There is a lot to semantics. As ridiculous as it sounds, it could actually spur more people to seek treatment.

I vote for "shell shock."

ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

That's retarded handicapped special exceptional

ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

Combat fatigue.

I know a guy who has PTSD.

The VA gives him a check every month for it.

He uses the money to buy guns, among other things.

He does not spend any of it to seek help.


/wish I was joking

That is actually a good idea. Injuries can be treated. Having a disorder is embarrassing.

CruiserTwelve: ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

Combat fatigue.

Battle fatigue.

RodneyToady: There is a lot to semantics. As ridiculous as it sounds, it could actually spur more people to seek treatment.

Indeed. You see a coworker get blown apart by an RPG when they pop the hatch on their tank and you're just not right after that. It's an injury of your mind. There was nothing wrong with you before that and nothing fundamentally wrong with you after that, but you're not the same.

Now if you can watch a dude you know get blown apart and not care that's a disorder.

My SIL has written stuff about this. At one point she went back through letters she had written to people to reconstruct the timeline around the death of another close soldier. She couldn't remember what happened the days after he died. Turns out she was out on patrol the very next day. There was no allowance for any of the normal grieving and acceptance process that we usually get as human beings.

RodneyToady: There is a lot to semantics. As ridiculous as it sounds, it could actually spur more people to seek treatment.

That's not why the military wants to change it. It's a lot easier to publicly justify sending someone with an "injury" back to the war than it is to send someone with a "disorder."

Unless the military has changed greatly since I was in (of course, that was back in the dinosaur days), soldiers don't really care what it's called. This is more of a public relations ploy than anything else.

FormlessOne: ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

So did Carlin, and his point was also valid.

His point was wrong. Sometimes new names are more accurate and more descriptive

"Post dramatic stress disorder" is better than "shell shock" - may not be better than "combat fatigue," depending on the situation.

I think "Post Traumatic Stress Injury" is better than "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" too.

It is an injury.

Fark Me To Tears: That's not why the military wants to change it. It's a lot easier to publicly justify sending someone with an "injury" back to the war than it is to send someone with a "disorder."

Good point.

impaler: Post dramatic stress disorde

Post TRAUMATIC stress disorder is also bad.

impaler: impaler: Post dramatic stress disorder

Post TRAUMATIC stress disorder is also bad.

To be fair to myself, once a soldier sees a live Broadway performance, they're often never the same.

Thousand yard stare-itis.

Fark Me To Tears: RodneyToady: There is a lot to semantics. As ridiculous as it sounds, it could actually spur more people to seek treatment.

That's not why the military wants to change it. It's a lot easier to publicly justify sending someone with an "injury" back to the war than it is to send someone with a "disorder."

Unless the military has changed greatly since I was in (of course, that was back in the dinosaur days), soldiers don't really care what it's called. This is more of a public relations ploy than anything else.

I disagree, my experience in the military lends me to believe that the general has his troops in mind by reclassifying PTSD to PTSI. An injury in battle is an injury in battle, whether its physical or mental. I've seen some shiat, but luckily for me it didn't hit me like that.

I like this change.

CruiserTwelve: ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

Combat fatigue.

Something along these lines. Combat Shock? Combat-induced PTSD needs its own classification, from civilian PTSD. Usually, a civilian who witnesses a traumatic event goes through it once, and is given plenty of time to grieve, take time off, etc. It is also highly unlikely you'll face an equally (or even worse) traumatic situation again, especially in a short time frame, much less repeatedly over the course of a year.

A soldier?

"Hey man you okay? If you want to talk to the chaplain, he'll be back from the Green Zone next week. He might be able to squeeze you in for a few minutes after the memorial. It sucks that Sergeant Taylor died on the flight back to Germany, and PFC Williams is probably going to never walk again. It's amazing that you were the only one in the truck who didn't get a scratch. By the way, next mission is at 0500, so try to get some sleep. We're hitting the worst part of Sadr City in force tomorrow, and our company is spearheading the initial thrust. What, you gonna stand their lookin' farkin' sorry for yourself? Go clean your weapon, you're on the LT's truck now."

jbuist: Indeed. You see a coworker get blown apart by an RPG when they pop the hatch on their tank and you're just not right after that. It's an injury of your mind. There was nothing wrong with you before that and nothing fundamentally wrong with you after that, but you're not the same.

Hi. I'm a vet. I've been through two combat tours (Kosovo and Iraq). I have no PTSD. I have no injuries. But I have friends who do. I would like to thank you for understanding, because a lot of people don't. The military has this idea that injuries of the mind are 100% psychosomatic... or something. I don't really know. But what ever it is, if you are mentally injured, then there's something *wrong* with you. But if you are physically injured... well, that happens. You just need time to heal. And professional help. And we, as the military, will ensure that you get whatever help you need; and if you need help your entire life, we'll take care of you.

But if you are mentally injured, well, you're just a farked up piece of shiat, aren't you? You're worthless. You're broken. And we ain't gunna do a damned thing about it, because you should be tougher than that, like a real man^tm would be.

The military doesn't care about injuries that can't be seen. I have a friend who killed a guy in Afghanistan with his .50 cal (if you don't know, .50 cal's are not designed to kill individuals, they're too powerful; they're designed to destroy vehicles and buildings). His unit had captured the guy, and my friend saw the guy (who had his hands in the air) give off a signal - he fired, and killed the man; blood and bones splattering his comrades. He had no idea if the man was really signalling for an attack or just twitching his hand, but either way, he's dead. And it's my friend's fault. He's torn over it; he has serious mental issues over it. Was it right? Did he kill an innocent man? He doesn't know. I bet my friend will have issues with that for the rest of his life. The military doesn't care. According to his superior officers, he should just "toughen up." "Become a real man." Or some bullshiat like that. The man seriously needs some psychological help, but the military doesn't care enough to help him, because his injuries can't be seen by the eye. When he first got back to the States, he started seeing a psychologist (own his own). His physician prescribed him medication. The military didn't care; within three months, they deployed him back to Iraq, without any medication. He didn't see a psychologist or medical doctor for the entire year. When he got back, he personally when to a psychologist, because he knew something was wrong. The military treated him like a dirt-bag for doing so. Last time I talked to him (a few months ago), his commanding officer told him that the unit did not have the time to drive him to his psych appointments any more (30 min drive from post), and he would have to cancel all of them. Oh, and they want to discharge him, because he's "not fit to serve." And they're also trying to discharge him for being overweight (which he is), but he still scores 280 out of 300 (180 minimum required) on his physical fitness test. Other guys, who score less and are physically injured, are not being discharged, because their injuries can be seen.

Another friend of mine was shocked with electricity while we were in the barracks (this was about 2003). He played guitar, and we were setting up for a jam session. For some reason, when we plugged in the amp, an electrical surge went through all of it to his guitar, and shocked him (I no longer say "he was electrocuted," because I have a different friend who was actually electrocuted. Electrocuted means you are killed; shocked means you are injured). My friends was stuck to his guitar with both hands, and couldn't move or speak. For what seemed like forever, he just stood there, shaking, trying to call out for help, but unable due to the electricity. The guy who plugged it in realized what was going on (in reality, only a few seconds), and unplugged the amp. We saved his life. What did the military do? They treated his visible wounds: the electrical burns on his hands. When the burns were healed, they expected him to be able to return to duty. But he couldn't, because the electricity seriously farked up his back muscles. He was in serious pain. His superiors didn't believe him. They started treating him like a dirt-bag; soon, the whole unit (except those of use who were there) was treating him like a worthless soldier. When he cried out in pain picking up a heavy object, his sergeants called him weak and pathetic (he previously was very physically competent). The military didn't care, because they couldn't *see* the wounds.

The military really treats their (non-visible) injured like shiat. As a veteran, I really think that citizens of the USA need to be aware of just how badly soldiers are treated by their superiors when the soldier endures a wound cannot be seen by the eye.

MoreVespeneGas: imo Brain = Disorder
Body = Injury

disease
(redirected from Medical disorder)

disease /dis·ease/ (dĭ-zēz´) any deviation from or interruption of the normal structure or function of any body part, organ, or system that is manifested by a characteristic set of symptoms and signs and whose etiology, pathology, and prognosis may be known or unknown.


My interpretation:
All injuries are disorders are diseases. And reverse.

ProdigalSigh: ProdigalSigh: relatives and family

Er... make that relatives and friends.

You know, I didn't even notice that mistake until you pointed it out.

ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

zombiegoat: I vote for shell shock. Brutal, descriptive and accurate.

CarrieWhite: Shell shock is far better, much more direct.

You guys realize that term is outdated by almost a hundred years, right?

Sgt Otter: CruiserTwelve: ZAZ: I vote for "shell shock."

Combat fatigue.

Something along these lines. Combat Shock? Combat-induced PTSD needs its own classification, from civilian PTSD. Usually, a civilian who witnesses a traumatic event goes through it once, and is given plenty of time to grieve, take time off, etc. It is also highly unlikely you'll face an equally (or even worse) traumatic situation again, especially in a short time frame, much less repeatedly over the course of a year.

A soldier?

"Hey man you okay? If you want to talk to the chaplain, he'll be back from the Green Zone next week. He might be able to squeeze you in for a few minutes after the memorial. It sucks that Sergeant Taylor died on the flight back to Germany, and PFC Williams is probably going to never walk again. It's amazing that you were the only one in the truck who didn't get a scratch. By the way, next mission is at 0500, so try to get some sleep. We're hitting the worst part of Sadr City in force tomorrow, and our company is spearheading the initial thrust. What, you gonna stand their lookin' farkin' sorry for yourself? Go clean your weapon, you're on the LT's truck now."

I don't even know you, but I want to call you friend. I want to buy you a beer. I wasn't a sergeant. I was a specialist. E-4. In the army, that means that you are still lower enlisted, and you don't lead men. Bullshiat. I lead men. I was in command. Both back at the home base and in combat. I've trained men on how to use weaponry (men lower and higher rank than I). I've seen combat, in multiple countries. I've seen men treated the way you speak. I want to thank you for pointing it out. The American public needs to be aware of it. Thank you.

/Fortunately, I'm not injured.
//At least, I don't think I am.

buckler: You guys realize that term is outdated by almost a hundred years, right?

Holy fark, it has been almost a hundred years.

Uneven Displacement: Winning: I know a guy who has PTSD.

The VA gives him a check every month for it.

He uses the money to buy guns, among other things.

He does not spend any of it to seek help.


/wish I was joking

So do I. I know another one that spends it all on drugs.

/I'm fine. No money for me. Or my drugs or guns.

Heh. Me too. I know a guy who spends his all on drugs. He was discharged (honorably) before I went to Iraq. He was a good friend of mine. We often sparred, because we were both martial arts practitioners. By circumstance, we both grew up in the same town. When I got out, I looked him up, and we hung out a few times. He was high. I didn't want to go that route, and I told him so. We hung out less and less often, as he did more and more drugs. Last I heard from him (about three years ago), he called me out of the blue asking if I had any extra coke on hand. I don't think I was the person he was really trying to reach.

/As far as I know, he still gets his disability check.