British soldiers take MoD to court

#1
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article340827.ece

15 British soldiers who recently served in Iraq are suing the Ministry of Defence over alleged medical negligence.
Let's compare it with

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4651706.stm

At least six Russian soldiers have been held after the beating of a conscript, whose injuries were so severe his legs and genitals were amputated.
All TV-channels place this sad news on the first place. Yes, Russian army is too far from British standards.
 
#2
The Independent article is a little misleading. Andrew Wragg was a guardsman - allegedly trained by the SAS at some point in his career. As far as the press are concerned the spurious SAS tag just adds a bit of seasoning for the average civvy reader.

As for bullying in the FSU, what's new?
 
#3
KGB_resident said:
At least six Russian soldiers have been held after the beating of a conscript, whose injuries were so severe his legs and genitals were amputated.

All TV-channels place this sad news on the first place. Yes, Russian army is too far from British standards.
Dedovshchina byla, dedovshchina est', dedovshchina budet. Unavoidable in a conscript organisation with pump NCOs. At least they're arresting them, now, rather than letting them continue to bully the living shite out of the first-years.
 
#4
Maybe the conscripts need a Russian soldiers federation?
 
#5
The Territorial Army has 60 members receiving psychological help. Half of those who requested help are reservists and not entitled to army facilities


Maybe the Army needs to review it's treatment of the TA before a High Court Judge forces the issue - won't be long before someone takes the MoD to court and wins
 
#6
The Territorial Army has 60 members receiving psychological help. Half of those who requested help are reservists and not entitled to army facilities.

Which army facilities are these? The military has no psychiatric inpatient facilities.

What's the betting that these guys have been demobilised, which is what has cut them off from military healthcare. It shows why Lord Drayson chose his weasel words so carefully in the Lords recently, when talking about injured reservist's access to care. When will the government realise that it has failed these people, and their families, and make amends?
 
#7
ViroBono said:
When will the government realise that it has failed these people, and their families, and make amends?
VB, you're making the mistake of attributing the weasely-scum that comprise our government with human characteristics such as conscience, ethics, values and standards.
 
#8
DozyBint said:
ViroBono said:
When will the government realise that it has failed these people, and their families, and make amends?
VB, you're making the mistake of attributing the weasely-scum that comprise our government with human characteristics such as conscience, ethics, values and standards.
How true - it would help if (a) some of them had served and (b) most of them hadn't been pro CND, pro IRA and anti Armed Forces for most of their lives......
 
#9
TheSpecialOne said:
The Territorial Army has 60 members receiving psychological help. Half of those who requested help are reservists and not entitled to army facilities


Maybe the Army needs to review it's treatment of the TA before a High Court Judge forces the issue - won't be long before someone takes the MoD to court and wins

a High Court Judge force the issue in favour of a servicemen :lol: your having a laugh.
 
#11
I can't see how they can claim negligence for something they didn't actually receive.
As for no access to the army facilities, you can't have what isn't there.

Until someone kills a politician and claims PTSD as an alibi nothing will change.
 
#12
jabbawocky said:
I can't see how they can claim negligence for something they didn't actually receive.
As for no access to the army facilities, you can't have what isn't there.

Until someone kills a politician and claims PTSD as an alibi nothing will change.
The negligent act will be the failure to provide treatment.

Whilst the military psychiatric in-patient facilities have gone, there is a contract in place with Priory Clinics (owned by a major donor to the Labour Party, oddly) to provide in-patient psych care.

NHS facilities for the recognition and treatment of traumatic stress related psychiatric injuries are poor. The major obstacle for TA personnel is that once demobilised MOD washes its hands of them and dumps them into the morass of the NHS. It's a disgrace - these people have been wounded just as surely as those with gunshot wounds or other physical injuries.

A lesser problem, but still a problem, is the persistence of 'lack of moral fibre' thinking at various levels. I have come to the conclusion that a 'lecture and leaflet' session pre-and post-deployment is not enough. There needs to be additional training for those in the CoC to ensure that those suffering psychiatric injuries are dealt with appropriately and fairly.
 
#16
ViroBono said:
jabbawocky said:
I can't see how they can claim negligence for something they didn't actually receive.
As for no access to the army facilities, you can't have what isn't there.

Until someone kills a politician and claims PTSD as an alibi nothing will change.
The negligent act will be the failure to provide treatment.

Whilst the military psychiatric in-patient facilities have gone, there is a contract in place with Priory Clinics (owned by a major donor to the Labour Party, oddly) to provide in-patient psych care.

NHS facilities for the recognition and treatment of traumatic stress related psychiatric injuries are poor. The major obstacle for TA personnel is that once demobilised MOD washes its hands of them and dumps them into the morass of the NHS. It's a disgrace - these people have been wounded just as surely as those with gunshot wounds or other physical injuries.

A lesser problem, but still a problem, is the persistence of 'lack of moral fibre' thinking at various levels. I have come to the conclusion that a 'lecture and leaflet' session pre-and post-deployment is not enough. There needs to be additional training for those in the CoC to ensure that those suffering psychiatric injuries are dealt with appropriately and fairly.
To be fair Viro, most PTSD work i.e. EMDR, CBT, etc is done on an out- and day-patient basis in the military and in civilian life. Admission happens usually for reasons related to direct clinical risk e.g. self-harm, dangerousness (to others). My experience is that the Priory is pretty good, and a lot better than most NHS facilities (admittedly thats based mainly on experience of only one hospital).

I would generally agree on the NHS and dealing with PTSD, although it is a bit of a lottery. Some areas of the UK are better than others.

The reservist issue is a major problem, but even here things can be done. The person's unit should speak to the Mental Health Team at Chilwell. They can be very useful to know. If someone has completely severed links with the military, Combat Stress is a top organisation.

On the topic of better in-service support, I would suggest that people look into the RN & RM Trauma Risk Management Programme.
 
#17
Thanks, Neuroleptic, for the info. I'm met the Chilwell team who are most helpful - a shame that the info on them doesn't appear to have filtered down to some TA units. I don't know whether this is different for those who've deployed en masse or as IRs. Combat Stress really are excellent as you say, and will accept self-referrals, too.

The key issue on the subject of TA personnel not getting the right follow up (psych and physical injury) seems to be that they are being excluded from the system when demobilised. If they can't be kept mobilised until well, a much better liaison system is needed to ease the transition.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top