Firearms, Mental Illness, and Deployment

[Thin Black Line]

I've read various articles recently and know from my own tour that soldiers
who were diagnosed with depression, PTSD, etc, and were prescribed
psychotropic meds were A) kept in Iraq if already deployed and B) sent for
a 2nd tour even if they were previously diagnosed and still on medication.
The questions posed in this poll would be irrespective to what the soldier wants, i.e.,
to remain in the warzone or not. In any case, we're talking about soldiers
with weapons, meds in a questionable supply chain, difficulty promptly seeing
a mental health expert/psychiatrist if in a personal crisis, and the stress of a
warzone added to whatever mental/emotional fluctuations they might be
experiencing.

Bottom line: Soldiers need their weapons in the warzone --so should a soldier
be kept in the warzone who may be a danger to him/herself or suffering a
more severe case of depression/PTSD as a result of continued service in
the warzone?

 

[Thin Black Line]

[crickets chirping]

 

[Big Calhoun]

No. For the same reasons a civilian with a prescribed 'mental defect' should not be able to own a weapon.

I have a relative with a mental stability issue that requires meds. He has expressed an interest in joining the military. His illness can be controlled through meds and dietary supplements, but sometimes, he gets in these funks and doesn't take them. Sometimes it's hard to recognize that he has stopped taking his meds or the after-effects until he is in the midst of a full-blown psychotic episode. At that point, he is uncontrollable and must be medicated and we (myself and the family) start from zero in getting him help.

I would not want our fellow soldiers at risk becuase of my relative nor would I want to live with the 'shame' of a relative of mine having killed fellow soldiers, regardless of the reasons.

 

[Biker]

I went with "no", period. Logistics is the biggest problem with every army. Hell, sometimes a unit has a hard time with food, water and ammo and even a REMF might be required to ruck up if things went south and I want nobody in my fighting hole who doesn't know who and what he is when not on his meds.

Biker

 

[RavenVT100]

The quiz is too vague and doesn't provide any context. People take meds for serious mental problems like Schizophrenia and Bipolar disorder. They also take meds for relatively minor stuff like insomnia and ADHD. I hope that no one who has already posted here actually thinks that someone who had trouble sleeping and took medicine for that shouldn't be allowed to own a gun.

 

[DogBonz]

I'm sorry, but...

Someone with a mental disorder should not:

1: be in possession of a weapon
2: be in a combat zone.

I personally don’t care if it can be controlled with meds because people with mental issues don’t always take their meds. The fact of the matter is that no other soldiers’ lives should be placed in jeopardy because of an unstable individual. Further more, I don’t think that the best way of helping the person with the disorder is to put them in a combat environment, medicated or not. Why place someone in an environment where they are likely to injure or kill themselves, friendlies, or civilians. It just is not worth it. Pull them out of the combat zone and get them the help that they need. Our soldiers deserve at least that.

 

[RavenVT100]

Whoops, this got cut off from my last post...I just wanted to add that the military can decide who it wants for certain roles, and that's why applicants are medically screened. Some disorders are disqualifying, others aren't.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Let's consider a current diagnosed mental illness requiring psychotropic meds
such as an antidepressant for the sake of our poll. I wouldn't classify a sleep
aid for time zone changes or short-term anxiety/restlessness as the same
thing (most of which clears up anywhere between a few days and a week).
So no, three doses of Ambien from the BAS doc when you arrived in theater
or had some rough convoys doesn't count. Talking a couple times with the
Chaplain or the Combat Stress guys, doesn't count.

The soldier who had an "issue" in the past, received treatment for it, was
not currently in treatment and/or receiving a psychotropic meds when
deployment orders were recieved, and medically cleared (green) at SRP
doesn't count either.

I hope that clears it up for sake of consideration and discussion. But, if
there are still comments, that's why we're all here.

 

[JohnBT]

"so should a soldier be kept in the warzone who may be a danger to him/herself "

May? The question lacks the detail necessary to make a call.


"Someone with a mental disorder should not:

1: be in possession of a weapon
2: be in a combat zone."

Again, lack of detail. Which mental disorder? How severe? Which drug has been prescribed. What has been the response to treatment?


I've been dealing with individuals with disabilities since I finished grad school in 1973. You can't reach reasonable conclusions without considering the details of each individual's situation.

John

 

[Thin Black Line]

Again, lack of detail. Which mental disorder? How severe? Which drug has been prescribed. What has been the response to treatment?

Good questions. In this scenario you are effectively playing the soldier's
commander and such questions and decisions are left to that soldier's
commander.

 

[KC&97TA]

OK I'll get personal on this.

Went to Afgan in 2002 - Cleared Grid Squares "free fire zone"

Went to Iraq on 90 day investigation team in fall 2003

Went to Iraq March 04-Sept 04 - went into Fallujah in April, went to Ramadi several times

Was forced into orders to a unit that I never wanted to be with, Advice I was given from a Capt in Navy "shrink", (pretty much word for word) Things have changed you're a murderer and you have to accept that the night mares, paranoid thoughts and bipolar mood swings are now a part of life. Homie shrink wanted to put me on meds which I refused. Sucked it up with a thick straw, took the green weenie, threatened to kick the crap out of a few POG's and now I feel much better. Even reenlisted again.

I wouldn't take those Meds that screw with your head, my boys have gone on them and totally changed, then came off them or ran out of them and it just screws with ones mind a too much for me to handle. Drink some wiskey, shoot some guns, train the life out of you personel, go to bed tired and keep your self so busy that you don't have time to think about it.

What Took the PTSD away: 0500 formation, 0510 5 mile run, 3 mile swim, 5 mile run, 0630 weigh training till 0700, 0730 back at office, paper work, 0900 classes, 1030 weapons PT or just pyramids, 1130 chow, 1300 back at office, general clean up, maintence, 1500 run/swim/hump till 1600. I'd go home, about 1700, cook, clean the house spotless, go run around 1900, sit in the liveing room tieing ghillie suits, cleaning guns, studing knowledge till 2300 and then go to bed and do it all again... I wore myself out, sliped a disk and had to come back to reality.

Half this PTSD problem is from takeing Men out of a Combat Zone were they're so preoccupied with stress, and then dump them back in the states, in a Barraks room or with a wife and new born kid... so thier mind creates stress... you just have to over come the stress with crazy ness.

Went back to Iraq Aug 05-Feb 06 - Worked inside the wire, disassembled my M16 and left it in a sea bag for days, did great things in the Eng Community, got several tickets driveing hummers and got no reward, besides the experiance of working with Adultrace Officers.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

You can take psychotropic meds and still own a firearm under Federal law.

A person is only prohibited on mental illness grounds if he:

(4) Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution;

This means that a court must find you to be mentally incompetent or such a danger to yourself and others that you are committed to a mental institution involuntarily.

Regular old depression and PTSD doesn't cut it, so I would say that the decision would depend on the individual facts in any given case. Sometimes it will be appropriate, sometimes it won't; but generally if we let someone own and use a weapon under the same circumstances in the U.S., I can't see a good reason to excuse them from duty.

 

[Thin Black Line]

LOL, well I didn't see adultry come to a screeching stop when it came to
people below the butter bars either. This, of course, has it's own
"complications" in a combat zone and could be the subject of a different
poll. However, I did want to stick with weapons in places where ppl are
condition red.

You make a good point on keeping oneself busy. That is often hard to do on
some of these FOBs --most soldiers are not at Camp Victory. Too much
extra "busy work" for ppl and you can add to their operational stress. I
know a lot of that depends on how competent your command is and what
kind of missions ppl are on.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Regular old depression and PTSD doesn't cut it, so I would say that the decision would depend on the individual facts in any given case.

This is the most recent military approach, but was not the case even a
couple years ago. You would have been very likely to see a separation
on medical grounds. During WWII, quite a few people who volunteered (and
drafted) were let go for depressive symptoms. Then, as now, this changed
as fewer people volunteered for duty and manpower dwindled. Less than
1/2 of the military age male population during the WWII years wore a uniform.
We're probably at something like 1% right now, including females. This would
certainly explain why the military is not discharging people like it did in the
past. As a civilian population, we should consider this trend because what
we are in effect saying is that the mentally ill should remain on the front
lines and fight.

 

[JohnBT]

Maybe they're doing a better job of screening them on the front end of the process these days. I see quite a few who didn't make it through the first two months and quite a few more who were let go later for having a Personality Disorder. I don't know which Personality Disorder because the code on the form isn't specific.
___________

"Good questions. In this scenario you are effectively playing the soldier's
commander and such questions and decisions are left to that soldier's
commander."

I assume the commander would have access to information provided by the doctor who made the diagnosis and prescribed the meds.

Actually, I'm guessing many soldiers see the doctor because the commander is fed up or seriously concerned about something in the first place.

I worked in the local VA hospital for a semester in 1973 to finish up my M.S. It was an interesting four months on the inpatient drug and alcohol treatment unit.

John

 

[vmfrantz]

I know of Marines that were suicidal and they were taken out of the platoon for good, or until the docs thought they were safe to come back. It has to be that way. You cant have someone flaking out in the bush and he is supposed to have your back..

 

[JohnBT]

That certainly makes sense. There's a specific problem and it impairs functioning.

Let's say the problem is some kind of panic disorder or panic attacks or anxiety of some sort. The question then is how much is the person affected and in what types of situations. What are the actual limitations, not the diagnosis, but the details of the impairment itself. The commander would have to rely on the treating physician's report. Assuming of course the commander doesn't have a real good feel for the situation and can tell the doc what the report needs to say for the good of all concerned.

John

 

[Zoogster]

It really does not matter unfortunately. With soldiers being forced to take multiple tours indefinately because they can't afford to let them go your going to have less than ideal soldiers in the field. Recruitment is low, we are mid police action, we have a voluntary army (voluntary to join not to ever leave, before the job is done ) so that means high demand and low supply of fresh soldiers.
We in fact are getting around this by recruiting large numbers of foriegn soldiers who join for eventual citizenship and if they die are not counted as casualties.
For every soldier that dies many more become unfit to soldier due to loss of body parts.
Regardless of the ideal mental health of soldiers a nation will make due with what it has. It may effect his liklihood of promotion or being made into a hero, but it won't effect his 'duty'. If a soldier could quit that easy I think there is a few on thier fourth or whatever tours that would like to see thier child before they are almost a teenager and have never had a father.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Thanks to everyone who voted and commented.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Addendum: Brought up this topic (among others) while speaking 1:1 with a
Congressional representative last night.