MoD says if we treat you we are then liable, so we won’t.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by armchair_jihad, Mar 18, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From the letters page of the Times

    CONGRATULATIONS on your articles about war veterans not receiving treatment on the NHS (News, Focus and Editorial, last week). My husband was diagnosed with Gulf war syndrome and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 2000 (after serving in Iraq, Bosnia and Kosovo). When eventually he was seen in 2004, he was asked if he had a claim in against the Ministry of Defence (suing for damages) and was promptly told he could not have treatment as it would enhance his claim.

    After pressure from our MP and the solicitor dealing with the claim he was offered care but, by that time, had had another breakdown (in 2005), and we left to live in Germany, where treatment is excellent.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/debate/letters/article1530597.ece


    Can anybody tell me if it is stated policy for the MoD to behave like this?
     
  2. If it involves paying out money, Yes :thumbdown:
     
  3. Understand the MOD is more and more run by Civvies who have never served. The days when the departments where 'Military' are long gone.
    john
     
  4. I have heard of solicitors telling (non-military) clients not to accept PTSD treatment prior to a claim being settled (on the grounds that it will lower the payout), but this is a new one on me. Frankly, there's not enough information here to tell what's going on. It's not even stated that they were dealing with the MOD at that stage.

    The difficult bit for me is the assertion that having treatment would strengthen a claim for PTSD. It's the diagnosis that does that. As already stated, successful treatment tends to reduce payouts in non-military cases. I can't see how a claim for PTSD from military service would be strengthened by receiving treatment, quite the opposite in fact.

    Add to this, the letter doesn't really make clear the basis for the claim. No service person can sue the MOD on the grounds that battle/ops gave them PTSD. The MOD has 'battlefield immunity' in law, in that service personnel accept psychological trauma as an occupational hazard i.e. outside normal H & S law. Any claim would have to be based on failure to manage the person properly later. Following the big case in 2003, that's probably a tall order now. Possibly the writer is talking about a war pension?

    Still, not enough detail to tell what is being implied in the orignial source.
     
  5. You fellas need a good union.
     
  6. You still haven't died in your sleep.....
     
  7. How to attack the person and not the message. See Spiffy.
     
  8. "Understand the MOD is more and more run by Civvies who have never served. The days when the departments where 'Military' are long gone."

    Not really - plenty of civvies work for MOD - but if you look, its still military personnel in the real positions of power and influence.
     
  9. ... looks like they are being influenced more by the civvies :frustrated:
     
  10. Tytus_Barnowl

    Tytus_Barnowl On ROPs

    Why don't they use this F*****G influence where it matters, ie welfare of serving and ex serving troops.
    :frustrated:
     
  11. The people who work at the veterans agency in Norcross seem to be blinkered, inept or both, I was seen by a civilian GP with no military service and my case for a war pension was decided on by a "suit" that has never seen a conflict zone ( other than blackpool on a Friday night). Not bad after 22 years of loyal service which unfortunately left me with severe PTSD and suicidal tendencies.

    I have been contact by private message by numerous arrse members asking for details of my condition and treatment, ( see my post re PTSD on the professionally qualified RAMC and QARANC forum). Unfortunately they have all been from journalists who I am too cynical to believe that they will print my true story and not re-arrange all the words into something totally different.

    I see it as a crying shame that serving soldiers and ex military personnel do not get the help and assistance that they need, after all that they gave to their country WITHOUT QUESTION.

    I'm still trying to think of a suitable quote to have on my headstone when I finally bow to the pressure and slot myself, which hopefully won't be for a while yet because I have the suport of all my friends and family.

    Medders,

    Getting tired of taking on the system ( and losing)
     
  12. 'Always look on the bright siiiiide of life!'

    or

    'Here lies Medders
    he was thredders'
     
  13. "looks like they are being influenced more by the civvies"

    Blame the chain of command then - ultimately they're the ones who sign off on decisions - they could say no couldn't they?