NY Times Article - A New Kind of Care in a New era of casual

Discussion in 'Professionally Qualified, RAMC and QARANC' started by Jailorinummqasr, Jan 31, 2006.

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 todays NY Times,

    Sorry it is full as it is not possible to link to the article.

  2. Puts our pathetic medical care to fecking shame :evil:

    As a medic, I witness what we offer..............fecking pathetic
  3. Agree Dui Lai, post army life care sucks real bad and the care for the serving soldiers could be a lot better!!!...No one really gives a toss until it happens to them and its all about the money....some asshole gets a gong for penny pinching and lowering budgets from there business plans initiated by their own department. This is Fact not fiction......its not a whine, i'm in agreement :)
  4. If they were Brits, they'd be dead from MRSA or someone from N.I.C.E. would decide their treatment was not economically viable and would spend the money saved on art.
  5. Just scan read it but Ive read something similar before. Understand that the increase in this type of case is due to improvement in personal protection i.e. Flak jackets Helmets. So that where as these types of injuires (not all of them clearly) would of previously KIA'd the guy, now their vitals are protected so they can "survive" with distal/head injuries. Ok thats a very simplistic view but it seems to make sense.

    Almost want to think that in some cases you would be better off pushing up daisys ?
  6. Thats it in a nutshell Gibson

    A very sobering read.

    At least the Americans have a medical support system in place

    This affords some comparison with the TA lost/left/abandonned in the medical system thread and the number of seriously injured UK servicemen thread.

    "Almost want to think that in some cases you would be better off pushing up daisys ?"

    Not wrong there, I've been at the messy end of an incident, the outcome of which was a real hardcharger, career and life ahead of him, Quadraplegic and being fed soft foods by a nurse!

    Not nice

  7. At the risk of incurring the wrath of many ARRSERs I have to ask what quality of life are some of these young men going to have. I appreciate that leaps in body armour design and medicine now mean more people survive injuries that even ten years ago would have proved fatal but to what purpose. Not sure that I would wish to cling to a life where the fact that I can swallow is judged as a 'milestone'. Not sure that I would wish to put my family through that either. This is not meant to be disparaging in any way to anyone who has suffered grievious injuries or to the families of such individuals.
  8. Incredibly emotive stuff. The following is purely my thoughts on the matter and I don’t wish to offend anyone.

    Following from Gibson’s, Gimp’s and ACAB’s comments, those injured soldiers battling to regain their lives, their families and those who nurse them all have my utmost respect and admiration, but I have very mixed emotions about how modern man has become obsessed with saving lives for the sake of saving lives – it’s almost as if death has become a dirty word.

    Of course life is precious and natural human emotion dictates that we believe that we want our loved ones returned to us, alive, no matter what their physical or mental state, but after seeing my mid-70s grandmother struggle through rehabilitation after a stroke I can’t begin to imagine what these young men are going through. Yes, the medical care sounds excellent, the dedication of the doctors, nurses and therapists is undoubted, but what life for this young couple:

    And that is in the US, where at least they appear to take the welfare of their wounded servicemen and women seriously. What of the UK? As well as the soldiers struggling with physical injuries and emotional / psychological trauma, their families suffer stress and the last thing they need is to have to fight for care. This is unacceptable and in the very worst cases of injury, I have to conclude that it is possible that death would be the kinder option.
  9. ACAB I don't think you'll incurr the wrath of many ARRSERS with that view. I personally would prefer 'Option number one' if I was that seriously injured and would hate to be a burden both financially and emotionally and practically on my family.

    A truly terrible thing to say but it probably helps MOD/Gvt stats to have VSIL's rather than KIA

    But at what price, we have hit the 100th Brit soldier killed in Iraq, how many arrive home seriously ill, loosing limbs, sight, mental function.....

  10. Quadraplegic... not for me thanks I mean, couldnt pick my nose scratch me conkers or even indulge in self abuse, would have to get somebody else to do that for me and even then couldn't feel it !.

    At the risk of offending delicate souls, 100 in 3 years of invasion (sorry sorry liberation) and ongoing conflict. Something to be thankfull for rather than dramatically despondent about. On the BBC news this am. News bird talking to Col Collins and some "epxert" was saying how terrible this is and how soldiers where dying on a Daily basis !. Now in my reckoning that would put us well over a 1000. Its war kids and we have got off lightly. (with the greatest of respect to everyone of those guys and their familys, every one a hero !!)
  11. 100 dead, but how many with brain damage? missing limbs? horrific scarring both physical and mental? lost/impaired sight? organs removed due to damage?

    Having worked on a large number of casualties with these types of injuries over the years, its very easy for us to forget them as soon as they are out of the theatre door and the next one is on the table, what quality of life do these people and their families have in years to come? Pro-life is very easy to bang on about if its not you that has to live it!
  12. I see today's DT listing of the 100 includes a civilian who died as a result of the stress. Not a suicide mind but died of stress.
  13. Fair point FF, the Yanks do not as a matter of course report on wounded personnel which must number many thousands.
    Wonder what our figures are like ? Im sure they where quoted on the BBC some time ago. Problem is when you say wounded could be anything from Hatch rash on your fingers to Loss of limb or worse !
  14. The_Duke

    The_Duke LE Moderator

    Gibson - I wholeheartedly agree. The fact that we are "only" at 100 dead is no mean feat considering some of the actions that have been fought. Many arrsers have first or second hand experience of "there but for the grace of God moments". If all of those worst case scenarios panned out, what figure would we be at now? If I recall correctly, total losses on Op Corporate was 255 in one short period, so 100 over 3 years is terrible, but could have been a lot worse. One thing to consider is that more than that number have committed suicide since 1982.

    On the treatment side, those members of the Battlegroup I was in who were injured received amazing treatment at dressing stations, field hospitals and Selly Oak. It was when they slipped outside of that system that it all started to go pear shaped.