DR. SALLY TAKES HER LUMPS -- THE NEW YORK TIMES PUBLISHES
SEVEN LETTERS THAT BLAST DR. SALLY SATEL AND
HER ANTI-VETERAN AGENDA
Last week Dr. Sally Satel wrote an OpEd piece in The New York Times that
painted an unrealistic and untruthful picture of veterans who suffer from
PTSD.
March 1, 2006
Op-Ed Contributor
For Some, the War Won't End
By SALLY SATEL
Washington
ACCORDING to a report from its inspector general, the Department of Veterans Affairs is now paying compensation for post-traumatic stress disorder to nearly twice as many veterans as it did just six years ago, at an annual cost of $4.3 billion. What's more surprising is that the flood of recent applicants does not, for the most part, consist of young soldiers just returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. Rather they are Vietnam veterans in their 50's and 60's who claim to be psychologically crippled now by their service of decades ago.
The Rest Can Be Read HERE
Here are the 7 LTE's In Response and can be found HERE:
March 6, 2006
For Veterans, a Longer Battle (7 Letters)
To the Editor:
Re "For Some, the War Won't End," by Sally Satel (Op-Ed, March 1):
I served in Vietnam in the early 1960's, when we were supposed to be "training" the Vietnamese to establish a democratic South Vietnam. We did everything but. I did not fight (I was a chaplain), but the trauma of those days is still with me.
For more than 40 years I carried that burden alone in nightmares, sleeplessness, weeping, trying to tell no one because it was not "manly." Only when a Houston police officer picked me up one night when I was sleepwalking and directed me to a therapy group at a local veterans' hospital could I even talk about the trauma.
Now, 45 years after my service, I can talk about it because it has become "manly." It became accepted after the Persian Gulf war and is accepted in this war.
Now you know why so many Vietnam veterans are coming forward only now. It just wasn't "manly" to admit such a "weakness."
Peter J. Riga
Houston, March 1, 2006
•
To the Editor:
Sally Satel wants us to believe that there are veterans who try to scam the Veterans Affairs Department by requesting benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder long after their wartime experience.
What Dr. Satel actually does is expose a system that pits veteran against veteran in a competition for scarce resources. This is how our supposedly troop-supporting, grateful nation rewards its men and women in uniform.
My brother served in Iraq. He is one of the luckier ones and is home now, but the recovery from his experiences is extremely complex and will clearly take a lifetime to unpack. I hope that whenever he needs any of the benefits he was promised when he enlisted he will get them.
Which veterans deserve their benefits? All of them!
Laura Costas
Silver Spring, Md., March 1, 2006
•
To the Editor:
Sally Satel mentions a report by the inspector general of the Veterans Affairs Department on compensation for post-traumatic stress disorder. But that report did not fault the veterans involved. Rather, it found premature ratings and sloppy record-keeping by overworked and undertrained V.A. staff members.
After intense review, the secretary of veterans affairs determined that there was no evidence of widespread abuse.
Combat is the root of all trauma for war veterans. This is often worsened by the V.A.'s labyrinthine bureaucracy, by prejudice and by those who question the veterans' integrity and the validity of their neuropsychiatric wounds — without offering a shred of evidence.
Many Vietnam veterans dealt with their post-traumatic stress disorder by becoming workaholics. But their symptoms are now re-emerging after retirement as they sit home and relive their trauma by watching a new war on TV.
Dr. Satel minimizes the problem of thousands of legitimate claims that have been denied veterans because of the great difficulty of finding supporting documentation to verify the stressor.
John P. Rowan
National President
Vietnam Veterans of America
Silver Spring, Md., March 1, 2006
•
To the Editor:
Sally Satel's calibrating approach to veterans' benefits is all too familiar from precincts like the American Enterprise Institute, where she is a resident scholar. Coming from a psychiatrist, a supposed healer, it's unseemly.
Instead of fretting about conserving resources for the "truly deserving" veterans by strictly scrutinizing all veterans to determine those who are not "truly deserving," I suggest that we support the troops by bringing them home and treat veterans as generously as we treat, say, Halliburton and the oil companies.
John Moran
New York, March 1, 2006
•
To the Editor:
I believe that all honest veterans and the taxpaying public in general should be greatly troubled over Sally Satel's description of the costly handling by the Department of Veterans Affairs of post-traumatic stress disorder compensation claims, especially in an era of declining tax revenues and rising deficits.
Having worked for Veterans Affairs for many years, including more than 15 years in the area of hearings and appeals, I find this all too familiar. In my opinion, post-traumatic stress disorder has been the single most abused, misused and costly diagnosis encountered in the disability compensation program for years.
I believe that there are legitimate cases of war-induced psychic trauma. But I also have no doubt that in many cases, this diagnosis is made with no objective substantiation for it. This is compounded by the department's see-no-evil attitude toward veterans in general, and its constant pressure on employees to get the work out at the expense of getting it done right, and to grant, rather than deny, claims regardless of the merits.
R. J. Egan
Littleton, Colo., March 2, 2006
•
To the Editor:
As a former Marine officer who served in the Vietnam War, I take issue with Sally Satel's conclusion that "we must be skeptical of veterans who file claims as retirement approaches."
Post-traumatic stress disorder came into bloom in my life 25 years after the trauma. It took five years of therapy before I was able to deal with the demons. I had been a successful lawyer, elected official, father and husband, but the disorder took its toll.
I've met traumatized veterans and urged them to seek help. Not many did. They too were "successful," but haunted. I thought that some day it would catch up with them. The stresses of old age would do it.
We are old, proud veterans. Few who need help get it. Let us not turn our backs on those who do. Time does not make post-traumatic stress disorder any less powerful. It does not make sense to deny it because it is "decades after" the war.
Tom Brush
Ann Arbor, Mich., March 1, 2006
•
To the Editor:
Even the certainty that some veterans' claims of reactivated war trauma are false does not excuse the failure to treat other veterans who are suffering.
Bureaucratic policy-making and speculative notions about those who "deserve" treatment are trivial (though money-saving) objections to our duty to help men and women who have fought our wars.
Rosemarie Arbur
Klamath Falls, Ore., March 2, 2006
Here's Another Earlier 'Anti-Veteran' OpEd of Sallies:
Returning from Iraq, Still Fighting Vietnam
By Sally Satel, M.D.
Posted: Friday, March 5, 2004
New York Times
Publication Date: March 5, 2004
And she calls herself a Professional!!
"No, war is not Hell. War is worse than Hell. There are no innocent bystanders
in Hell, but war is full of them."
- CPT Benj. Franklin "Hawkeye" Pierce, 4077th M*A*S*H
A Lesson Quote Brought Back In Support Of This New Generation Being Used:
Vietnam War History 101:
"The Only Glory In War, Is In The Imagination Of Those Who Were Never There"
"Never again shall one generation of veterans abandon another."
2 comments:
Please see http://npublici.blogspot.com for a small part of what I would like to let out.Del Allegood, Vietnam veteran with agent orange damage.There are no purple hearts for CBR damage and precious little honesty either.
Second Thoughts about Dr. Sally Satel’s Personal Kidney Transplant:
On November 22, 2005, Dr. Sally Satel, M.D., issued a deeply personal account of her need of a kidney transplant because of the “no-fault” failure of her own kidneys. She wanted a normal life rather than dialysis due to convenience and she was not critical of any potential donor. Her writing was very moving. All can empathize with her and wish her a speedy recovery now that she has a new kidney. See: http://www.sallysatelmd.com/html/a-nytimes19.html .
But this Dr. Satel is the same anti-veteran physician on the payroll of the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) who openly criticized military veterans making claims for disabling PTSD after they were assigned to duties in Iraq, Afghanistan and past wars. Satel accused veterans of using “an underground network [that] advises veterans where to go for the best chance of being declared disabled.” See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/26/AR2005122600792_2.html . Once veterans are declared disabled, they retain that status indefinitely, Satel said in the Washington Post on December 27, 2005. Recently, the VA announced that certain PTSD claims already granted would be reduced by 50%. See: http://www.vva.org/TheVeteran/2005_09/gov.htm .
Dr. Satel believes that PTSD is not a medical diagnosis of any social consequence. Those who seek VA benefits for PTSD were recently labeled by Dr. Satel in a New York Times op-ed of March 1, 2006 as, “[b]ut it's also very likely that some of the veteran baby boomers who have filed claims in recent years did so not out of medical need but out of a desire for financial security in their retirement years.”
In the same op-ed, Dr. Satel stated, “it is often hard to know which applicants can be helped with short-term psychiatric care, which are seeking a free ride and which are truly deserving of the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder and thus long-term care and payments of up to $2,300 a month for life.
Dr. Satel appears to view many disabled veterans as “welfare queens” seeking a “free ride” and unjustified “financial security”.
There is more disturbing information about Dr. Satel to consider.
Dr. Satel works for the AEI, and appears to be the Bush administration's "go-to" physician for denial and reduction of rightful health care and veteran benefits.
Satel is also a "go-to" physician for the tobacco industry. See: http://main.uab.edu/smokersonly/show.asp?durki=67468&site=3187&return=63615 where Satel stated that second hand smoke is not as harmful as most medical experts think.
Likewise, Satel is also the "go-to" physician for the silicone gel-filled breast implants industry. See: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/satel200504121402.asp in which Satel assures women that breast implants are quite safe. Interestingly, breast implants are linked to kidney failure. See: http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/ANS00586.html .
Her credibility as an expert was once demolished in a reported court case. In the case of Farmer v. Ramsay, 159 F.Supp.2d 873, D.Md. [2001] (the case is a reverse racial discrimination case seeking to allow white applicant into medical school over minority student applicants with lesser MCAT scores. Satel was expert for the white applicant), the court found:
"The Defendants have filed a motion to strike Dr. Satel's report on the grounds that it lacks the necessary indicia of reliability required under FRE 702. The Court agrees and will, by separate order, grant the motion. Satel offers little more than her personal opinion of Farmer's application and the weight that UMSM should have placed on his MCAT scores. Satel has no familiarity with UMSM; she lacks an extensive background in medical school admissions; she reviewed a total of only five applications; her work has not been subjected to any peer review; and her opinions are not based on a methodology that can be tested. Accordingly, her views lack the indicia of reliability required under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). See Samuel v. Ford Motor Co., 96 F.Supp.2d 491, 493 (D.Md.2000).
Even if Dr. Satel's report were admissible, the Court could not accord it much, if any, weight. As stated, the report consists entirely of Satel's personal evaluation of the applications. A plaintiff's (or his expert's) personal evaluation of his own qualifications is, however, irrelevant. Courts have repeatedly held that such subjective personal judgments do not raise a genuine issue of material fact. See Smith v. Flax, 618 F.2d 1062, 1067 (4th Cir.1980); Bradley v. Harcourt, Brace and Co., 104 F.3d 267, 270 (9th Cir.1996); Williams v. Cerberonics, Inc., 871 F.2d 452, 456 (4th Cir.1989). Applications of Minorities Not Interviewed".
The Court found that Dr. Satel’s credibility and so called expertise were so unreliable that her findings had to be stricken by law without waiting for opposing evidence or cross-examination. Dr. Satel appears to be a “mouthpiece” for sale to any anti-veteran neoconservative cause.
In her New York Times op-ed dated March 1, 2006, Satel stated, “[Veterans] have made use of a system that has coalesced around the idea that combat is the root of all anguish. [Veterans] deserve treatment to the extent that it can help, but rarely long-term disability payments.” See: www.sallysatelmd.com/html/a-nytimes8.html .
Based on Dr. Satel’s current connections to the Bush administration, the VA now places great emphasis on “combat” exposure supported by almost non-existent documents because VA officials know that it is a convenient method to deny or lower PTSD benefits. If there is no confirmed documentary combat stressor – the veteran is denied the claim for PTSD. As a civilian, Dr. Satel apparently believes that military clerks are taking detailed notes on wi-fi computers right there on the battlefield during a firefight or IED explosion.
Dr. Satel advanced that anti-veteran theory in her March 1, 2006 op-ed: “As the department tries to distinguish among these groups, verification of exposure to trauma is vital. The inspector general's office found that for one-quarter of Vietnam veterans claiming post-traumatic stress, the department could not confirm any incidents of traumatic stress. A study in a leading psychiatric journal last year could not verify such history in 59 percent. True, military personnel records are not perfect — a cook who endured a terrifying rocket attack on an airbase at which he was stationed may be unable to produce documentation of it. However, such records could indeed disprove the fabrications of a cook who claimed he was traumatized by a firefight on infantry patrol.”
Dr. Satel appears to have learned nothing about legal ‘expertise” since Farmer v. Ramsay in 2001. Dr. Satel continues to believe that if there is no confirmed documentary combat stressor – the veteran should be denied benefits. The infantry battalion cook who holds a dying fellow soldier killed by a suicide bomber in a Baghdad mess hall and then must put the body in a body bag receives no sympathy or benefits from Dr. Satel.
The latest of Dr. Satel’s malice against disabled veterans on March 1, 2006 in the New York Times occurred since she received her kidney. See: http://www.sallysatelmd.com/html/related_writing.html .
Perhaps it is time for Dr. Satel to walk in a veteran’s boots. Had Dr. Satel been subjected to the kind of hostile inquiry she believes ought to be used in the VA claims process, she might never have received a kidney transplant. Her hostile positions could subject her to the following insulting and outrageous VA questions suggested by her own anti-veteran rhetoric:
“Dr. Satel, why do you say your kidneys ‘retired early’ and ‘mysteriously’? Have you ever used controlled substances or abused alcohol or had breast implants? Do you have a tattoo? Why should we give you a ‘free’ kidney if you abuse your body? We need documentary proof that you did not engage in reckless behavior causing your kidney failure.”
“Let me understand your position, Dr. Satel, do you want us to give you a free kidney for your convenience, I repeat, convenience? There are thousands of people in the U.S. waiting for kidney transplants. Why should you break in line in front of them? Your kidney ‘problem’ did not seem to halt your prolific writing and speaking engagements, did it? Tell me again, where is the financial ‘inconvenience’?”
“Dr. Satel, did anyone on your behalf use any form of ‘influence’ to obtain your kidney match so soon? Did you use an underground network to advise you on the best chance of finding a kidney?”
“Dr. Satel, Haven’t you made use of a system that has coalesced around the idea that deprivation of convenience is the root of all devastation and victimization. Certainly, you deserve continuing dialysis treatment to the extent that it can help, but rarely should long-term or expensive payments or gratuities be justified. Don’t you agree?”
* * * * *
Fortunately, this kind of “Satel-suggested” outcome determinative interrogation will never take place for Dr. Satel and all can wish her a speedy recovery.
There are many kinds of support for our enemies in the war or terror. Most are obvious. One of the most insidious attacks on our military troops and our combat veterans is from Dr. Satel, M.D. who apparently believes that combat trauma must be proven with almost non-existent documentary evidence at the expense of battlefield common sense and traditional medicine. Unlike many other non-profit, well-financed corporate propaganda machine “experts”, Dr. Satel is leading the AEI into an alarming anti-military and anti-veteran culture. The concept that combat PTSD is of little consequence or is quickly and easily cured by quick medical intervention, by return to combat, or by a good hard day’s work at Wal-Mart borders on treason. That potential treason is evident every day at our military recruiting offices when potential recruits reject military service when they sense that neoconservatives might exploit and abandon brave warriors and patriotic veterans using Dr. Satel’s “credibility”. Our brave troops in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve the protections of a solemn and sacred contract that our nation will care for “him who shall have borne the battle and his widow, and his orphan.”
Submitted by:
Hugh D. Cox
Greenville, North Carolina
hughcox@hughcox.com
Post a Comment