LOGO
USA Society
USA social debate

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 11-16-2011, 03:23 PM   #1
SigNeewfoew

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
525
Senior Member
Default Critics: Fort Carson policy targeted troubled, wounded soldiers
http://www.stripes.com/critics-fort-...diers-1.160871

For all his heroics, however, Smith’s life was falling apart.

He was headed for a medical discharge he didn’t really want, due to knee and back injuries. He was in a disastrous marriage, drinking too much, trying to hide the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Fort Carson doctors checked him into a mental health facility for several days in January. Then, just three months after the Soldier’s Medal ceremony, Smith came up positive for cocaine use in a random drug test.


I think they should have maybe just medically discharged him since he was already in the process but what kind of message does it send by not punishing someone who uses drugs? I understand even with the "zero tolerance" policy commanders use discretion and I have seen a few people who popped hot on a urinalysis stay in. It's great what this soldier did with the fire incident and whatever he got an ARCOM with V but does that mean you just let slide when they use drugs?

What should have happened is they should have gotten this soldier some help. Honestly I get tired of people using PTSD as an excuse to use drugs and too much alcohol. How many people have come back from combat and they don't resort to those things? Yes those people usually have a great support system and the Army quite obviously still has a lot to do to help those who are physically and mentally wounded. But this article is pretty sensationalistic in my opinion.

Plus - won't the Army just start doing this because they have to cut the amount of soldiers we have? So I guarantee you people who piss hot are going to get kicked out to fill that quota, along with the fat people or the lazy people who don't want to get promoted.
SigNeewfoew is offline


Old 11-16-2011, 03:52 PM   #2
ljq0AYOV

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
453
Senior Member
Default
Good post...and quite the conumdrum. The CC is responsiple for the health, welfare & discipline of their command BUT...the system can be pretty damn slow to help those who need it most resulting in "damaged" goods becoming "broken" goods.

Drug use definitly has to be punished and you're right, the CC has some leeway. In my time in the AF from 1981 to about 2005 I always thought/believed ALL drug users who popped hot got kicked out under "zero tolerance." Then in my last couple of years it seems like they pulled back...not much but a little. I had a gal who worked for me that the CC did not prefer charges on (wrongful use of perscription drugs)...admititly it was a weak case but she deserved some type of punishment. Then I knew a MSgt who popped hot for the weed...he was CM'd and did a little jail time but kept his stripe and was allowed to retire. I compare that to another MSgt with almost exact same circumstances and excuse (I didn't know it was pot) back around 1995...CM'd with a hard bust & Bad Conduct discharge.

The times thay's achanging...again!
ljq0AYOV is offline


Old 11-16-2011, 04:09 PM   #3
mirex

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
473
Senior Member
Default
Good post...and quite the conumdrum. The CC is responsiple for the health, welfare & discipline of their command BUT...the system can be pretty damn slow to help those who need it most resulting in "damaged" goods becoming "broken" goods.

Drug use definitly has to be punished and you're right, the CC has some leeway. In my time in the AF from 1981 to about 2005 I always thought/believed ALL drug users who popped hot got kicked out under "zero tolerance." Then in my last couple of years it seems like they pulled back...not much but a little. I had a gal who worked for me that the CC did not prefer charges on (wrongful use of perscription drugs)...admititly it was a weak case but she deserved some type of punishment. Then I knew a MSgt who popped hot for the weed...he was CM'd and did a little jail time but kept his stripe and was allowed to retire. I compare that to another MSgt with almost exact same circumstances and excuse (I didn't know it was pot) back around 1995...CM'd with a hard bust & Bad Conduct discharge.

The times thay's achanging...again!
I understand it is difficult for some people to adjust when they have experiences while deployed like the three in the article in Stripes but c'mon. One of them came up hot for marijuana, got sent to some program and came back from it and pissed hot again. Okay marijuana helps but it is illegal right now. Then the ones who popped for cocaine - really? Mixing alcohol and cocaine...

The Army does need to do a better job in taking care of soldiers after they return from combat and the people at Carson sounded like they were more worried about money than anything but at the same time, I'm not going to feel sorry for someone who took an easy way out. Using drugs, alcohol, that's not solving the problem of PTSD or pain issues. That is making the problem worse and now you've just added a possible addiction to your problem.

I don't have PTSD and hope I never experience anything that would cause it. But bad things happen to people all the time. I've never been so depressed that I thought I'd go get drunk or go find some cocaine. That's just me though.
mirex is offline


Old 11-16-2011, 07:38 PM   #4
easypokergonj

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
420
Senior Member
Default
Hope you didn't misunderstand what I was saying...self-medicating with illegal drugs & alcohol is niether an answer OR excuse for bad behavior. What I was trying to point out was that timing is everything. To illustrate, I've put two kids in the military about three years apart (one in 07 the other last year). They talked to all the branches then made their choices.

When we talked to the Army & Marines in late 2006/early 2007, they were willing and able to give waivers for various minor offences but in 2010, both services had tightended up considerably turning away people they would have accepted a few years earlier (spent a lot of time talking with the Marine recruiter last year...they have become much stricter)

So the stricter recruiting becomes, the stricter discipline becomes and more likely CC's will take a harder line on things like drug use.

Last thing...like I mentioned earlier, I always believed the AFs policy on drug use was "ZT" because that's all I ever heard, read and saw. But do you remember the WAPS cheating scandal from a few years back? The SMSgt convicted of sharing test answers? That all started with a SSgt who had popped hot for some type of illeagal drug use. This SSgt was punished but allowed to stay in...he was entered into some type of "second-chance" group program thing and in the spirit of honesty, let it out about the WAPS thing (sorry, don't remember the details). I was more shocked about the SSgt getting a second chance then the WAPS cheat cause I just flat out had never heard of any drug user getting a second chance!
easypokergonj is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 04:54 PM   #5
Seesspoxy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
528
Senior Member
Default
We always heard the same zero tolerance bs about drunk driving to, but I have seen with my own eyes, 2 3 or 4 DUI's.
Seesspoxy is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 10:58 PM   #6
sportsbettinge

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
415
Senior Member
Default
We always heard the same zero tolerance bs about drunk driving to, but I have seen with my own eyes, 2 3 or 4 DUI's.
Yeah buuuutttttt....DUIs always seemed iffy. No matter how straight faced they say "ZT" on DUIs, I never quite bought it either.

The drug thing though was very publicized, especially in the early 80s and it always seemed high viz with "golden flows" and all that. DUIs always seemed only to be whispered about...at least till i got to USAFE with Foglesongs freaking ridiculous RESCON BS...I think we had about 5 Saturday morning formations (in blues) just in Jan/Feb of 06...it wasn't RESCON...it was SUCKCON!
sportsbettinge is offline


Old 11-18-2011, 12:39 AM   #7
dodsCooggipsehome

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
355
Senior Member
Default
I have a buddy who has serious PTSD, is an E-7 still in. He's self medicated with booze for a long time has highlighted himself at several functions, and made an ass of himself TDY. The leadership knows about it, but what do you think happens? Nothing. No ADAPT no nothing. I've covered for him multiple times as an E-5. Yea an E-5 babysitting an E-7 and covering for his dumbassery. The military is assed up in general.
dodsCooggipsehome is offline


Old 11-18-2011, 05:53 PM   #8
jstizzle

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
515
Senior Member
Default
I have a buddy who has serious PTSD, is an E-7 still in. He's self medicated with booze for a long time has highlighted himself at several functions, and made an ass of himself TDY. The leadership knows about it, but what do you think happens? Nothing. No ADAPT no nothing. I've covered for him multiple times as an E-5. Yea an E-5 babysitting an E-7 and covering for his dumbassery. The military is assed up in general.
That should not be happening and just goes to show it depends on the command.
jstizzle is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:24 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity