problems at Walter Reed and suggested that as commander -- and living across the street -- he should have been more involved with the operation. Kiley has been involved in discussions about how to fix problems throughout the Army's health care system and had been working with Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army's vice chief of staff, on how to proceed. Kiley and Pollock were involved in such meetings at the Pentagon as recently as Friday. "It has been my honor and my privilege to serve this nation and her soldiers for over 30 years," Kiley said in a statement. "And I could not be prouder of the incredible Americans in the Army Medical Command who care for the warriors who have volunteered and sacrificed so much to defend our country and our way of life. I was blessed to have walked among them." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/12/AR2007031200544.html D&D. Waiting for the Other Shoe to Drop.
Yeah, obviouly this has been big news for me and our program today; from my perspective it is too bad, we seem to be losing an effective and thoughtful leader in pushing for better care for the vets, particularly PTSD. But it comes with the terrirory. When you are overseeing something as huge as the Army medical facilities, you are accountable for its transgressions. He might not have handled it perfectly PR-wise, but I dont think that is the point. Hopefully this will forward visionary and effecive care for the vets, that is what is important. Worst case is that the system becomes so risk-averse and PR conscious that no one with any courage or vision would take the job. It is going to be a tough, tough job. We'll see.
I hope the story, and the aftermath, leads to positive change for our veterans and the care they receive. I know that there are many, many hard working people in a system that has been underfunded for decades, and during the control of Congress and the White House by both Republicans and Democrats. How the decision can be made to fund yet another carrier for the Navy, at a cost of $4.5 billion dollars, and that's just for the carrier, and not fund properly the care of those who given their country so much, is beyond understanding. That's just an example of mad priorities. Endless tax cuts during a war is, if anything, even more irresponsible. edit: I changed the cost of a Nimitz class carrier. The figure I first used is probably the cost of a carrier battle group and a number I tried to call from memory. edit: Yes, another edit. I knew I didn't pull the $13 billion dollar figure out of my hat. It's for the next carrier class, the Gerald R. Ford class, for which the Ford will run $13 billion-plus. http://www.answers.com/topic/gerald-r-ford-class-aircraft-carrier D&D. Past Time to Pay for Care Veterans Deserve.
I think that has to do with lobbying. Which one do you think has the deeper pocket? The Military Industrial Complex? Or the Vets?
this is an interesting take from a vietnam vet. he's a monthly guest on the radio program texas overnight, these are just a couple segments from today's (3/14) show. in the 4th clip, they discuss walter reed hospital and the VA. it's quite powerful, these are the same stories i've heard from guys in their 50s that served, and my friends in their 20s. basso may or may not like some of what's said; i gotta admit, i was surprised to hear it myself. 1) [segment 3] 5:10 http://download.yousendit.com/7E24022D2A4E1942 2) [segment 4] 6:41 http://download.yousendit.com/01169D975ECDE0DB 3) [segment 5] 7:35 http://download.yousendit.com/01CD70860108BD15 4) [segment 6] 10:28 http://download.yousendit.com/0C05319A7282D390 i must apologize for the low quality (hey, it's AM radio), if anyone has suggestions for a better way to capture audio i'd appreciate it... also, what program can i use to merge these all in to 1 file rather than having them separate files and just using a playlist?
ok folks as of now, which country produce the deadliest,most efficient intelligently trained military power that can conquer a country without remorse. United States, China,Japan,Israel,United Kingdom,Russia or India. Which one of these countries can cause major destruction when it comes to the battlefield?
Weapons manufactures spend huge amounts of money on lobbying congressmen, what sort of lobby does the VA have? And the money goes where?
The VFW and DAV are both pretty big lobbying groups. I'm sure that protecting the VA is a pretty big function of theirs.
Hard to say on the remorse issue, but outside of that, the United States, and it isn't even close. We now return you to your regularly scheduled topic.
