DOD not allowing free access to wounded soldiers by DAV.

[Reeder]

Here’s part of what DAV Washington Headquarters Executive Director David W. Gorman had to say to the Secretary of Defense:

"At one facility in particular [Walter Reed Army Medical Center] our efforts to visit with wounded patients have been severely restricted. For example, all requests to visit patients must now be made through the WRAMC headquarters office, which then selects the patients we may visit and strictly limits information about the patients, even the patient’s name and the nature of the injury is withheld without express permission. The DAV’s representatives also are escorted at all times while in the facility, and all contact with patients is closely monitored by the escort. This is particularly unnerving and inappropriate as all conversations between a representative and client are confidential in nature.

"I believe these overly broad restrictions on patient access inhibit the ability of our professional accredited representatives to help ensure these wounded service members have the vital information they and their families need in order to obtain the medical care and benefits many of these veterans will depend on for decades to come.

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_government&Number=1185387&t=-1#Post1185387

What the hell is up with this? I don’t buy the security and privacy issues DOD throws out. What are they trying to hide? Are they afraid of maybe having to spend money on our wounded troops that put their lives on the line?

What gives?

[Brutus]

*Originally posted by Reeder *
**What the hell is up with this? I don’t buy the security and privacy issues DOD throws out. What are they trying to hide? Are they afraid of maybe having to spend money on our wounded troops that put their lives on the line?

What gives? **

So you think medical information should be freely available, with the patient getting no say in the matter?

[Reeder]

Do you really think DAV would strong arm a soldier who didn’t want to talk to them?

[Brutus]

*Originally posted by Reeder *
**Do you really think DAV would strong arm a soldier who didn’t want to talk to them? **

Do you comprehend what the article says? The information is given to DAV, if the soldiers consent to it. What is the fucking problem here, other than your reading comprehension?

[elucidator]

Yes, that’s exactly what he said. Reeder is clearly in favor of xeroxing thousands of copies of medical records, and tossing them from helicopters at the Super Bowl.

Nothing gets past ol’ Brutus

[Squink]

Sadly, Brutus has managed to make another point:
HIPAA needs to be revised for the ill
That’s what, three in the past month? The lad’s on a roll.

[Brutus]

I stopped huffing paint thinner.

[TartPops]

*Originally posted by Squink *
**Sadly, Brutus has managed to make another point:

That’s what, three in the past month? The lad’s on a roll. **

It won’t last very long.

[Petter]

*Originally posted by TartPops *
**It won’t last very long. **

Neither did you.

[Xploder]

*Originally posted by Petter *
**Neither did you. **

Now THAT was FUNNY!

[county]

These tactics regarding government benefits have been the norm since Ronnie R. if not before. Not surprising that they are even more offensive with Bush. National Security and Security issues have been used/misused before, now they carry even more wieght.