Soldier suicides on the rise ...

[shesulsa]

Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006.

At the same time, the number of attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries in the Army has jumped sixfold since the Iraq war began. Last year, about 2,100 soldiers injured themselves or attempted suicide, compared with about 350 in 2002, according to the U.S. Army Medical Command Suicide Prevention Action Plan.

.......

The Army was unprepared for the high number of suicides and cases of post-traumatic stress disorder among its troops, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have continued far longer than anticipated.

FULL ARTICLE

The article goes on to link other service-related factors with suicide. Thoughts?

 

[michaeledward]

One can't help but wonder about the number of suicides that are occuring after release from military service. We know that there is a large number of ex-soldiers suffering after their time in Iraq and Afghanistan. The military does not count Mental Health concerns if they do not manifest within six months of separation.

With each passing day, the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq become less clear. And with less clarity of objective, it is not difficult to recognize that despair can set into our service people.

Or, perhaps I should say, the clarity we have toward the mission in Iraq, is disheartening to our services. (See 'recent signing statement' 'President Bush')

 

[Big Don]

One can't help but wonder if the number of suicides, is like the number of criminal acts attributed to veterans, that is, 5 times less than those who didn't serve. If I had to make a guess, this would probably be a good one.
Yes, we are in a war, and military morale is UP. Morale was extremely low during the Clinton years, knowing the Commander in Chief hates you, kind of drags morale down...

 

[Big Don]

With each passing day, the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq become less clear. And with less clarity of objective, it is not difficult to recognize that despair can set into our service people.

The missions remain the same, the objectives remain the same, the only ones who don't recognize this are those that are so biased to the left that they claim the missions are failing, and thus unclear.

 

[Big Don]

Breast implants linked to suicide Lots of things are factors in suicides, to blame the military is ridiculous.

 

[shesulsa]

So are you saying there is no credence to the theory behind Battle Fatigue? To continued exposure to derogatory comments and hateful speech? To the decades of documented problems with military health care?

And what would you be basing this on?

 

[MA-Caver]

Breast implants linked to suicide Lots of things are factors in suicides, to blame the military is ridiculous.

Yeah you're right but to say that the military is a contributing factor isn't ridiculous. A soldier goes out into life threatening situations in hostile environments day after day and is ordered to. If they don't obey that order they face consequences. There are a lot of cliche's that could be said here, hard to make friends when the next day said friend is blown up by a IED, walking around (off duty) in a peaceful neighborhood and said neighborhood blows up from a suicide bomber, driving back to base after a relatively quiet day on patrol and an RPG or machine gun attack occurs... and so on.
Why people decry the comparisons of Vietnam with this particular "war" is a mystery to me. Unclear objectives, daily hazards from non-combatants, crimes witnessed and unreported and again, so on.
I find it appalling that the military thinks that severe symptoms of PTSD (or as George Carlin would say... lets call it for what it really is... "shell shock!") usually occur within the first six months. Seems they forget how well they train their troops to deal with the stress of combat. Forget that some people deal with stress better than others but eventually it catches up with everyone.
This is a serious problem, it needs immediate serious solutions.

And I don't think comparing breast implants to urban combat is a good one.

 

[michaeledward]

The missions remain the same, the objectives remain the same, the only ones who don't recognize this are those that are so biased to the left that they claim the missions are failing, and thus unclear.

Then define those clear missions for me?


As I understood them ... (of course, they kept changing with the passage of time)

Mission in Iraq: to disarm the Nation State of Weapons of Mass Destruction - WMD did not exist at the time of the invasion.

Mission in Iraq: to change the regime of Saddam Hussein - Saddam Hussien was hanged by the neck until dead on December 30, 2006

Mission in Iraq: to spread Democracy and stability in a turbulant part of the world - No functioning government in Iraq. Iran's authority and prestige in the region rising.


So, what is the mission?
What is the objective?

 

[Big Don]

So are you saying there is no credence to the theory behind Battle Fatigue? To continued exposure to derogatory comments and hateful speech? To the decades of documented problems with military health care?

And what would you be basing this on?

So, derogatory comments and hateful speech such as the antiwar crowd regularly heaps on our military is now bad for morale? Gee, they almost always preface their despicable remarks with "We support the troops, but,"...
What do I base my opinion on? How about personal experience? I was in the Army when Bill Clinton took office, you want to talk about a downturn in morale, try having a commander in chief who hates you. There were a number of articles a few weeks ago in which the "alarming" number of returned soldiers committing violent crimes was lamented. However, after about 5 minutes of research the TRUE statistics were shown that returned soldiers committed only one fifth the amount of crimes non-servicemen of the same age group committed. It is another instance of the left controlled media slamming those who serve, and by extension the president, this tactic is far from being new, but no less disgusting for it's age.

 

[Ninjamom]

She- I think his point was NOT that this isn't a problem, but that, even with the increase in rate, the military is still healthier than the 'average American'.

I just read an article yesterday linking the degree of PTSD in soldiers to the history (number/severity/frequency) of concussions they've suffered.

While we usually do not have to contend with the stress effects of daily life-and-death battle, this finding should be of special interest and concern to those of us in the MA community.

 

[MA-Caver]

She- I think his point was NOT that this isn't a problem, but that, even with the increase in rate, the military is still healthier than the 'average American'.

I just read an article yesterday linking the degree of PTSD in soldiers to the history (number/severity/frequency) of concussions they've suffered.

While we usually do not have to contend with the stress effects of daily life-and-death battle, this finding should be of special interest and concern to those of us in the MA community.

Uh, Ninjamom do you have a link to this article?

 

[Big Don]

Then define those clear missions for me?


As I understood them ... (of course, they kept changing with the passage of time)

I dispute that you understood them, but that is a whole different topic...

Mission in Iraq: to disarm the Nation State of Weapons of Mass Destruction - WMD did not exist at the time of the invasion.

God, are you still on that? The facts are: Hussein was ordered to disarm and PROVE the disposition of the WMD he had previously admitted to having and that ever major intelligence service in the world believed he had. He did not either provide documentation or allow inspectors unfettered access. Thus, no one could be sure whether or not WMD's were still a threat. In fact, no less than Bill Clinton (and he only lies about sex...) spoke on the threat of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, as did a who's who of democrat politicians when Clinton was in office, and indeed right up until they realized President Bush would, with our allies ignore the UN's hypocrisy and act to end the threat.

Mission in Iraq: to change the regime of Saddam Hussein - Saddam Hussien was hanged by the neck until dead on December 30, 2006

So, advocating regime change was wrong when Bush did it, but, when Clinton, and others, said Hussein was a threat, that was different?

Mission in Iraq: to spread Democracy and stability in a turbulant part of the world - No functioning government in Iraq. Iran's authority and prestige in the region rising.

So, Iran having an irrational, racist leader is enhancing to the prestige of Iran? Gee, When President Bush is accused of being irrational and racist, your ilk say that lowers our prestige...

So, what is the mission?
What is the objective?

The mission is as it has always been, to further the spread of freedom, by establishing stable democracies.
What is taking so long? You mean aside from the left in America constantly trying to hinder the Bush administration's efforts? Aside from the supposed anti-war kooks (even US Senators) comparing American troops with Nazi's, when they had no problem with Clinton defying the UN and bombing Bosnia.
Aside from the Democrat controlled congress stifling funding? Aside from that? Gee, I don't know, things take time. President Bush has never proffered a time table, in fact, he specifically said that this war on terror will extend far beyond his presidency. Where was the "Exit strategy?" gee, FDR and Truman had no "Exit Strategy" from WWII, Clinton said the troops in Bosnia would be home by Christmas (1998!)
The quote that is most relevant here isn't the words of a politician, however, but those of Gen Douglas Mac Arthur: "There is no substitute for victory."

 

[Ninjamom]

Uh, Ninjamom do you have a link to this article?

Will search for it, and post when/if I find it again. (Wish I had saved the link - I would have included it with my original post.)

 

[shesulsa]

So, derogatory comments and hateful speech such as the antiwar crowd regularly heaps on our military is now bad for morale? Gee, they almost always preface their despicable remarks with "We support the troops, but,"...

So ... let me get this straight ... if we as Americans do our civic duty and voice our disapproval at the actions of the government ... the government which was designed to guarantee our right, priveledge and requirement to do so ... that government and freedoms our soldiers fight for every day of their lives ... it is construed by all soldiers that we are attacking them even when we clearly state we're not? I can't help but wonder if this thought process is perceived independently or encouraged by certain party factions. Actually, I don't wonder. I know.

What do I base my opinion on? How about personal experience? I was in the Army when Bill Clinton took office, you want to talk about a downturn in morale, try having a commander in chief who hates you.

Citation please. Did he send you hate mail in the field?? I know I make emotional arguments but, this is such an emotional statement it can't be held up for argument, sorry.

There were a number of articles a few weeks ago in which the "alarming" number of returned soldiers committing violent crimes was lamented. However, after about 5 minutes of research the TRUE statistics were shown that returned soldiers committed only one fifth the amount of crimes non-servicemen of the same age group committed. It is another instance of the left controlled media slamming those who serve, and by extension the president, this tactic is far from being new, but no less disgusting for it's age.

There's a lot to say about this statement. First, the media is a business plain and simple. We all know how smarmy the media is - they needed a fresh story. The old "what the hell are we still doing in Iraq" story is such old hat now it's hardly worth reporting. We starting seeing a LACK of war coverage whatsoever until someone shook them up. So they dug beneath the barrel and came out with that "study" - I won't argue it was trash, but I have serious doubts behind the whole "left-leaning" media thing. When the president is a democrat, the media lean right. When the president is republican the media lean left. It's an angle for examination. Then some just bend over and shove their heads up their asses - because they need to turn a buck. Hard to aim that way, but whatever.

Pointing out problems is healthy - your take on it is a slam on those who serve and I can understand why. It seems the service is a thankless J.O.B. these days. I won't defend people who disagree with the Iraq strategy and tranfer it onto personnel - I think they're ignorant people who can't comprehend the purpose of duty nor what the necessity behind following orders is. I also will NEVER agree with ANYONE who says that if I disagree with the foreign war policy that I don't support troops. I've volunteered, donated, honored our service men and women consistently - AND I WANT THEM HOME!!! There is NOTHING wrong NOR conflicting with those feelings. Those who "slam" your president are not by extension slamming you nor any other soldier. Those who slam soldiers are ignorant. Those who are in need of a story are heartless businesses who don't care who they hurt or dishonor to turn a buck (see the aim analogy above).

Finally - I REFUSE TO APOLOGIZE FOR HAVING CONCERN OVER THE WELL-BEING, FUTURE WELFARE AND PATHETIC, DISGUSTING LACK OF PROPER CARE FOR OUR FIGHTING MEN AND WOMEN. You will not convince me to stop talking about it. You can spew whatever you want and accuse me of slamming military personnel and the president and rutabagas and broccoli for all I care - but I will not stop caring about what happens to soldiers who have fought and fought, given up their lives and livelihood, families and MINDS. They MUST be cared for. It should be a TOP priority.

Say what you will. Some of these soldiers need help they are not getting. If you think they don't ... then you're part of the problem yourself.

 

[michaeledward]

The mission is as it has always been, to further the spread of freedom, by establishing stable democracies.

I refer you to the Authorization for use of military force in Iraq.

http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

In this document you find exactly zero references to establishing stable democracies.

President Bush has never proffered a time table, in fact, he specifically said that this war on terror will extend far beyond his presidency.

The use of military force in Iraq is not connected to the 'war on terror'. Certainly, it was not in any way connected to the attacks of September 11, 2001; nor the Cole, nor the African Embassy bombings, nor the first WTC attacks.

And, there are plenty of statements about the amount of time the invasion of Iraq would take by those in the Bush administration; "six days, six weeks, I doubt six months" by the SecDef. The President had ample opportunity to correct any mis-statements.

see www.bushoniraq.com

But, time-table, or not, the continued occupation of a country where we are not wanted, and where we are not making the political progress necessary must be disheartening to any soldier having to watch the Iraq government take vacations in Europe, whilst they continue to be targets.

 

[Ninjamom]

Link for study in the New England Journal of Medicine: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/health/31brain.html

Battle Concussions Tied to Stress Disorder
By BENEDICT CAREY
Published: January 31, 2008

About one in six combat troops returning from Iraq have suffered at least one concussion in the war, injuries that, while temporary, could heighten their risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder, researchers are reporting.

The study, in The New England Journal of Medicine, is the military’s first large-scale effort to gauge the effect of mild head injuries — concussions, many of them from roadside blasts — that some experts worry may be causing a host of undiagnosed neurological deficiencies.

The new report found that soldiers who had concussions were more likely than those with other injuries to report a variety of physical and mental symptoms in their first months back home, including headaches, poor sleep and balance problems. But they were also at higher risk for the stress disorder, or PTSD, and that accounted for most of the difference in complaints, the researchers concluded. Symptoms of the disorder include irritability, sleep problems and flashbacks.

Experts cautioned that the study had not been designed to detect subtle changes in mental performance, like slips in concentration or short-term memory, that might have developed in the wake of a concussion and might be unrelated to stress reactions. Many returning veterans are still struggling with those problems, which can linger for months.

The findings are in line with previous research linking concussions to post-traumatic stress disorder that develops after frightening events outside a military context, like car accidents; concussions from athletic collisions rarely lead to the disorder.

“This study is a very good first step, and an important one, but like any first step it should lead us to ask further questions about these injuries,” said Brian Levine, a neuropsychologist at the Rotman Research Institute and the University of Toronto, who was not involved in the study.

Now that the prevalence of combat concussions is better known, Dr. Levine said, the next step should be to assess troops’ cognitive functioning early on and track it over time, before and after combat.

In the study, military psychiatrists had 2,525 soldiers from two Army infantry brigades fill out questionnaires asking about missed workdays and dozens of kinds of physical and emotional difficulties, including symptoms of PTSD. The soldiers had been back home from Iraq for three to four months.

The questionnaires also asked about concussions and their severity. A concussion is an injury from a blow or shock to the head that causes temporary confusion or loss of consciousness, without any visible brain damage. The investigators found that 384 of the soldiers, or 15 percent, reported at least one concussion. One-third of that 15 percent had blacked out when injured.

The severity of the concussion was related to the risk of developing the stress disorder, the survey showed. Nearly 44 percent of the soldiers who had blacked out qualified for the diagnosis, about three times the rate found in soldiers with other injuries. Among soldiers who did not black out, the rate of PTSD was 27 percent, significantly higher than the 16 percent rate among veterans with other kinds of injuries.

“There’s a lot we don’t know about these injuries, but we do know that context is important,” said the lead author, Dr. Charles W. Hoge, director of the division of psychiatry and neuroscience at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. “Being in combat, you’re going to be in a physiologically heightened state already. Now imagine a blast that knocks you unconscious — an extremely close call on your own life, and maybe your buddy went down. So you’ve got the trauma, and maybe the effect of the concussion is to make it worse.”

In an editorial that accompanied the study, Richard A. Bryant, a psychologist at the University of New South Wales in Australia, emphasized that concussed troops “should not be led to believe that they have a brain injury that will result in permanent damage.”

On the contrary, Dr. Bryant and other experts say, the link to post-traumatic stress suggests that mild brain injuries have a significant psychological component, which can improve with treatment.

Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said the study, and the interest of doctors and military officials in brain trauma, were long overdue.

 

[shesulsa]

Michaeledward, please either contribute to the topic of the thread or bow out. This is about soldiers in need, not the bogus policy of the Iraq war.

Thank you.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Michaeledward, please either contribute to the topic of the thread or bow out. This is about soldiers in need, not the bogus policy of the Iraq war.

Thank you.

I agree. The scuicides are happening because these people are in a conflict, fair or not. It would be happening even if the US were under direct attack.
Sean

 

[michaeledward]

Michaeledward, please either contribute to the topic of the thread or bow out. This is about soldiers in need, not the bogus policy of the Iraq war.

Thank you.

I was taught that it takes two to have a conversation. I can only wonder why this is directed to only one half of the conversation.

And, I believe I am contributing to the thread. I have been fighting and arguing for all soldiers since before the war began.

These soldiers are not committing suicide at the highest rates since the military started counting, some twenty-five years ago, in a vacuum. The military screens incoming soldiers to filter out those with propencities toward suicide before they get in. To ask what is causing these persons who were stable, to take their lives, is a critical part of the question. To recognize the effects of the continued deployment in hostile territory is a critical part of your question.

 

[Ninjamom]

Health issues affecting our service members are serious concerns, and we have a responsibility to those who have sacrificed so much, to care for them, their wounds, and in cases of those who make the ultimate sacrifice, their surviving children and spouses. I can't stand the thought of anyone 'playing politics' with their wounds.

With that said, I noticed something alarming, yet educational, when I went to search for the link to the study that I had mentioned. The link that I posted reflected the story pretty much the way I recalled it: those who had suffered concussions were at a higher risk for developing PTSD, but this was in some sense 'good news', because the symptoms could be better treated and some intervention undetaken.

However, while searching, I found far more links to stories in media outlets that reported a nearly 180-degree opposite position - that a controversial study revealed that many soldiers were being treated for concussions, when they were really suffering from PTSD. (For instance, see USA Today article here.)

The actual article from the NEJofM may be viewed in full here.

I hope this hasn't taken this serious issue too far afield/off-topic, but it served as a powerful reminder to me to double-check sources and beware of reading preconceptions (my own or others') into news articles.