Experts say U.S. soldiers likely will suffer emotional trauma

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Experts say U.S. soldiers likely will suffer emotional trauma

Associated Press

The beefy Army drill sergeant has been a soldier since he was a teenager. Now 35, he was eager to go to war with the Third Infantry Division and do for real what he had been teaching recruits. But after at least five confirmed kills, he discovered combat was different than he had expected.

"I didn't think it would be like this, killing people," Staff Sgt. Thomas Slago reflected, not long after squeezing the trigger on his assault rifle to stop an approaching Iraqi guer rilla, then watching the gruesome result through his scope.

"He exploded like a watermelon," Slago said.

In numbers not seen since the Vietnam War, trauma ex perts say, soldiers soon will return home from battle forever changed by what they've seen and done.

War in Iraq has meant machine-gunning guerrillas in tent on suicide charges. It has meant gunplay in neighborhoods, building corridors and desert bunkers.

Marine Cpl. Clint Begley of Shreveport, La., approached a bunker thinking, "I don't know if there are three or 30 in there. Oh my God, am I going to have to shoot that guy?"

He did. So did his platoon mate in the 15th Marine Expe di tionary Unit, Cpl. Juan B. Elenes, 21, of Portland, Ore. In another bunker, Elenes shot off the top of an attacker's head. Then a second man. "I didn't want to get shot, so I shot him first," Elenes explained.

Afterward, he said, "OK, I'm done. I'm ready to go back to Kuwait now."

The presence of Iraqi villagers and irregulars in civilian disguises added to the stress and confusion.

"I didn't expect the whole civilian thing," said Lance Cpl. Jack Self, never taking his finger off the trigger of his grenade launcher. He watched a woman tugging two heavily laden donkeys away from a stone house that could provide cover to snipers. He had blasted other buildings like it and found bodies in the rubble.

"Part of me wants to kill everything I see. You just can't trust anybody," he said. "I hope there's nobody in that building when I destroy it."

Veterans centers are posting trauma advice on Web sites for both soldiers and their families. They are expanding treat ment programs for that fraction of soldiers who need special help.

"There will be a lot of work to do when the men and women come back from Iraq," said psychiatrist Matthew J. Friedman, executive director of the National Center for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and a researcher at Dartmouth College. "We've had killing and we've had death and injuries. We've had civilians killed. There was a fragging."

How many soldiers will require mental health treatment? Past conflicts offer clues.

A nationwide, long-term study of Vietnam veterans — now entering its third phase — concluded that one-third of combat soldiers returned emotionally wounded. After the 1991 Persian Gulf War, about 10 percent of the troops suffered distress from a conflict that was much briefer and less intense.

Given the confusing, urban ambush-style fighting in this Iraq campaign, experts predict trauma levels closer to Vietnam's.

Counselors say most soldiers reconcile disturbing memories with the support of family and veterans' groups. Reflections on good deeds — rescuing wounded comrades, liberating an op pressed nation, distributing hu manitarian aid — can help protect soldiers' fragile psyches.

But, psychologists agree, a portion of combatants will develop disabling psychiatric illnesses as episodes of fear and violence imprint on their memories, triggering biological and chemical changes that change how their brain cells function.

Fifteen years after being discharged, the post-Vietnam study shows, 15 percent of veterans still suffered from PTSD, the most serious of trauma reactions.

Former West Point psychologist Dave Grossman said soldiers must be trained intensively to overcome the natural reluctance to kill other people.

"When faced with a living, breathing opponent, a significant majority of soldiers revert to a posturing mode in which they fire over their enemy's heads," Grossman, a retired lieutenant colonel and former Army Ranger, wrote in his book, "On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society."

Traumatized soldiers relive their horrors through flashbacks and nightmares, often followed by depression or fury.

One Vietnam vet told Boston psychiatrist Jonathan Shay: "I really haven't slept in 20 years. I'm always watching the door, the window. I get up at least five times to walk my perimeter, sometimes 10 or 15 times."

The brains of PTSD patients show shrinkage of the hippocampus and abnormal activity in the amygdala, small structures associated with memory. The sympathetic nervous system — which is centered in the spinal cord and controls the fight-or-flight response — works overtime years after the danger has passed. PTSD patients continue to produce abnormal levels of key stress hormones and high levels of natural opiates that the brain produces to calm itself.

A recent study at Fort Bragg, N.C., shows PTSD patients have lower levels of a neurotransmitter produced in the hippocampus called neuropeptide Y.

Now the Army wants to know if it can select more resilient soldiers by measuring neuropeptide levels. Future soldiers might get NP-Y booster shots to vaccinate their brains against PTSD.

PTSD treatment includes counseling and exposure therapy, in which patients repeatedly recall their frightening memories to become less sensitive to them. Drug treatments include depression medications. Israeli researchers are testing a drug to regulate the protein AChE, which protects brain cells from becoming hypersensitive after stress.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has modified training and certain battlefield practices to address PTSD.

Units remain together longer and drill in realistic war games. In Iraq, soldiers conducted battlefield rites for fallen comrades. After battle, commanders encouraged troops to openly discuss their fears. During combat, more psychologists and social workers helicopter to forward lines.

More help awaits back home for those soldiers who need it.

Al Batres, who administers the VA's 206 veteran centers nationwide, says, "The Iraq war has high-tech weapons like the Persian Gulf War. It has street warfare like Somalia and combat like Vietnam. But this war has more controversy and protests like Vietnam, too."

As vets return home, he says, "They need to know that it's OK to talk about your experiences in battle. It's therapeutic."

http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/041903/war_0419030091.shtml
 
I think the numbers of those that actually suffer from emotional trauma will be relatively low for a couple of reasons. First of all, because of the support our military is receiving from not only from others in the military, but also from family, friends, but the rest of the nation as well. 2ndly, they understand that they are/were fighting for a moral good. Lastly, winning the war and coming home to welcoming crowds of people will re-enforce the validity of what they did.
 
I think this it just total crap.

Yes, some people will get PTSD, and some may "miss" on purpose.

The left wants to condition people to believe that killing is never ok.

People with a good moral foundation - religion or a cohesive philosophy should be able to acknowledge that there is "a time to kill". Certainly it is not pleasant but a segment of our society consistently broadcasts the message: "do not kill".

We just watched an episode of "Yes, Dear" on our TiVo. Some squirrel was hoarding peanuts in their yard and their kid is alergic and could die. Yet the contortions and hesitations and machinations they went through worrying about killing the poor squirrel - it was absolutely pathetic - yet, having an extreme aversion to killing the smallest creature - even when it poses a significant threat to your child is portrayed as completely normal and sympathetic.

Ultimately, it is all about state of mind, intent and purpose. These ideas are never mentioned because the right of self defense, self preservation are never discussed.

And David Grossman is a total idiot in my opinion. He is the guy who rants about how video games are "murder simulators" and how people have to be trained to kill other people. I am sorry Mr. Grossman, but the last few thousand years of human history teach differently.

:barf:
 
more liberal nonsense.

how does someone feel bad about killing a guy who was trying
to kill you.

Maybe torching a VC village of innocent people might lurk in your attic, but certainly not killing armed enemy.

-d
 
Never been there never done that

However being in the military and having to kill someone as part of your job in the military is well to be expected. I am sure it isn't pleasant but come on it goes with the job. It will also undoughtadly change everyone who participated. If they need some help thats fine the deserve it. But all these people whinning and crying about it drive me nuts.
 
To quote (or paraphrase) Clint Eastwood's character in Unforgiven : "Killing's a hell of a thing: It takes away all a man has and all he's ever going to have."


And let's not forget: "The person you kill is someone else's son, brother, father, friend, etc."


After fatally shooting a person in self-defense some years ago, I still have pangs of conscience and inner doubts. The worst for me has been: Could I have done differently? (But I know the answer is: I had no choice.)

Killing another human being is, indeed, "a hell of a thing" to a person of conscience. It's going to obsess you, off and on, for the rest of your life. And this is probably the hardest thing to live with.
 
Last edited:
Nickle, dime, quarter, shilling, whatever, here come the bottom feeders with all the answers and don't have a clue about the question. First I have to create a syndrome then offer treatment. Maybe I can get the government or insurance to pay exorbatant rates. Same fecal matter different day.
 
I think the worst possible damage will be caused if the country takes a swing left w/ CNN and in a fit of "warriors remorse" blames the returning soldiers for a war it once supported. Or worse if our government betrays us and starts justifying everyones cynical reservations about the war. So lets keep CNN and all the hollyweird people turned off.
 
It's my own personal belief that the VietNam vets who suffered PTS syndrome did so because of the lack of public support for the troops or, more pointedly, the direct hostility shown the troops by so many people. Killing another person isn't a natural act, and the "killer" has to be able to reconcile his actions with himself; public support helps.

If the returning troops get a hero's welcome, that will go a long way toward helping them cope with the memories.
 
Judging by human behavior, I'd say killing is incredibly natural. We do it often enough.
 
You'd be surprised how long this problem has been around. Before guns, the ancients knew that battle was in great part psychology so that the commander who could psych his troops into holding ground would win even at great numerical disadvantage.

Killing in battle is harder than you might think, so much that the concept that commanders have been fighting the tendancy of troops to shoot high since the Revolution. Records from the Civil War show most of the rifles picked up after the battles were never shot. Same thing in WW-I and WW-II. My old teacher EB Sledge told about how that even after the intense training in Marine boot camp, most of the replacements his platoon got in Okinawa came to the front, were killed and were dragged back to be buried without ever firing a shot. It was only the ones who learned to fight and survive in combat who could actually pull the trigger.

In some wars psychological casualties have been as high as 90% of the survivors. While the armchair soldiers might scoff at this, anyone who has ever had to train or lead troops knows how deadly serious is this problem and how difficult it is to overcome. The training techniques are different but the problem is the same as the one Hannibal had when he crossed the Alps.
 
Forgive my ignorance, but aren't these different wars?

In one war, the soldiers volunteered to join. The other war the soldiers were mostly drafted. Am I wrong? Wouldn't that play a part in the mindset of the soldier?

One war lasted a month. The other, what, 10 years? I can see years or many months of fighting, but a few weeks?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the War in Iraq was a picnic for anyone. I'm just saying, these wars are too different to compare with each other. That said, you can't predict the mental state of soldiers by comparing apples and oranges.

My brain hurts now, :confused:, I'm gonna go shower.
 
Just to reaffirm or debunk my personal pet theory: has there been any documentation on the percentage of WWII vets who suffered from PTS syndrome versus VietNam? I don't recall any veterans of WWII having told me they were spat upon, but a number of VietNam vets have related as such.

Sean Smith, I'd have to disagree with you. Certainly we see killings of others of our species all the time. But those who do the killings are either criminal (not just right in the head) or do so under the orders of their governments ("justifiable homicide").

Just my own .02.
 
Monkeyleg there are a lot of popular misconceptions about WWII versus the Viet Nam war. This link helps put some of them to rest. Some statistics and comparisons between the Viet Nam war and other wars. I was interested to see that only 25% of the troops in VietNam were draftees but 66% of the ones in WW-II were.

There are also difficulties in comparing the number of cases of psychological casualties between rear echelon units and combat units. Here down a bit on this page is a table listing several areas of operations and casualty ratios. Comparing these numbers with those from VietNam we find that psychological illness during WW-II has been vastly downplayed.

If this helps, here is the link to the information page for the Veterans PTSD Reference Manual.

Probably the highest rates modern rates of PTSD were in US draftees who were captured and became POWs during the Korean war. This rate was very high, nearly 100% in junior enlisted men. I once talked to a fellow who'd been in the British Army about why this could be and he said that Americans suffered from "mom-ism", they all wanted their mamas to take care of everything! My answer back to him was not fit for pritning here.
 
The report states that the "brains of PTSD patients show shrinkage of the hippocampus and abnormal activity in the amygdala, small structures associated with memory."

Why do they suppose that the "shrinkage" happened after the trauma? Doesn't it make sense that the hippocampus was smaller than average on the people suffering PTSD and its smaller size was the reason for the affliction? It may end up that a minimum size of the hippocampus might be a prerequisite of being in the Armed Forces. Just like a soldier has to be able to run so far in such a time, he may also have to be able to handle a certain amount of stress. That stress measurement may be determined via MRI.
 
I would suppose that some people are hardwired to handle combat better than others. I remember in college I had a boxing coach that was a SEAL in Vietnam. He told me some really great stories about his missions. One day a fellow boxer was listening in said something like "you mean you killed people during the war?" like that wasn't the most idiotic question I have ever heard. I'll never forget my coach's response. He didn't become angry or defensive or shy away from the question. He simply said matter-of-factly "that was my job and I did it well." No bravado, no sense of trying to impress, you might as well have asked him "do you want fries with that?"
 
Meekandmild,

Is that E.B. Sledge, as in 'Sledgehammer', author of 'With The Old Breed a t Okinawa and Peleiu'?
 
Yes, Sledge was an ornithologist and biologist. He was probably one of the greatest college professors who ever lived, certainly he was one of my favorites. The fact he didn't die of his grief and misery after the war was probably due in large part to the fact his father had been a doctor during and after WW-I and knew how to direct therapy for what they then called battle fatigue or shell shock. His books, especially the second book, China Marine, are only truly revealed if you knew him in life.

MrKandiyohi, there is a progressive deterioration which is worsened with prolonged elevation of certain hormones such as ACTH, cortisols and adrenal medullary hormones and with the lack of sleep common to the disorder. Same deterioration can be reduced or even reversed in its early stages with certain medications.

I think rock jock is right. But the hard wiring can be better protected with proper training, discipline and attitude, adequate rest times during combat, officers who honestly care for the troops, an expectant attitude for psychological battle casualties, immmediate treatment for them and treatment as close to the battlefield as possible. Too many things to go into here but this is an important part of training for military support officers.

The Brits may have the right idea by enlisting volunteer soldiers when they are fifteen years old and training them in depth. Their psychological casualty rates during WW-II seem to bear out the conjecture they were doing something right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top