Being good Americans we honor those who do give their lives in the defense of our freedoms. We call them heroes. We have "Memorial Day", a Federal holiday in their honor. To again quote Mr. Lincoln, "We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live." No one questions that they are heroes. However, let us look just a little farther in this speech, "The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract." Now we run into that which may be a problem. Many veterans feel that they made a mistake in their service. They forgot to die for their country, thereby becoming heroes, and therefore are not considered to be heroes but burdens. Perhaps there are those who would say that I am prejudiced because I am a combat veteran of Viet Nam. Perhaps that is true. But please hear the author lay out a presentation of facts.

The fact is that we have a system of hospitals for veterans, for those who have laid their lives on the line and though they did not die for their country, they were injured or wounded (physically or psychologically) as a result of their service. Many of these now need medical care. But the system to which they must turn is in deep and serious trouble. It is staffed by personnel of which thirty five to forty percent should not be working at a Veteran's Hospital because they are there not, as the VA proclaims "In Service to the Veteran", but just "showing up" to collect a paycheck. And having to serve veterans, or anyone else, is merely an inconvenience to these few which they must endure having to deal with veterans in order to receive that sought-after paycheck. Over the years during which I have been availing myself of the services of the VA, I have noticed that these services are becoming fewer, thinner, and harder to find. For instance, the "Pain Management Clinic" which used to be held at the Long Beach VA facility whose purpose was to assist veterans in learning how to handle their physical pain without having to resort to drug therapies, no longer exists. At one outpatient clinic, they used to have a cardiologist at the clinic. They used to have a neurologist at that clinic. Both of these medical specialists had plenty of genuine cases to handle. No more. Both have retired and neither was ever replaced. Where they used to have a full time physical therapist, that person is now required to spend their time between two or among three outpatient clinics throughout the area. So if I need physical therapy which I might have received at a convenient site, now I have to go out to the Medical Center which is a long trip for one who must use public transportation as it exists in my area. It makes me think that perhaps the game is that by offering reduced services, veterans will not be able to avail themselves of those services which means that those services can be cut "because no one uses them".

I am reminded of a scene in the documentary, "Elizabeth R". In that scene, the Queen's Chancellor of the Exchequer comes to her and reports that there are many veterans of the war then concluded (the defeat of the Spanish Armada) who were roaming around London. He reported that most of these men were sick and injured as a direct result of that recent conflict. He queried the Queen as to what was to be done with these men. Elizabeth's curt reply, "That is not our concern. Send them home".

When the Chancellor reminded her that they were in ill health, she replied that the Treasury of the Crown had not the money to be able to afford to be concerned with that "unfortunate happenstance". If I remember correctly (or pretty close thereto) she continues, "The war is over. We have no further need of their services. Send them home!!"

Is the reader aware that, among other examples, according to private social service agencies in the Los Angeles area, fully one third of the "street people", those whom we see sleeping in the doorways of businesses, in alleys and on bus benches every night, are Vietnam veterans? Many in need of psychological assistance because of what they were forced to witness and observe in the war zone having been drafted and had no "say" in where they were sent in the service of their country?

The problem, as I see it, is that neither political party has the slightest actual interest in the fate/plight of veterans. One group doesn't like the military at all, and the other group has absolutely no desire to own up to its financial obligations. During the Democrat National Convention which was held in Los Angeles in 2000, it was widely reported in the newspapers that among the demonstrators who had received permission to "demonstrate" outside the Convention Center were veterans. This is germain because many of these articles went further to report that the veterans were the one group which the delegates did not want to face. There was an admission by many of the delegates which was quoted by these newspapers which stated the problem these delegates were having as: because many were legislators (both Federal and State) who recognized what a raw deal veterans have received since 1975 and that it was the direct fault/responsibility of those very legislators. How many times have we seen Congresspersons and Senators of all political stripes on television, on talk shows, heard them on radio, and they say "Oh yes, we love our veterans, we will do all we can for our veterans". and that is as far as it gets. In point of fact, they sit in their offices on their big fat armchairs and promptly forget anything which they might have said, any promise which they might have made to the veterans. And every veteran knows that the probability is at least 99% that those very Congresspersons and Senators never will do anything. Nor had they ever at any time any intention of taking any constructive action. But they knew and gave the "correct" answer when they were pressed in public.

My wife put it best. She once said to me, "Any country which treats their veterans as I have seen this Country treat its veterans has no right to enjoy the freedoms which were won for it by its veterans"

My wife is very thankful always for that which our military did for her native Country. My wife is European. Her country was liberated by GI's in WWII. In fact she once told me that while her parents were in a square in Amsterdam celebrating the liberation of Holland, (my wife was then a baby of about one year) the American troops were still cleaning enemy snipers out of various towers and buildings around the square. Would that many of our own citizens have half the gratitude which she exhibits. How has she exhibited it? She was a volunteer at a VA Medical facility for many many hours dealing directly with veterans.

And lest we forget, may the reader recall that for a long time our Government denied that there was any damage from Agent Orange? Gulf War Syndrome? They are dead set against smoking and claim that they never had anything at all to do with the "habit" and yet veterans may recall that in the field ration packs up through the Korean "conflict" (and possibly the opening of Viet Nam) contained cigarettes. That the military enabled and assisted cigarette manufacturers to make sure that veterans in the field had all the cigarettes they could handle. That many, including the author, never considered smoking until they were in the service?

I could cite many experiences, but a few will suffice. When I was at a VA Medical Center which shall here not be identified, I asked why they did not hire more veterans to the positions at that Center. The doctor whom I asked said that she would check and get back to me. The next day she saw me and reported that she had asked my question at a staff meeting and "They told me that they do not hire veterans because veterans cause too many problems." Having observed the difference between the actions and conduct of the paid staff and the many veterans who did volunteer work at that facility, I understood immediately. She was absolutely correct. The veterans did cause too many problems. They were there to do precisely what the VA claimed it was doing in the spirit which the VA claimed it was rendering its service. This reflected very negatively on the paid staff who were not so dedicated to the care of veterans. So instead of raising the service standard for the staff by hiring veterans to set an example, just got rid of and kept out those who would set the excellent example. By the way, I am given to understand that if you wish to have a job/position at the Bureau of Indian Affairs, you are a shoo-in if you are a Native American. Perhaps the same sort of standard ought to apply to the Veterans Administration. Right now, it is painfully apparent that staff positions in the VA are, and for at least the last ten years have been, filled on the basis of race, gender and other "politically correct" concerns such as quotas. This without regard to work ethic, understanding of the special mission which is the VA's legacy and mandate or anything else.

When I was at another VA facility, having had very serious surgery, when in a ward which was just one care-step below CCU/ICU, I heard the nurses complaining about the fact that there were only three nurses on the floor for the entire overnight shift. This with somewhere between thirty and forty patients in their charge. And two of them ended up that night taking care of a very ill man who was brought in in the middle of the night. If there had been an emergency, many lives would have been in danger because in this ward, all of the patients were on IV's and many were unable to fend for themselves. I challenge anyone to tell me that this sort of thing would be allowed by any accrediting agency in any public or private civilian hospital anywhere in this Country!!

VA officials claim that they are cutting down on services because there are fewer and fewer veterans in our area who require them. That the services are not that fully utilized. So why are there interminably long waits to get an appointment with dermatology, dentistry, or physical medicine? Why, after the appointment is made and the day arrives do veterans normally wait for an hour or more beyond their appointment time to see a doctor? Especially when the VA absolutely requires that the veterans be on time for their appointments or lose their place? Is that respect??

President Bush, in a speech given the week before his election, promised to upgrade and restore the Veterans Administration. To date, at least as nearly as I can tell, he has done nothing. In my humble opinion, he can start that process without spending any money. The first step should be to get rid of those of the staff who's attitude and quality of service do not meet the standard which the VA professes to uphold.

The second step however, would be that thereafter, it would help greatly if this Agency were properly funded. Its budget has been squeezed for years. Thousands of staff have been laid off each year just in the area in which I live.

A question: What are we going to say to veterans who come back from the current war which by any reasonable estimate is going to take years if not decades (and make no mistake about it, the "war on terror" is a war in every sense of the word)? Are we going to tell them, "Well, you must understand, even though we are terribly sorry for your current condition, we don't wish to expend the funds which would be required to take care of you now that you went out and got yourself injured like that. But then remember, you volunteered. We didn't require you to go and defend us."

I guess it all depends on how much each person who is a citizen of this country prizes their freedoms.

vurdraak@pacbell.net

Opinion Piece # 11

IN SEARCH OF "ILITIES"

Click to Read

Home / List of Topics