We are all aware that the rate of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is extremely high among soldiers who have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, particularly among those who have served multiple tours of duty. The constant stress of combat situations among all levels of troops, whether officially designated as combat or not, due to the use of improvised explosive devices as the primary weapon of those who oppose the presence of our forces, does more than cause a “psychological” problem. High levels of stress cause actual physical changes to the brain and the body. Up tuntil recently the military’s primary response to many soldiers with PTSD was to sweep the problem under the rug, which has resulted in devastating consequences, including increased rates of suicide and violent, homicidal incidents by stressed out soldiers after returning home.
So what is the Pentagon’s new response to this deadly epidemic among our military service members? You won’t believe how inadequate it is (or maybe you will):
PHILADELPHIA — The Army plans to require that all 1.1 million of its soldiers take intensive training in emotional resiliency, military officials say.
What the hell does that mean? Read on brothers and sisters, read on.
The training, the first of its kind in the military, is meant to improve performance in combat and head off the mental health problems, including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide, that plague about one-fifth of troops returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. […]
The new program is to be introduced at two bases in October and phased in gradually throughout the service, starting in basic training. It is modeled on techniques that have been tested mainly in middle schools.
Usually taught in weekly 90-minute classes, the methods seek to defuse or expose common habits of thinking and flawed beliefs that can lead to anger and frustration — for example, the tendency to assume the worst. (“My wife didn’t answer the phone; she must be with someone else.”) […]
In an open exchange at an early training session here last week, General Casey asked a group of sergeants what they thought of the new training. Did it seem too touchy-feely?
“I believe so, sir,” said one, standing to address the general. He said a formal class would be a hard sell to a young private “who all he wants to do is hang out with his buddies and drink beer.”
Does anyone think that a program designed to work with middle school kids is going to be adequate to prepare soldiers for the severe stresses they will face in Iraq and Afghanistan? And that’s not just my intuitive response to this “program,” that’s the opinion of professional psychologists quoted by the Times’ reporters:
In recent studies, psychologists at Penn and elsewhere have found that the techniques can reduce mental distress in some children and teenagers. But outside experts cautioned that the Army program was more an experiment than a proven solution.
“It’s important to be clear that there’s no evidence that any program makes soldiers more resilient,” said George A. Bonanno, a psychologist at Columbia University. But he and others said the program could settle one of the most important questions in psychology: whether mental toughness can be taught in the classroom.
So, we’re spending 17 million dollars on an experiment? Turning our troops into lab rats? Hoping it works? A program which has perhaps helped “some” children and teenagers “reduce mental distress?” Something tells me this is a woefully inadequate response to a massive problem. And what good does it do to for those troops who already suffer from stress and mental and behavioral disorders as a result of previous deployments? Soldiers we keep sending back into war zones regardless of their “invisible” injuries?
I’d love to see these “techniques” succeed, but count me as someone whose gut is telling him this is just a “cover your ass” response by the brass instituted primarily for their own benefit. Now they can point to this program when questioned by Congress or the media about the high rates of PTSD. I suspect whether it actually works or not is irrelevant to them. In my opinion this is all about creating the perception that they care about the problem and are doing something about it. Considering that sergeants who already distrust “touchy-feely” approaches to stress disorders will be the people providing this training rather than experienced psychologists and counselors, and I think you have little chance that these techniques will provide any benefit to soldiers in the field. At least that’s how it strikes me.
Several notes:
It’s a lot cheaper not to start wars.
After I got out of the army in the mid-seventies I worked for a few years at the VA Hospital in San Francisco. Back in those days most soldiers didn’t go to the front lines. Much of the military was deployed in Korea or Germany or in bases across the U.S., so they didn’t endure combat pressures. And those who went to Vietnam only went for one tour.
The VA was a lot better back then, under Nixon, Ford and Carter (especially under Carter with Max Cleland running it), not that it was perfect.
There were some people who survived the most horrific situations in war and came out unscathed. Others were broken. The ones I worried about were the ones who’d appear okay but had things like collections of fingers they collected from people they’d killed.
People are taught to kill in war. It’s an intentional ruination of a person’s humanity. There is nothing good about a process that creates monsters, even if those monsters only destroy themselves when they get back home. When the war that destroys these people is based on a pack of lies in order for the oil industry to gain control of Iraqi oilfields (or in the case of Afghanistan, the oilfields of Central Asia), then you as an American should be ashamed, disgusted and very angry at the politicians who led you into it.
I have to agree. I think this is actually a good idea, and helpful if it works. It doesn’t mean you just ignore the aftermath though, an ounce of prevention etc. etc. and some middle schools can be very bad indeed. Probably not to the level of warzones but fear of violence and death is not unheard of and these are kids pysche’s not adult ones.
$17 per soldier does not sound like a outrageous investment. Would we be happier to hear that soldiers aren’t told anything about emotions other than “be tough?”
It’s outrageous because it is too late and too little. And because it won’t work.
The real reason it is outrageous is because it does not address those that already have PTSD. The military has been shoving those aside for years and then disallowing them their medical benefits. They have cut them loose.
They are the ticking time bomb we will face for forty years. What they need is medical treatment RIGHT NOW.
But the military refuses to give it to them. It calls them malingerers.
nalbar
What the Pentagon is REALLY looking for;
and they will not be happy until they get it.
nalbar
.
(AP) – In recent years, Novak ended up actually being a part of a big Washington story, in ways he likely never intended, becoming a central figure in the Valerie Plame CIA leak case. Novak was the first to publish the name of CIA employee, and he came under withering criticism and abuse from many for that column, which Novak said began “a long and difficult episode” in his career.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
When our military leadership thinks like this, it is a wonder that the US wins any wars. Perhaps, we should just avoid wars in the first place but, then, we might not be able to justify owning over 730 military bases across the planet.
PTSD is just on more unhappy cost of running an empire. The grunts always suffer the most in such military organizations. Sad but true.
There is tremendous, affordable help out there for War Trauma PTSD, but it’s mostly still under the radar.
PLEASE watch this video. http://www.efttrainingcourses.net/video3.htm.
There are relatively new modalities under the umbrella of energy psychology that involve tapping or holding acupuncture meridian points. Some people describe it as acupuncture without needles. EFT, one of the most prominent, is currently being used by MDs, psychologists and mental health counselors, and is being used in some V.A. systems for War Trauma PTSD with dramatic and often quick results. It neutralizes the emotional charge associated with the stored traumatic memory.
For those who think even acupuncture is too way out, the US Air Force as of March 2009 started a pilot program for battlefield care: “A pilot program starting in March will prepare 44 Air Force, Navy and Army doctors to use acupuncture as part of emergency care in combat and in frontline hospitals, not just on bases back home.” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28930238/
Just heard a story about a soldier just back from Iraq who was getting some tapping treatments. He walked into a Walmart and started to freak out from the noise, so he started tapping as he had been taught. Two uniformed soldiers happened to see him, walked up to him and said “Keep tapping. It works.”
Both EFT (Emotional Freedom Techniques) developed by Gary Craig, and TAT (Tapas Acupressure Technique), developed by acupuncturist, Tapas Fleming, recently and independently of one another, offered and completed very successful workshops in treating War Trauma PTSD. Tapas Fleming recently designed a deck of cards with the TAT techniques especially for soldiers – that can be used by individuals or in a therapeutic group setting.
While we wait for the s-l-o-w wheels of the established systems to get on board, more and more vets are in severe distress. This is unacceptable, especially when I know there is help and people willing to give it and make it affordable. One site is right here: http://stressproject.org/
My suggestion is this: someone needs to introduce what I would call the Support The Troops Bill – and soldier, sailor, airman or marine who is deployed into a combat zone will be entitled to free medical care (including dental and Rx) and education for life. They present their ID and the US pays for it – doctor visits, prescriptions, dental, psychological, junior college, college, trade school, anything.
This has two effects – 1) obviously, it takes care of those who we have put in harms way, and 2) it puts a financial disincentive to placing our troops in harms way.
I’d love to see the GOP try to squirm out from under supporting this…