SunToads Health News 294. VA and Military block claims and treatment for veterans

[Guest guest]

At 01:34 PM 2/7/08, you wrote:

FW FYI

2-7-08

Below are 3 examples of reasons not to join or continue a career in the

US military. Other reasons include the huge number of harmful vaccines

that are forcefully given to the military...... SunToads

 

++++++++

 

There are 3 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Veterans not entitled to mental health care, U.S. lawyers

argue

Colonel Dan

2. I endorse these recommendations to Reduce the backlog of Veteran

Claims

Colonel Dan

3. DOD is like VA... they ignore laws and congress

Colonel Dan

 

Messages

______________________

1. Veterans not entitled to mental health care, U.S. lawyers argue

Posted by: " Colonel Dan "

colonel-dan coloneldan1

Wed Feb 6, 2008 8:21 am ((PST))

 

Links sent by: James

starjm50

 

All Vet orgs should join the is lawsuit

 

Lawsuit mentioned in article by:

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/

 

also see this article

 

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.orgVFCS/ProceedingsVAFeb2008.pdf

 

Veterans not entitled to mental health care, U.S. lawyers

argue

 

<begelko Bob Egelko,

Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

 

<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/05/MNQLUQ4IS.DTL & h

w=Veterans & sn=001 & sc=1000>

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/05/MNQLUQ4IS.DTL & hw

=Veterans & sn=001 & sc=1000

Veterans have no legal right to specific types of medical care, the

Bush

administration argues in a lawsuit accusing the government of

illegally

denying mental health treatment to some troops returning from Iraq

and

Afghanistan.

The arguments, filed Wednesday in federal court in San Francisco, strike

at

the heart of a lawsuit filed on behalf of veterans that claims the

health

care system for returning troops provides little recourse when the

government rejects their medical claims.

The Department of Veterans Affairs is making progress in increasing

its

staffing and screening veterans for combat-related stress, Justice

Department lawyers said. But their central argument is that Congress

left

decisions about who should get health care, and what type of care, to the

VA

and not to veterans or the courts.

A federal law providing five years of care for veterans from the date

of

their discharge establishes " veterans' eligibility for health care,

but it

does not create an entitlement to any particular medical

service, "

government lawyers said.

They said the law entitles veterans only to " medical care which

the

secretary (of Veterans Affairs) determines is needed, and only to the

extent

funds ... are available. "

The argument drew a sharp retort from a lawyer for advocacy groups that

sued

the government in July. The suit is a proposed class action on behalf

of

320,000 to 800,000 veterans or their survivors.

" Veterans need to know in this country that the government thinks

all their

benefits are mere gratuities, " attorney Gordon Erspamer said.

" They're

saying it's completely discretionary, that even if Congress

appropriates

money for veterans' health care, we can do anything we want with

it. "

 

The issue will be joined March 7 at a hearing before U.S. District

Judge

Samuel Conti, who denied the administration's request last month to

dismiss

the suit. While the case is pending, the plaintiffs want Conti to order

the

government to provide immediate mental health treatment for veterans who

say

they are thinking of killing themselves and to spend another $60 million

on

health care.

The suit accuses the VA of arbitrarily denying care and benefits to

wounded

veterans, of forcing them to wait months for treatment and years for

benefits, and of failing to provide fair procedures for appealing

decisions

against them.

The plaintiffs say that the department has a backlog of more than

600,000

disability claims and that 120 veterans a week commit suicide.

In his Jan. 10 ruling that allowed the suit to proceed, Conti said

federal

law entitles veterans to health care for a specific period after leaving

the

service, rejecting the government's argument that it was required to

provide

only as much care as the VA's budget allowed in a given year. A law

that

President Bush signed last week extended the period from two to five

years.

In its latest filing, however, the Justice Department reiterated

that

Congress had intended " to authorize, but not require, medical care

for

veterans. "

" This court should not interfere with the political branches'

design,

oversight and modification of VA programs, " the government lawyers

argued.

They also said the VA " is making great progress in addressing the

mental

health care needs of combat veterans. " Among other things, they

cited a law

passed in November that required the department to establish a

suicide-prevention program that includes making mental health care

available

around the clock.

The VA has hired nearly 3,800 mental health professionals in the last

two

years and has at least one specialist in post-traumatic stress disorder

at

each of its medical centers, the government said.

Since June, government lawyers said, the VA has had a policy that

all

veterans who seek or are referred for mental health care should be

screened

within 24 hours, that those found to be at risk of suicide should be

treated

immediately, and that others should be scheduled for full diagnosis

and

treatment planning within two weeks. A new suicide-prevention hot line

has

been responsible for " more than 380 rescues, " the lawyers

said.

Erspamer, the plaintiffs' lawyer, was unimpressed.

" Nowhere do I see any explanation of what kind of systems they have

in place

that deal with suicidal veterans, " he said. " There's no excuse

for not

spending the money Congress told them to spend on mental health care

and

leaving $60 million on the table when people are going out and

killing

themselves. "

E-mail Bob Egelko at

<begelko

begelko.

 

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/05/MNQLUQ4IS.DTL

 

Messages in this topic (1)

______________________

______________________

2. I endorse these recommendations to Reduce the backlog of Veteran

Cla

Posted by: " Colonel Dan "

colonel-dan coloneldan1

Wed Feb 6, 2008 8:47 am ((PST))

I endorse these recommendations to Reduce the backlog of Veteran

Claims

Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL Col, AUS, Ret, Owner, Veteran issues News

Forward to your list(s) if you also endorse them send a note

to

Sp5kelley2nd94th

 

http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/Chas/reviewVA.htm

 

Reducing the Backlog of Claims for Veterans and Widows

Veterans Affairs Subcommittee meeting on February 14, 2008

Examining the VA's Claims Processing System

 

February 6, 2007

 

To:

 

Congressman Bob Filner, Chairmen of the Veterans Affair Committee

Congressman John Hall, Chairmen of the Subcommittee on Oversight,

Veterans

Affairs Committee.

Congressman Steve Kagen

Congressman Tim Walz

 

 

 

The Veterans of this Nation

 

SUBJECT: Recommendations for reducing the backlog of claims for

Veterans

and Widows

 

Discussion and recommendations from Veterans and Widows on the

subject

discussed by the VAC subcommittee in expediting claims:

 

Veterans need help now before we all die not after continued promises

of

implementation of electronic medical records using extremely

difficult

interfaces, artificial intelligence with query language too few are able

to

utilize, and often delayed progress stretching into not months but

years.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has done nothing to correct this

problem,

and continues to promulgate anti-Veteran rules to delay, stall, and

deny

while it fights Court cases, which rather than reduce claims has

exacerbated

the backlog. The Courts gave the Department wide latitude to stay

Haas,

which it has thoroughly abused. Congress must take bold action NOW

to

mandate ways to catch up.

 

Congress can help to substantially reduce this backlog by mandating

the

following steps:

 

Claim Triage Process:

 

A civilian fellow with Veterans Affairs (VA) experience recently

testified

before your subcommittee, and concluded that simple claims should not

be

part of the complex process that is time consuming and creates delays

in

presumptive approval that at most requires a brief evaluation and

decision.

Triage should be performed on all claims. Any presumptive disease

claims

should go to a team that only does presumptive disorders. This

requires the

verification of " three data points " only, with emphasis on

giving the

" Congressional mandated " benefit of the doubt concerning

presumption,

service connection, and precedence to establish compensation rates.

 

Extensive Examples:

 

Stage four presumptive cancers are automatically 100% by VA rating

rules.

The Veteran is either going to die or is going to seek treatment for

the

cancers. Cancer treatment alone is enough to disable someone from

working.

 

In some disorders such as presumed diabetes, it is not the level of

created

disability but the level of treatment that is required to determine

the

disability rating. Only the verification of data is required with

no C & P.

In this case, the validation of four data points and the level of

treatment

are required. Obvious secondary conditions from the records could

be

included if there is a straightforward connection to the primary

disability.

Other more complicated residuals requiring a C & P to determine the

level of

disability can then be done and compensated based on the results.

Getting

the Veteran and his family the needed financial support in a timely

manner

should be the most important aspect. This also entitles the Veteran

to many

benefits from his respective State that is continually being

delayed.

 

This process also would allow those claims that are in contention to get

the

full attention, fact-finding, and " speed of resolution " they

deserve, also

contributing to the reduction in the backlog of claims.

 

The Department of Veterans Affairs must not be allowed special legal

privileges. It must be held to the same legal standards to which

every

citizen is entitled. The Department ignores evidence presented by

Veterans

as unverified, impugns the veracity of honorable Veterans, calls every

case

unique by denying case precedence, and refuses to assist Veterans in

accordance with law.

 

If the Court of Circuit Appeals honors a Veteran's statement in support

of a

claim that he loaded herbicides in Udorn, Thailand or similarly a

declassified report or other evidence confirms use, then all claims

for

Udorn are approved. Each case is not unique. Does it make any

sense to

have two Veterans serving side by side with one claim approved and the

other

denied for the same disorder within the BVA justice system? Congress

provided administrative adjudication powers to a department of the

Executive

Branch, not authority to act with judicial prejudice. The triage

looks at

similar periods of service, military occupations, duty stations,

diseases,

Court decisions and then rules in favor of the Veteran. The data

fields

necessary to search like citations and decisions already exist.

 

Example: Esophageal cancers are very prevalent in Vietnam Veterans

with

herbicide exposures, yet the Department of Veterans Affairs denies

esophageal cancers as a presumptive disorder, and then is overruled by

BVA

and CAVC claims that took years. Once the BVA or CAVC has approved

the

claim for one, then all such like claims should be approved.

Through use of

" artificial intelligence, " the Department can create rule-based

criteria for

all esophageal cancers. The rules then approve claims for widows

and

Veterans based on legal precedence and not necessarily subjective nexus

with

herbicides, particularly when data outside the DVA and IOM indicates

this

should be presumptive to tactical herbicides. We do not need to

prosecute

the same case 100,000 times rather than define one approval and approve

the

same 100,000 cases.

 

Congress must mandate that cases with decisions overturned by BVA and

the

Court of Appeals For Veterans Claims (CAVC) are legal precedent and

the

Department of Veterans Affairs must decide favorably in like cases.

 

 

Congress must mandate that spouses and families of Veterans who die prior

to

adjudication of their claims are legally and legitimately no different

from

the deceased Veteran and the Veteran's claim is " in perpetuity "

until

settled. There is no other system in the world that treats the

legal rights

of the claimant's descendents as different from the claimant. At

the DVA if

the Veteran dies before his claim is approved, the claim is then dead

as

well. This is a direct conflict of interest and leads to a bias not

to

perform in a timely manner. The widow then must reenter the claim

again and

submit for DIC, a process that creates catastrophic financial hardship

of

potentially many years for what should be a simple validation of

beneficiary

information and the immediate prioritization to " the head of the

line " for

deciding the claim.

 

These suggestions should result in the reduction of massive numbers

of

claims, associated costs, and delays of six to eighteen months or longer

of

financial hardship on the Veteran and his family or widow for

presumptive

disorders and like-claims that are already approved through a brief

evaluation and decision process. Additionally, there is little risk

of

abuse as these changes are in accordance with law as established by

Congress, and the Courts.

 

To further reduce claims backlog Congress should change the policy

on

Veterans who served in the toxic chemical swill on the Korean DMZ,

stop

denying those claims, and accept them as compensable. The DoD and

VA only

recognize a short period of time spraying occurred. This totally

nullifies

and discounts the laws of chemistry and the half-life of these

dioxins.

 

Congress itself has identified for civilian contractors that worked

" on or

near the Korean DMZ " for presumptive disorders a period from 1967 to

1971.

This span is about four times that of the span for Veterans. We

find a

total disparity in Civilian versus Veterans issues.

 

Example: A group of 14 engineers that served along the Korean DMZ

indicated

they sprayed this toxic swill from 1967 to 1971 on the DMZ and at

Camp

Casey. Many of these engineers have the same presumptive disorders

already

established for herbicide association and in some cases, there are

two

automatic presumptive cancer disorders leaving the DMZ with a diagnosis

of

pustular acne, a hallmark of dioxin exposures. Yet, the VA still

denies

claims based upon the denial of the laws of chemistry and the very

narrow

inclusive dates of which Congress itself is in disagreement with

regarding

civilian contractors.

 

Many of these Korean DMZ claims and herbicide spraying elsewhere should

be

automatic claims and not sitting there for nefarious reasons being

denied

and then appealed just creating more and more backlog. It is

imperative

that Congress remembers that most of the mortality and morbidity issues

are

caused by our own government.

 

Congress must mandate the same inclusive dates that it has established

for

civilians and the inclusive dates our Veterans indicate herbicide

spraying

occurred. Denied claims based on erroneous DoD inclusive dates must

be

reversed and approved.

 

Next, we have the Blue Water Navy exposure problems. Congress must

get

involved in this issue before all these seamen are dead and their widows

are

denied DIC payments.

 

Congress leaves the Veterans and their expert witnesses no forum with

which

to present their scientific and medical evidence. Congress must

make this

decision and not leave it up to DoD, VA, or IOM, which has too many

Executive Branch conflicts of interest and biases.

 

Many of us Veterans would welcome the opportunity to debate the IOM and

VA

in front of Congress utilizing some common sense and data but we are

never

given that chance. Congress does not want to hear the Veterans side

- only

the VA and the contracted IOM, both of which have numerous conflicts

of

interest, as does the DoD.

 

If all of these recommendations were implemented, we would not have to

wait

years to reduce the backlog of claims.

 

These recommendations would be of low risk in validity to the Congress

and

the nation. Many scientists as well as Veterans believe that the

way

dioxins work in the body's cells, any cancer or immune system dysfunction

is

an expected outcome. The data is there in many studies including,

the

opinion of a sitting member of Congress, a medical doctor, who under

oath,

has concluded before the BVA that esophageal cancers are associated.

 

Our personal beliefs, based on scientific data and biological

plausibility

is that all cancers, endocrine, and immune system disturbances in

homoeostasis are associated to the herbicides. Based on taking the

top

four-dioxin studies and doing a quantitative risk analysis, the

Standardized

Mortality Ratio (SMR) {number of observed deaths/number of expected

deaths}

delta for all cancer sites and specific cancer sites was very

slight. In

addition, the fact that Ranch Hand, the government's gold standard used

in

denial, now has admitted it missed a two-fold increase in all cancers

after

spending $160 million dollars.

 

We have estimated a reduction of at least 200,000 claims within 6 months

by

using " artificial intelligence " from BVA databases and the

recommend changes

noted herein.

 

Congress has already doubled the number of employees in the Veterans

Court

and the result was a 50% reduction in claims output, obviously a

poor

investment to say the least.

 

The time for Congressional action is NOW.

 

For those Congressmen copied, I would appreciate you providing copies

of

these suggestions to your respective committees.

 

Thank you in advance,

 

Charles Kelley

2978 Eastwood Drive

Snellville, GA 30078

DMZ Vietnam 67-68

2/94th Artillery 175 mm guns

Author Vietnam's Rain Agents

Orange, White, and Blue

(Weapons of Mass Destruction)

Messages in this topic (1)

______________________

______________________

3. (no subject)

Posted by: " Colonel Dan "

colonel-dan coloneldan1

Wed Feb 6, 2008 8:58 am ((PST))

 

DOD is like VA... they ignore laws and congress.. & do what they d'mm

well

please

 

Outlawed job conversions still in 2009 budget

 

By <rmaze?subject=Question

from ArmyTimes.com reader> Rick

Maze - Staff writer

Posted : Tuesday Feb 5, 2008 17:21:53 EST

 

<http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/02/military_defense_jobconversions_08020

5w/>

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/02/military_defense_jobconversions_080205

w/

The 2009 defense budget prepared by the Pentagon disobeys a

congressional

order to halt the conversion of military medical jobs into civilian

positions, senior lawmakers said.

The House Armed Services Committee pushed for a freeze on the conversion

of

the jobs out of concerns that it would hurt the qualify of medical care

for

service members and their families, and eliminate noncombat jobs that

could

offer a respite for battle-weary medical personnel.

The committee may push Defense Secretary Robert Gates for answers

Wednesday

as to why money was not included in the military personnel budget to

stop

the job conversions.

Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the committee chairman, said he is

" deeply

disappointed " that the budget " ignores the law's provision to

prohibit

replacing experienced military medical professionals with civilian

personnel. "

He is referring to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act, enacted Jan.

28,

which ordered an immediate halt to conversions, to include

reassigning

military people to any jobs that were not yet filled but were in the

process

of switching to civilian status.

Skelton aides said it appears to be too late to stop the Air Force

from

converting jobs, since its changes have been made. But the Navy and

Army

still have more than 2,000 positions held by uniformed service members

that

have been identified as jobs for federal civilians or

contractors.

Aides discovered that the 2009 budget did not include money to cover

the

costs of having service members continue to fill the positions when

they

looked at details of the Navy budget.

Navy officials told the committee that the order to stop conversions was

not

included in the budget because of timing - the fiscal 2009 budget

proposal

unveiled Monday was put together last year, well before the 2008

defense

policy bill was enacted.

It is more difficult to discern the Army's intentions. That

service's

personnel budget includes money for extra people because the Army is

growing

significantly, making it possible to cover the cost of additional

military

medical personnel without any requirement for Congress to provide

more

money.

Skelton said the Bush administration's failure to add money for

military

medical personnel is " all the more troubling " because Congress

stopped the

conversions " after learning about the difficulties our troops and

their

families had accessing adequate care. "

Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif., who chairs the House Armed Services

military

personnel panel, said she is not sure what to make of the

omission.

" By including in his budget request for fiscal 2009 the continuation

of

military-civilian conversions, which were recently outlawed, President

Bush

is violating a provision he himself signed into law, " she said.

" I hope this

is simply an oversight on the part of his administration and not an

attempt

to ignore his constitutional obligation to enforce the

law. "

There is suspicion this was not a completely innocent act, since the

House

Armed Services Committee made it known last March that it wanted to

freeze

the conversions and the Bush administration made clear it opposed the

idea.

When lawmakers proposed prohibiting the conversions, the Pentagon issued

a

policy statement saying such a ban would " eliminate the flexibility

of the

secretary of defense to use civilian medical personnel for jobs away

from

the battlefield and at the same time use the converted military billets

to

enhance the strength of operating units. "

 

Messages in this topic (1)

______________________

______________________

" Keep on, Keepin' on "

Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL " Colonel Dan "

See my web site at:

http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/

Change your email address when needed by signing in at

VeteranIssues/

Forward to other veterans, tell them to Sign up at:

VeteranIssues/join

------