Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
USA Today
March 23, 2009
Pg. 1
Army process may send ailing to battle
By Gregg Zoroya, USA Today
WASHINGTON — The Army's process for determining a soldier's fitness for combat is so confusing that it increases the chance of sending ailing troops to war, an Army inspector general's report obtained by USA TODAY says.There are at least 15 "inadequate, unsynchronized or conflicting" policies governing fitness, which "increases the likelihood that soldiers who do not meet medical deployability requirements may be deployed in violation of one or more policies," the report concludes.
Army Secretary Pete Geren requested the probe last June after soldiers, Congress and veterans groups raised concerns "regarding the growing perception that the Army is deploying soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan who are medically unfit," the Jan. 28 report says. The Army provided USA TODAY an executive summary of the report under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report did not list any specific medical conditions that afflicted unfit soldiers who were deployed.
Geren made the request a month after USA TODAY reported that more than 45,000 troops— including 37,000 Army soldiers — were sent to combat since 2003 even though doctors had found them medically unfit for war weeks before their deployment.
"The Army is concerned about the medical deployment process," Geren said in a statement. "More work remains to be done to fully correct the findings addressed in the report. We are making progress … to ensure that our soldiers meet medical requirements before they are deployed."
Geren says the Army will change how it determines a soldier's medical fitness for combat. They will be the latest effort to correct a problem that surfaced in 2006, when U.S. Central Command leaders learned that commanders were overriding medical concerns and deploying troops with health problems, says Army Col. Bryan Gamble, the surgeon for Central Command, which oversees U.S. troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The report's key findings:
*Confusion exists over who makes the final decision to send a soldier with a health issue to war: a soldier's commander or a medical officer, and the Army has "no clear resolution process" to settle disagreements between a doctor and commander over a soldier's fitness.
*Many commanders and Army doctors are not aware of new Central Command guidelines that add medical conditions that would make a soldier unfit for combat. Last year, the command added vision and hearing loss as conditions to the list of problems that would stop a soldier's combat deployment.
*The Army has "no clear resolution process" to settle disagreements between a doctor and commander over a soldier's fitness, the report says. "This lack of clarity may result in confusion and conflict regarding a soldier's deployability determination."
*Electronic systems containing the medical records that allow commanders to track a soldier's readiness are "not always timely or accurate." Many soldiers are still required to hand-carry to their commanders medical documents explaining their physical limitations.
*Most commanders and the doctors who screen troops to deploy are not aware that a waiver from a war-zone medical commander is required if a soldier with a medical problem was going to Iraq or Afghanistan.
"This new report is an outrage, but not a surprise," says Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. "We have had serious concerns for years that medically unfit troops are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan."
Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, Army spokesman, says the all the recommendation in the inspector general's report have been accepted. The Army has educated commanders about guidelines, simplified the fitness process and incorporated more stringent Central Command rules into Army policy, he says.
A process for settling disputes over a G.I.'s fitness and a new electronic record system are being developed, Garver says. Commanders are now the final authority on deciding whether a soldier will deploy, and where there are disagreements between a doctor and a commander, the first general officer in the chain of command will make the final decision, Garver says.
Garver says it is not Army policy for soldiers to hand-carry their medical documents to a commander and "guidance is currently being re-issued Armywide to ensure full compliance."
Investigators spoke with 1,637 people at 24 Army installations for the report.
March 23, 2009
Pg. 1
Army process may send ailing to battle
By Gregg Zoroya, USA Today
WASHINGTON — The Army's process for determining a soldier's fitness for combat is so confusing that it increases the chance of sending ailing troops to war, an Army inspector general's report obtained by USA TODAY says.There are at least 15 "inadequate, unsynchronized or conflicting" policies governing fitness, which "increases the likelihood that soldiers who do not meet medical deployability requirements may be deployed in violation of one or more policies," the report concludes.
Army Secretary Pete Geren requested the probe last June after soldiers, Congress and veterans groups raised concerns "regarding the growing perception that the Army is deploying soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan who are medically unfit," the Jan. 28 report says. The Army provided USA TODAY an executive summary of the report under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report did not list any specific medical conditions that afflicted unfit soldiers who were deployed.
Geren made the request a month after USA TODAY reported that more than 45,000 troops— including 37,000 Army soldiers — were sent to combat since 2003 even though doctors had found them medically unfit for war weeks before their deployment.
"The Army is concerned about the medical deployment process," Geren said in a statement. "More work remains to be done to fully correct the findings addressed in the report. We are making progress … to ensure that our soldiers meet medical requirements before they are deployed."
Geren says the Army will change how it determines a soldier's medical fitness for combat. They will be the latest effort to correct a problem that surfaced in 2006, when U.S. Central Command leaders learned that commanders were overriding medical concerns and deploying troops with health problems, says Army Col. Bryan Gamble, the surgeon for Central Command, which oversees U.S. troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The report's key findings:
*Confusion exists over who makes the final decision to send a soldier with a health issue to war: a soldier's commander or a medical officer, and the Army has "no clear resolution process" to settle disagreements between a doctor and commander over a soldier's fitness.
*Many commanders and Army doctors are not aware of new Central Command guidelines that add medical conditions that would make a soldier unfit for combat. Last year, the command added vision and hearing loss as conditions to the list of problems that would stop a soldier's combat deployment.
*The Army has "no clear resolution process" to settle disagreements between a doctor and commander over a soldier's fitness, the report says. "This lack of clarity may result in confusion and conflict regarding a soldier's deployability determination."
*Electronic systems containing the medical records that allow commanders to track a soldier's readiness are "not always timely or accurate." Many soldiers are still required to hand-carry to their commanders medical documents explaining their physical limitations.
*Most commanders and the doctors who screen troops to deploy are not aware that a waiver from a war-zone medical commander is required if a soldier with a medical problem was going to Iraq or Afghanistan.
"This new report is an outrage, but not a surprise," says Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. "We have had serious concerns for years that medically unfit troops are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan."
Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, Army spokesman, says the all the recommendation in the inspector general's report have been accepted. The Army has educated commanders about guidelines, simplified the fitness process and incorporated more stringent Central Command rules into Army policy, he says.
A process for settling disputes over a G.I.'s fitness and a new electronic record system are being developed, Garver says. Commanders are now the final authority on deciding whether a soldier will deploy, and where there are disagreements between a doctor and a commander, the first general officer in the chain of command will make the final decision, Garver says.
Garver says it is not Army policy for soldiers to hand-carry their medical documents to a commander and "guidance is currently being re-issued Armywide to ensure full compliance."
Investigators spoke with 1,637 people at 24 Army installations for the report.