Supreme Court to rule on disibility time limitations

[shintao]

While time limitations maybe seem like a mundane issue, it happens more frequently than you might expect for various reasons. If you don't meet the dead lines, your case is denied. Getting benefits is difficult for veterans, and they should be advised to join a veteran organization and let their lawyers handle their claims.

=======
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have left nearly 40,000 U.S. troops wounded, caused veterans' disability claims to spiral and now brought new urgency to a legal fight over deadlines for claims.

The Supreme Court on Monday will hear a case testing whether a veteran -- in this situation, from the Korean War with severe mental illness -- should be prevented from appealing a Department of Veterans Affairs denial of benefits if he missed a 120-day time limit for judicial review of the decision.

"We've seen, as you would expect, a spike in disability claims during wartime," says lawyer Gregory Garre, representing the National Organization of Veterans' Advocates. "In these conflicts we've also seen a rise in traumatic stress injuries, psychological injuries and other problems that would cause a veteran to miss a deadline for appeal."

Supreme Court To Hear Disability Case - ABC News

 

[Toome]

Thank you for posting this.

What many non-military folks don't understand is that the process for service members who retire or separate from service is a bureaucratic paper shuffle. For the most part, it does work and does identify service-related disabilities that qualify an outgoing service member for continued medical care and other benefits. However, it is not designed to thoroughly scrutinize all service-related disabilities. Some of these medical conditions either don't surface until later or aren't detected through standard medical examination but show up during another type of exam.

The point here is that military personnel who serve, particularly those who survive combat, should not be penalized based on some arbitrary deadline established by some fat-assed, paper-pushing bureaucrat.

 

[Ozmar]

Thank you for posting this.

What many non-military folks don't understand is that the process for service members who retire or separate from service is a bureaucratic paper shuffle. For the most part, it does work and does identify service-related disabilities that qualify an outgoing service member for continued medical care and other benefits. However, it is not designed to thoroughly scrutinize all service-related disabilities. Some of these medical conditions either don't surface until later or aren't detected through standard medical examination but show up during another type of exam.

The point here is that military personnel who serve, particularly those who survive combat, should not be penalized based on some arbitrary deadline established by some fat-assed, paper-pushing bureaucrat.

As a veteran, I agree there should be a certain amount of leeway. I also understand that there is a system in place that requires deadlines. Maybe if they made the deadline twice a year instead of once a year. I know I had to scramble to get my claim in by July 31st. Otherwise, I would have waited until July 31st next year for the next opportunity to submit a claim. Maybe once every 6 months would be better.

 

[Toome]

As a veteran, I agree there should be a certain amount of leeway. I also understand that there is a system in place that requires deadlines. Maybe if they made the deadline twice a year instead of once a year. I know I had to scramble to get my claim in by July 31st. Otherwise, I would have waited until July 31st next year for the next opportunity to submit a claim. Maybe once every 6 months would be better.

Oh yeah, I agree that you have to have submission deadlines in order to establish some sort of orderly process. What I'm talking about is the final deadline that prevents any submission for claims that haven't been detected yet.

This by no way means that claims will automatically be accepted. It is more difficult to establish the service connection as more time passes by. However, at least there still remains a chance to make the claim and investigate its legitimacy. Whereas using a cutoff date prevents all such claims.

Troops deploy to more locations with more frequency than any other time in history. A lot of the countries they go to are third world shit holes. And while the military takes precautions against disease, there are some things that just can't be avoided. The Balkans, for instance, was a biological cesspool because of the absence of any sort of EPA standards. That means that the air, water and ground served as potential health hazards (when the snipers weren't shooting or whenever no one discovered the location of the million mines littered all over that country). The sort of diseases that may be potentially transmitted might not be detected for years after the service member leaves the military. These are the sort of things that need to be claimable.

 

[Ozmar]

I agree. I must point out though that the times we live in aren't really exceptional. Veterans of the first Gulf War, and Vietnam had a heck of a time too. Think cancers related to armor piercing rounds, agent orange, etc. While the system needs to be improved, the situation right now is not all that different.

 

[007]

I agree. I must point out though that the times we live in aren't really exceptional. Veterans of the first Gulf War, and Vietnam had a heck of a time too. Think cancers related to armor piercing rounds, agent orange, etc. While the system needs to be improved, the situation right now is not all that different.

Especially since the government figured that if they burnt down the central office where all veterans files were held, they wouldn't have to pay out so many benefits. Freakin' crooked bastards.

 

[Ozmar]

Huh?

 

[007]

Huh?

You're not very old are you? Or do you just not know much history?

A look back ? Military records center fire burned for two days, destroying millions of files

 

[Ozmar]

Huh?

You're not very old are you? Or do you just not know much history?

A look back ? Military records center fire burned for two days, destroying millions of files

I know plenty of history, just not every little nook and cranny. Normally if someone makes a statement such as yours, they assume that other parties may not be familiar with what one is talking about, and provide a link with the initial comment. Or do you just not know etiquette?