The Purple Heart is among the most prestigious and oldest of all military decorations offered to members of our military. Additionally - it was the first such decoration offered to the "common soldier".
The concept came from George Washington, who was known to offer payments and awards to his soldiers for gallant behavior while on the battlefield. After the Continental Congress informed him that he would have to stop offering such commissions due to a lack of funding in 1782, he devised a way to continue awarding his troops and recognizing the tremendous work they were doing regardless of their rank. Thus, the Purple Heart was born.
The Purple Heart is awarded to members of the armed forces of the U.S. who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy and posthumously to the next of kin in the name of those who are killed in action or die of wounds received in action. It is specifically a combat decoration.
According to current Army regulations, PTSD does not warrant the award of a Purple Heart; however, there are people trying to change that.
"These guys have paid at least a high -- as high a price, some of them -- as anybody with a traumatic brain injury, as anybody with shrapnel wound, and what it does is it says this is the wound that isn’t worthy, and I say it is," said John E. Fortunato.
As a military wife and daughter, and as someone with countless friends currently deployed around the world protecting our country, I have heard numerous accounts of people returning home with PTSD. In many cases, these military personnel have been awarded a disability rating and are receiving disability benefits. According to some reports, the ongoing war in Iraq has resulted in the highest number of reported cases of PTSD ever (other reports suggest that it is only slightly behind Vietnam).
My father-in-law was sitting peacefully at his desk in his barracks in Iraq when he heard a loud noise and felt the ground move. Seconds later, a rocket plunged through his barracks. He was uninjured, but the effects still keep him awake at night.
An old roommate of mine was driving one of the vehicles along the roads outside of Baghdad when an RPG went through his truck. He escaped uninjured, without a scratch, but the soldier riding next to him was killed. Loud noises still send him into painful flashbacks.
It's painful to see, even from the outside. I can only imagine what's going on from the inside. And because of this, some people are working to bring the Purple Heart further into the open by offering this award to military personnel suffering from PTSD.
The Military Order of the Purple Heart is speaking up against them.
According to the Military Order of the Purple Heart - a group of combat veterans set up in 1932 to help protect the integrity of the Purple Heart Program and its members - such an award should not be offered to those military personnel suffering from PTSD:
"The Purple Heart was set up for combat wounds, for those who have shed blood, and I believe that although PTSD is a physical disease and is an injury ... [it] does not qualify for the merit of Purple Heart based on that," he said Tuesday.
Injuries that merit the Purple Heart must happen in a combat theater and must be a direct result of enemy action, said Jack Leonard, also of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
The group’s concern about PTSD is that it can be caused by other factors, not necessarily the enemy.
I, personally, am slightly undecided on this issue. On the one hand, I can hardly equate PTSD to someone who has lost a leg or a life. Sure, PTSD is hard...but with proper treatment and time, its effects can diminish. A soldier who lost his limb can never truly get that limb back.
But...I do recognize that these people have offered their service to protect our freedom - and they have done so at the expense of their own emotional discomfort and trauma. They should receive recognition for that even if the trauma did not manifest itself in the shedding of their blood.
What do you think?
Mental health is just all around poor in this country. It isn't considered as important as physical health, and is often ignored as a result. But if someone can get shot and not lose any limbs, and still earn the Purple Heart, I see no reason that someone with life-long mental issues resulting from war should not be recognized as well.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
As I was reading, I was thinking, "Why is mental health less important than physical health/" I mean, sure, you can breathe and walk and be physically alive with mental illness, but you can do those things after being shot, too (except, obviously the walking in case where the soldier is in a wheelchair, and the breathing, in the case of a fatal wound). PTSD can make life just as hard as losing a limb.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
At first I thought this was a simple question with a simple answer then all the buts started running in. I still think no they should not get the because the purple heart was meant for galantry of sorts. Not just people whom have shed blood, but those who have done so doing something that helped their comrades.
I remember the veteran wars of of another presidential election and one of those running was accused for stubbing his toe and getting a purple heart for it....Terrible.
Most cases of PTSD have been from happen chance situations. There other medals to offer for what happens after the situation. There is an accomodation medal and meritorious servous medal or the medal of honor...they could add a device that adds points to promotion or something.
So many things to consider, but I think that 'they' should be looking into how to help these people overcome the shock of war and adjust and cope, not give them a shiny to hang on the wall and remind them of the trechery they cannot forget.
U.S. Air Force troop
~T
All truths are easy to understand once discovered; The point is to discover them ~Galileo
I too have served for my country. I dont think the purple heart should be awarded to anyone who hasnt recieved a wound in battle from the enemy. The purple heart was created to serve a different purpose. To us old veterans it means that on some distant battlefield, far from home, your lifesblood soaks the ground because you chose to defend the Union, your family, and your beliefs. Because now you are close to death and see crimson stain your uniform, and yet you still continue to fight for OUR country.
They should create a different award for PTSD. I think its also a valid reason to give an award to the soldier. Herein lies the problem. You cant be diagnosed with PTSD till your Military Career is over. Thats why the award you do recieve is compensation in the form of money, and also a high enough disability percentage that you can seek free counseling for life. The VA gives every soldier with a case of PTSD a psychiatrist, and any other medical help he needs. If that isnt enough (when I know some people who would kill to get free medical, and counseling) than I dont know what is.
~~~><~~~
"One of the things that draws writers to writing, is that they can get things right that they got wrong in real life, by writing about them"
~ Tobias Wolffe
I'm torn on the issue as well...
It is a kind of "injury," although not a physical one, and it can be very dehabilitating.
But, like you said, the effects can diminish, and even disappear over time. I don't know. If it were me, and I escaped from something without a scratch and suffered from PTSD... if after a few years of therapy I wasn't suffering from it anymore, I wouldn't really feel like I deserved the honor of a Purple Heart.
The article did mention that part of the reason it isn't awarded for PTSD is because there's no way to prove it was caused by combat. I do agree with that.
And, I hate to say this, but I'm sure people have faked having it in the past to receive the disability payments, and some might do so just to receive the award.
I don't know. I guess I would say that PTSD isn't unworthy of the Purple Heart, depending on how it affects the people's lives, and the cause of it. But, like someone said in the forums of the article you posted, "I definitely wouldn't want to be the signature at the bottom of the memo that decides one way or the other."
Read my Blogs!
This is Why I'm Hot
And My Other Blogs
I'll share in the ambiguity of opinion of the other commenters here. The question you've brought up at first seems like a simple answer, but gets more complicated the more you think about it.
The first thought that crossed my mind is that yes, anyone who suffers in order to defend our country should be recognized and honored for that. PTSD is definitely something that causes our troops a great deal of suffering that can sometimes extend through someone's entire life. My godfather was in Vietnam and still can't sleep until he's checked all the locks on the windows and doors. He still has nightmares, even, and for a long time he couldn't come visit me in Florida in summer because the weather made him have flashbacks. (He also can't have children because of Agent Orange poisoning, but that's another discussion altogether)
The Purple Heart is sometimes given out to people whose wounds aren't that serious and don't inhibit any further life function once they're healed. However, those wounds were taken on the battlefield, in a foreign country, and had to be suffered through in a terrifying and potentially life-threatening place until they could be treated. PTSD comes on when a soldier is back in his home country with access to psychiatrists who can help him or her overcome it.
So, how do we honor the men and women who don't leave the war behind when they come home? Should we distinguish between those who bear physical signs of their time defending our country and those who bear mental signs of it? If we started giving out Purple Hearts to all the men and women with PTSD, would it become such a common award that it would lose all meaning? I certainly don't have any of the answers.
-------------------------
You must be the change you wish to see in the world -- Mahatma Ghandi
Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress. --Mahatma Gandhi
My Blog: http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/kablock
Rest in peace
yourfuneralguy
http://www.lowercostfuneral.com/rbrianblog
but I have a psychiatrist friend whose says psychological injury is worse than physical ones.
Those with heavy physical injuries are opposed to this notion and can become quite upset when confronted with this idea.
The Purple Heart was created specifically to honor those who have given their blood in defense of the country. Given that criteria... my first thought was why can we not create a new badge of merit that can be awarded to those who have suffered PTSD and other emotional distress or trauma at the hands of war?
But, I don't know. I think it is important to remember those who have and are dealing with PTSD as a result of their service to the country, but I would be more inclined to do so by ensuring they're taken care of. Not to mention the fact that nearly anyone who has been in a war zone is going to have some leftover emotional distress; it's the nature of war. Does their suffering only become worthy of recognition when it can be classified as PTSD? shouldn't they all be recognized in some way? Looking at it like that... you'd eventually have a purple heart for every soldier which defeats the purpose of the Purple Heart.
-----
~Fallon~
An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't- A. France
-----
I am a retired Marine, with admittedly little combat experience. I did Desert Storm but it was not all that bad. Anyway, with over one out of four American Women diagnosed as "clinically depressed," and put on medication... and nearly 4 out of 10 young boys diagnosed with mental illness (ADD, ADHD, etc) and put on medication... I think it is very obvious that as a society we are way to quick to diagnose someone as "mentally ill." There are PLENTY of medals and awards to give military personnel who have bravely and valiantly served in combat - lets leave the Purple Heart as something special for those who have actually shed blood. I am not saying that some do not legitimately suffer from PTSD - but I am saying that it is most-likely way over diagnosed, and that it certainly should not be in the same category as physical wounds. I would favor a separate medal all together for mental illness wounds, that is clearly different form the purple heart.
A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions listed above. A physical lesion is not required, however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record.
When contemplating an award of this decoration, the key issue that commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury. The fact that the proposed recipient was participating in direct or indirect combat operations is a necessary prerequisite, but is not sole justification for award.
By definition, the answer to the question is NO.
To recognize the mental and emotional damage inflicted by combat a new award should be created.
The DSM IV criteria could define the psychiatric injury.
The medal could be called the Purple Brain
This would clearly and fairly correspond to the purpose of the decoration process.
I completely agree with the idea of creating a new medal.
Though I don't know about calling it the "Purple Brain." =]
Mental health can also be faked - what if someone fakes it just to get a medal? I'm not saying that all people will do it, but a couple might. I honestly don't think I can make a decision on this issue. Like many others, I'm pretty torn. I see both sides - those really suffering from PTSD, but then there's always the ones who may just want to say they have a purple heart.....
I don't know... I'd say that anyone ridiculous enough to fake a mental illness in order to get a medal probably isn't planted firmly on the sanity ship in the first place.
-----
~Fallon~
An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't- A. France
-----
LOL - that's probably a good point!
I think I have been desensitized in the field of mental illness due to the number of people I know of that use (okay, just 1 person, but 1 is enough to make me question the motives of others) a fake mental illness to receive disability benefits, which I really don't understand since I fail to see how anyone can live on disability since the monthly checks are so small. The are prescribed medication for their supposed mental illness and then he just doesn't take it since he doesn't really need it. The way I figure it is if someone could fake it for a mere $900 a month I am sure there is the person out there that will do it for a medal - and probably the money as well.
My 87-year-old grandpa received the Purple Heart for his service in World War II because he was hit by schrapnel and got severe frostbite on both of his feet (getting dropped in Europe in winter without any boots will do that to you). He also had some kind of head trauma that caused him to lose his memory for a while, at which point he was consider MIA for almost 6 months until he resurfaced in a military hospital in Paris (over 150 miles from his original drop point and the rest of his unit).
I understand that PTSD can be extremely detrimental to a person's well-being, but I don't feel that it warrants the same kind of attention as the type of service that my grandfather gave to his country. I think the main reason that victims of PTSD should not be awarded the Purple Heart is because PTSD can arrise from a number of a different sources, not just from an attack by an enemy camp.
Those who are awarded the Purple Heart often experience the same types of mental anguish as someone who is diagnosed with PTSD, except that their mental health is somewhat overlooked in lieu of getting the best treatment for their physical injuries. My grandfather was lucky that he a) survived the Battle of the Bulge (19,000 were killed) and b) did not sustain injuries that prevented him from leading a normal life when he returned from the war. But his injuries caused a lot of hardship when he first returned home, as he was unable to work to support his young wife and two small children (under the age of 3).
As many veterans and their families will tell you, war changes a person. Many families fall apart when VFWs return home essentially a different person. These people are not awarded the Purple Heart, but they also are not diagnosed with PTSD. Everyone who serves in the military should be honored, thanked, and respected for what they did for us. But the Purple Heart should be saved for its original purpose, awarding those who have sustained physical injuries, injuries that caused bodily harm and potentially life-threatening (or life-taking) situations.
"Music expresses that which cannot be said and on which it is impossible to be silent." - Victor Hugo
Yup, I'm a music nerd.
People with mental problems are not less important than those who are mentally healthy. They should not be overlooked because as much as there are many things that lead to mental instability e.g drugs, they are still human and their achievements should be recognized.
.................................................................
Laura Green
Florida Drug Rehab
Florida Drug Rehab
Compelling reasons why the Purple Heart Medal should be awarded to those brave warriors suffering from "POST COMBAT STRESS DISORDER" ASAP are posted at Griffin's Lair, http://www.grifslair.com Visit today, thanks, Grif.