USMilitaryCare.com

By BRUCE KENNEDY

The Department of Defense’s Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) plans to close 20 military bases across the country by Sept. 15, 2011. Once a military facility closes, the ripple effect is felt throughout the surrounding communities: families lose neighbors, businesses lose customers and workers lose jobs. In this series of stories, DailyFinance looks at how closures have affected communities in the past, and what some military families and the businesses that cater to them plan to do once their base closes.

Tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel and civilian federal employees are packing up their belongings as the U.S. military’s Base Realignment and Closure program (known as BRAC) goes into effect. BRAC not only calls for shutting down 20 major military bases around the country, but it also requires the shifting of some commands to other areas, all of which must be done by next September.

The moves will be jarring to several communities across the U.S., as some towns lose the bulk of their population and others make room for thousands of troops and their families. One of the most significant migrations will occur in the southeast, where the U.S. Army Reserve Command and U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM) will leave Fort McPherson in Atlanta and head 325 miles northeast to Fort Bragg in North Carolina. According to North Carolina’s BRAC Regional Task Force, the region around Fort Bragg is expected to see “additional gains of 40,000 military and civilian personnel and their families” over the next several years.

Merrilee and Rex Norman were among some of the first people to make the migration. The couple, who met while in the Army and now work as civilian information technology professionals with FORSCOM, were part of a “torch party” (pictured above) of the first 50 soldiers and civilians to move to Fort Bragg from Fort McPherson last month. They are the vanguard of about 3,000 people in their commands coming from Atlanta — and just two of the estimated 22,000 civilian employees of the U.S. Army who are affected by BRAC.

The Pitfalls and Perks of Relocation Programs

Rex has been giving “mini-seminars” to his colleagues back at Fort McPherson on the Defense National Relocation Program (DNRP), which offers financial counseling, home marketing assistance and “a guaranteed buyout offer to purchase the employee’s residence at the prior duty station.” But even with government assistance, the decimated real estate market is working against them.

“They come in, appraise your house with a relocation company,” says Rex. “In the end if they don’t sell it through
your real estate agent, then the government will purchase it for you at the relocation appraisal price. In our case, it was about $40,000 below the fair market value of our tax assessment. It was an ugly price.”

“Luckily, we get the guaranteed sale and luckily we were also able to find a buyer for our home before we had to take the offer from the relocation,” Merrilee adds.

The program does have its perks, including a 25% pay incentive for the move, paid moving and temporary housing expenses and financed house-hunting trips to the new post. Despite the loss they took on their old home, Rex says the DNRP incentive package and the better mortgage rate they received on their new home in North Carolina has allowed them to break even on the move.

A Rude Awakening in North Carolina

Civilians relocating as a result of BRAC will face yet another obstacle once they arrive in North Carolina: qualifying for a home loan. Even though the Normans have a very good credit rating, they had to jump through several hoops to get a loan in North Carolina, says Rex.

Sponsored Links
“People who are making their mortgage payment every month in Atlanta, never missed a payment… got pretty good credit, they sell their home [and] think they’re going to qualify for a loan,” says Rex. “But they’re going to find it’s a different story, and I don’t know if that word is getting out to people or not. I think it’s just because of the housing market now and the state the market is now in.”

When the Normans started shopping for a new home in the Fort Bragg area they discovered a real estate market they believed was overpriced. With the anticipated influx of new residents from Fort McPherson, many homeowners in the area appeared to have raised their selling price or were unwilling to negotiate — an especially harsh reality for the couple after selling their old home at such a substantial loss.

“We searched and searched for a home,” says Merrilee. “Some of these owners were just not willing to come off their prices. And I think they’re going to start realizing the impact when all of us start coming into town And some of us have taken losses at Fort McPherson in Atlanta and they’re just not going to take those high prices.”

Weighing the Pros and Cons: Career Versus Lifestyle

Nevertheless, the Normans consider themselves lucky. Merrilee says the economy and the need for jobs is putting a strain on some of her colleagues and their families. “We know of a lot of people that are going to be coming [to Fort Bragg] as a bachelor or bachelorette,” she says. “They’re going to leave their home and family in Atlanta because they need that job. And they’re going to come here and set up another household, whether it be an apartment, just so they can keep their jobs and lifestyles. They’ll be the ones that cannot afford to sell the house.” Some of the Normans’ colleagues are even considering early retirement, rather than go through the financial uncertainty of relocating.

Despite all of the relocation challenges, the Normans remain upbeat about their new move. “You’ve got to realize, we’re civilians with over 30 years federal service,” says Merrilee. “A move is pretty traumatic and we were not wanting to go to Fort Bragg, but I’m pretty excited about it, coming into work every morning now. You see the soldiers out there in their uniforms running PT, we’re reminded every morning as to why we have a job. The bottom line is the benefits were good, they helped us out with the lock on the home and we’re here because we want a job and we love what we do — and we want to stay and retire with the federal service.”

The Nation
April 18, 2008

Julian E. Barnes, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — The latest and most comprehensive study of veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has concluded that nearly 1 in every 5 veterans is suffering from depression or stress disorders and that many are not getting adequate care.
The study shows that mental disorders are more prevalent and lasting than previously known, surfacing belatedly and lingering after troops have been discharged.
An estimated 300,000 veterans among the nearly 1.7 million who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan are battling depression or post-traumatic stress disorder. More than half of these people, according to the study conducted by the Rand Corp., are slipping through the cracks in the bureaucratic system, going without necessary treatment.
The Rand study underscores one of the lessons of modern counterinsurgency conflicts: Such wars may kill fewer troops than traditional fighting but can leave deeper psychological scars.
Screening techniques for stress disorders are vastly improved from previous wars, making comparisons with Vietnam, Korea or World War II difficult. But a chief difference is that in Iraq and Afghanistan all service members, not just combat infantry, are exposed to roadside bombs and civilian deaths. That distinction subjects a much wider swath of military personnel to the stresses of war.
“We call it ’360-365′ combat,” said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense. “What that means is veterans are completely surrounded by combat for one year. Nearly all of our soldiers are under fire, or being subjected to mortar rounds or roadside bombs, or witnessing the deaths of civilians or fellow soldiers.”
Military officials praised the Rand study, saying that its findings were consistent with their own studies, and said it would reinforce efforts to try to improve mental health care. Veterans Affairs officials, while questioning the study’s methodology, said their department had intensified efforts to find discharged service members suffering from mental disorders.
The Rand Study was undertaken for the California Community Foundation, which also has funded other programs for returning veterans. Lt. Gen. Eric Schoomaker, the Army surgeon general, said the study would help draw the nation’s attention.
“They are making this a national debate,” Schoomaker said.

The Army previously has said that an estimated 1 in 6 service members suffered from a form of post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, a slightly lower rate than the Rand study found. In addition to current PTSD rates, the Rand study found that 19.5% of people who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan suffered a concussion or other traumatic brain injury during their combat tour, a number similar to Army estimates.

Taken together, the study shows that 31% of those who have served in combat have suffered from brain injury, stress disorder, or both.
Combat-related mental ailments and stress can lead to suicide, homelessness and physical health problems. But more mundane disorders can have long-term social consequences.
“These conditions can impair relationships, disrupt marriages, aggravate the difficulties of parenting, and cause problems in children that may extend the consequences of combat trauma across generations,” the study said.
Failure to adequately treat disorders can cost the government billions of dollars, said Lisa H. Jaycox, one of the study’s authors.
“We make the case that investing in treatment early would prevent some of the negative consequences from unfolding and save money,” Jaycox said.
Some service members avoid a diagnosis of a mental health problem, fearing negative consequences, the study said. These troops worry about damage to their military careers and relationships with co-workers. “When we asked folks what was limiting them from getting the help that they need, among the top barriers that were reported were really negative career repercussions,” said Terri Tanielian, another of the study’s authors.
The study proposes two key changes. It recommends ways to allow service members to get mental health care “off the record,” to avoid any possible stigma. And since some soldiers and Marines fear that seeking treatment will prevent their redeployment, the study recommends that fitness-for-duty reports not rely on decisions to seek mental health care.
Col. Loree Sutton, director of the Defense Department’s PTSD center, expressed concern about the Rand finding that only half of service members with stress disorders seek help. Changing military culture to encourage troops to get help is difficult, she said at a news conference.
Service members who seek treatment face a dearth of healthcare providers with expertise in war-related mental disorders, the study found. The shortage leads to long waits that discourage some people from obtaining help.

Thousands of additional mental health professionals — both in government hospitals and in civilian healthcare systems — are needed, and current practitioners must be given extra training, the report said.
“Since the dramatic increase in the need for services exists now, the required expansion in trained providers is already several years overdue,” the report said.

Gerald M. Cross, the Veterans Affairs’ principal deputy undersecretary for health, said his agency was stepping up outreach, expanding a program designed to contact all veterans, whether or not they had reported problems.
“We contact them by mail, we contact them in person, we call them on the phone,” Cross said. “We are even putting a segment on MTV.”
Veterans Affairs officials questioned the Rand survey’s methodology, but Tanielian said the firm was “confident of our estimates.”
Ira R. Katz, the Veterans Affairs’ mental health chief, said the agency’s budget for mental disorders had surged from $2 billion in 2001 to $4 billion next year. “The VA has done an enormous mobilization, not only to meet the needs of returning veterans but all veterans,” Katz said.
But critics of the Bush administration contend the Rand study highlights that Veterans Affairs did not pay close enough attention to the issue of stress disorders, said Sullivan, the veterans advocate.
“The VA is completely unprepared for the tidal wave,” Sullivan said. “Unless the VA gets a massive amount of money [and] a set of new strong pro-veteran leaders, the situation will collapse.”
Bryan Catherman, a former staff sergeant in the Army Reserve, said he was screened for mental health ailments when he was demobilized in 2004. He said he was focused on saying and doing what was necessary to get home to his family. Besides, the euphoria of being home masked his problems.
“I felt like Superman for the first six months,” Catherman said. “Then I felt like I ate Kryptonite corn flakes. So everything went downhill after the military was done with me.”
Catherman said he sank into a depression and abused alcohol. At first resisting his family’s pleas to get help, he later encountered frustration in dealing with Veterans Affairs. Today, he credits the VA for the help he needed, but thinks the government misread the problem.
“The system is overburdened,” Catherman said. “We should have learned from Vietnam. I feel, as a veteran, that once I got home from Iraq, I wasn’t much of a concern anymore.”
The Rand study can be found at the corporation’s website: http://veterans.rand.org.

Source URL: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/18/nation/na-stress18

Published on Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com)
By Harris B. Stratyner, Ph.D., CASAC
Created May 3 2010 – 7:44am

Wars have always been controversial – so much so, that during the Vietnam War, young soldiers returning from the war were mistreated. Many did not ask to be drafted but were and when they returned many were ignored, or cursed – some were even spit upon. These young people, many of whom were suffering from alcohol and drug addiction spurred on by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) were left to live out lives of misery and despair.
We cannot allow this to happen to those young people returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. PTSD causes severe anxiety in individuals – it can result in depression related to a sense of recurring panic and hopelessness. There are several theories as to why individuals with PTSD are at higher risk of alcohol and drug use. One postulates alcohol and drug use may predate PTSD; another theory is that people with PTSD self-medicate with alcohol and drugs; yet another theory is biochemical – if you use alcohol and drugs it may alter brain chemistry and make one more susceptible to PTSD; lastly, genetics may put an individual at greater risk for PTSD and alcohol and drug abuse or addiction.
More research needs to be completed before a definitive answer is provided. So now to the crux of the matter – treatment is needed. Not just any treatment, but a unified approach – a team of mental health and addiction professionals working together to ensure that our young men and women get the treatment they deserve to live productive lives.
At one time it was considered the norm to treat each illness as a separate entity, but this clinician, in his model of “Carefrontation” has always advocated for a holistic approach. It just does not do to say if you treat the PTSD first it will increase the drinking or drugging. We professionals know better. Indeed, the literature seems to bear this out.
We must not rely on serial or parallel treatment approaches but integrated treatment. Programs must be established with experts from every field to deal with the bio-psycho-social nature of the co-occurring disorder of PTSD and chemical addiction. We must have professionals from both the mental health and addiction camps and when necessary the medical camp (e.g., neurologists, surgeons, etc.) come together as a unified force to treat our young returning veterans and see to it that they receive the finest treatment available. We can begin by drawing on the existent mental health and addiction facilities across this great nation of ours so that teams can be formulated based upon logical approaches that are steeped in evidence based practice in both camps.
We have been doing this for civilians and now we MUST do it for our returning veterans. Indeed, there are some organizations that are already established to guide us in this important “mission” such as the Veteran’s Healing Initiative. This particular subject matter is probably one of the most important topics I have written on since beginning this blog and I urge my readers to get behind me on this and make sure our officials know how important you feel about this issue. Thank you for your support.

Source URL: http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/42070