Author Topic: VA sending letters to vets deeming them incompetant.  (Read 4995 times)

Re:
« Reply #15 on: February 23, 2013, 11:58:46 AM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
I'm not so sure what's wrong with this, other than the fact that the use of the word "incompetent" could be seen as demeaning. Other than that, if someone receiving government benefits isn't able to handle their money because of some sort of disability they should have someone else handle it for them. The letter even includes ways to respond if he/she disagrees with the VA's assessment. I've heard some valid complaints with the VA, but this doesn't seem like one to me.
Yes, exactly.  I don't see the problem here either.
I also know that you can appeal this kind of decision.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory.  LLAP"
Leonard Nimoy

(No subject)
« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2013, 12:58:47 PM »
I have a buddy who I served with, he retired as a Chief with near 100% disability with his back, and he can't manage his money at all.  He is still making more than I ever did.  He lives in Alabama, was living with his dad then with "friends", and he's a gay man who is a proud Republican.

Not sure he should own firearms...
Kimberly (HSBUH) aka Baroness Sylvia von Zurich (formerly a Goldwater Conservative) endorses the Meadow Party's Bill N' Opus for the 2020 Presidential election!

Re:
« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2013, 01:03:24 PM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
I'm not so sure what's wrong with this, other than the fact that the use of the word "incompetent" could be seen as demeaning. Other than that, if someone receiving government benefits isn't able to handle their money because of some sort of disability they should have someone else handle it for them. The letter even includes ways to respond if he/she disagrees with the VA's assessment. I've heard some valid complaints with the VA, but this doesn't seem like one to me.

The problem with this is that (according to the story) there was no due process.  There was no examination by a professional and no court hearing like there should be to deem someone incompetant.  But as I stated earlier, this looks like butthurt guy and seeing that none of the vets have heard of it and see issues with the letter itself it's probably just something htat was blown way out of proportion.

Re:
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2013, 01:05:57 PM »
Quote from: "SvZurich"
I have a buddy who I served with, he retired as a Chief with near 100% disability with his back, and he can't manage his money at all.  He is still making more than I ever did.  He lives in Alabama, was living with his dad then with "friends", and he's a gay man who is a proud Republican.

Not sure he should own firearms...

I fail to see anything that would keep him from owning one in this statement.  Does he have mental issues and that is why he can't manage his money?  If the issues are his back and if he can't manage his money due to poor budget skills than there should be no issue.  If he can't manage his money because he's fucked in the head then he should not own a weapon.

(No subject)
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2013, 01:12:09 PM »
He likes unstable relationships, and likes to toke the smoke.  I don't know how he blows through his money like he does unless it is for drugs.  He's asked me to help him manage his money, and I declined as I am in Nevada and not on his payroll.
Kimberly (HSBUH) aka Baroness Sylvia von Zurich (formerly a Goldwater Conservative) endorses the Meadow Party's Bill N' Opus for the 2020 Presidential election!

Offline The Skeletal Atheist

Re: Re:
« Reply #20 on: February 23, 2013, 02:02:26 PM »
Quote from: "Alaric I"
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
I'm not so sure what's wrong with this, other than the fact that the use of the word "incompetent" could be seen as demeaning. Other than that, if someone receiving government benefits isn't able to handle their money because of some sort of disability they should have someone else handle it for them. The letter even includes ways to respond if he/she disagrees with the VA's assessment. I've heard some valid complaints with the VA, but this doesn't seem like one to me.

The problem with this is that (according to the story) there was no due process.  There was no examination by a professional and no court hearing like there should be to deem someone incompetant.  But as I stated earlier, this looks like butthurt guy and seeing that none of the vets have heard of it and see issues with the letter itself it's probably just something htat was blown way out of proportion.
You can't really claim there's no due process when the due process is explicitly stated in the letter.

The person can either:
A: Agree to the VA's decision and do nothing, or
B: Disagree, get a doctor's note stating that he/she is competent to handle his/her money (which his not that hard) or
C: Request a personal hearing to present evidence or
D: Be represented, without charge, by a representative of a veteran's organization or an attourney of
E: All of the above

With B the person has 60 days to do that, with C the person has 30 days to do it. From personal experience I can gather that it's not that hard to get a doctor's note if the doctor agrees with you. Once again, I don't see the problem with this inquiry.
Some people need to be beaten with a smart stick.

Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid!

Kein Mitlied F�r Die Mehrheit!

Offline Johan

Re:
« Reply #21 on: February 23, 2013, 02:02:45 PM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
I'm not so sure what's wrong with this, other than the fact that the use of the word "incompetent" could be seen as demeaning.
Here is what's wrong with it. If its legit (I'm going to assume it is only for arguments sake) it was predicated by one letter from one hospital. And if the person does nothing, his or her benefits and right to own a gun will go away. All because of one completely unverified letter that was sent to the VA.

IOW the VA is forcing this person to defend an unverified accusation.

Lets view it another way. If I sent a letter to your boss saying I saw you out at a bar and I felt you were drinking too much and therefore I also feel you should not be trusted with your own paycheck, your boss would very likely toss the letter in the trash which is as it should be. Is there any proof that you were ever at the bar? No. Is there any porccess to verify that I didn't make the whole thing up just to fuck with you? No. However if your boss then notified you that unless you went and got a doctors note within 60 days which could adequately prove your ability to handle your own funds in the opinion of your boss, your paycheck will go to someone of your bosses choosing instead of you. And oh yeah by the way, you won't be able to own a gun either. Would that be acceptable to you?
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful

Offline The Skeletal Atheist

Re: Re:
« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2013, 02:07:14 PM »
Quote from: "Johan"
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
I'm not so sure what's wrong with this, other than the fact that the use of the word "incompetent" could be seen as demeaning.
Here is what's wrong with it. If its legit (I'm going to assume it is only for arguments sake) it was predicated by one letter from one hospital. And if the person does nothing, his or her benefits and right to own a gun will go away. All because of one completely unverified letter that was sent to the VA.

IOW the VA is forcing this person to defend an unverified accusation.

Lets view it another way. If I sent a letter to your boss saying I saw you out at a bar and I felt you were drinking too much and therefore I also feel you should not be trusted with your own paycheck, your boss would very likely toss the letter in the trash which is as it should be. However if your boss then notified you that unless you went and got a doctors note within 60 days which could adequately prove your ability to handle your own funds in the opinion of your boss, your paycheck will go to someone of your bosses choosing instead of you. And oh yeah by the way, you won't be able to own a gun either. Would that be acceptable to you?
You're a random guy, so I would expect my boss to throw it in the trash. A hospital has some level of authority on the matter at hand. Once again, the person is provided with a variety of options to defend him/herself including representation at no cost. It's not like they're instantly thrown under the bus and told to just take it.
Some people need to be beaten with a smart stick.

Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid!

Kein Mitlied F�r Die Mehrheit!

Offline Johan

Re: VA sending letters to vets deeming them incompetant.
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2013, 02:44:02 PM »
Who says my letter to your boss won't be from a doctor at a hospital? Who says doctors at hospitals don't lie? Yes, you can defend it, but onus is on you.

So I send a letter to your boss from myself, Dr Strangelove, explaining that I have a background in such things and I am therefore qualified to make the assessment I'm making. Sure, you can defend it by simply going to a doctor of your own choosing and getting a letter saying that I'm schmuck, my opinion is shit and you're perfectly able to handle your own finances. And who pays for that doctor visit to get said letter? You do. Why? Because I sent a letter of my own. Is that fair?

I'm guessing the reason you don't see a problem here is because you assume that all doctors are competent and ethical at all times. I don't. The VA shouldn't either. If the VA gets a letter like that, the process that follows shouldn't be guilty until proven innocent. It should be that the VA, at their own expense, takes steps to verify the letters validity and if necessary performs their own evaluation of the patient or at their own expense has an independent doctor perform the evaluation. And the patient should be assumed competent until the VA themselves determine otherwise.

It shouldn't be you've got 60 days to do stuff or else. It should be we need to set up an appointment to investigate this. The onus should be on them, not you.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful

Re: Re:
« Reply #24 on: February 23, 2013, 02:57:00 PM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
Quote from: "Alaric I"
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
I'm not so sure what's wrong with this, other than the fact that the use of the word "incompetent" could be seen as demeaning. Other than that, if someone receiving government benefits isn't able to handle their money because of some sort of disability they should have someone else handle it for them. The letter even includes ways to respond if he/she disagrees with the VA's assessment. I've heard some valid complaints with the VA, but this doesn't seem like one to me.

The problem with this is that (according to the story) there was no due process.  There was no examination by a professional and no court hearing like there should be to deem someone incompetant.  But as I stated earlier, this looks like butthurt guy and seeing that none of the vets have heard of it and see issues with the letter itself it's probably just something htat was blown way out of proportion.
You can't really claim there's no due process when the due process is explicitly stated in the letter.

The person can either:
A: Agree to the VA's decision and do nothing, or
B: Disagree, get a doctor's note stating that he/she is competent to handle his/her money (which his not that hard) or
C: Request a personal hearing to present evidence or
D: Be represented, without charge, by a representative of a veteran's organization or an attourney of
E: All of the above

With B the person has 60 days to do that, with C the person has 30 days to do it. From personal experience I can gather that it's not that hard to get a doctor's note if the doctor agrees with you. Once again, I don't see the problem with this inquiry.

But you can.  They are saying he is guilty unless he proves himself innocent.  What would you do if a cop threw you in jail and the court said you will remain there unless you presented evidence that you didn't commit a crime?  That is exactly what they are doing.

Offline The Skeletal Atheist

Re: VA sending letters to vets deeming them incompetant.
« Reply #25 on: February 23, 2013, 03:28:32 PM »
Quote from: "Johan"
Who says my letter to your boss won't be from a doctor at a hospital? Who says doctors at hospitals don't lie? Yes, you can defend it, but onus is on you.

So I send a letter to your boss from myself, Dr Strangelove, explaining that I have a background in such things and I am therefore qualified to make the assessment I'm making. Sure, you can defend it by simply going to a doctor of your own choosing and getting a letter saying that I'm schmuck, my opinion is shit and you're perfectly able to handle your own finances. And who pays for that doctor visit to get said letter? You do. Why? Because I sent a letter of my own. Is that fair?

I'm guessing the reason you don't see a problem here is because you assume that all doctors are competent and ethical at all times. I don't. The VA shouldn't either. If the VA gets a letter like that, the process that follows shouldn't be guilty until proven innocent. It should be that the VA, at their own expense, takes steps to verify the letters validity and if necessary performs their own evaluation of the patient or at their own expense has an independent doctor perform the evaluation. And the patient should be assumed competent until the VA themselves determine otherwise.

It shouldn't be you've got 60 days to do stuff or else. It should be we need to set up an appointment to investigate this. The onus should be on them, not you.
I'm not assuming all doctors are competent and ethical at all times, but a letter from a doctor should not be taken so lightly, regardless of the fact that some doctors are unethical.

As per who's paying for the doctor's visit, I would assume (I don't know personally, mind you) that the VA would pay for it, since they cover such things. If the person has to pay for it with his/her own money then they might have a case with the VA for reimbursement.

This is not a court issues either; it's a medical/mental health issue. Medical diagnoses and concerns raised by doctors do not work like courts, it's not "innocent into proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". I'm damn glad the medical system doesn't work that way either, could you imagine a paranoid schizophrenic getting diagnosed and still being allowed to own weapons until he/she is proven insane by various court cases? What if the schizophrenic has really good lawyers? Or someone being told they have cancer deciding that they don't, and trying to sue the doctor for slander?

Also, even though the VA has reason to be concerned for this person's competence they are still reaching out to the person and providing multiple avenues by which the person can contest their claims. It's not like they instantly said "we decided you're incompetent, give up your weapons and control of your money". For a competent person it would be exceedingly easy to get a note from his/her doctor, or arrange a personal meeting, or any of the other options. The options the VA are providing far exceed what would be provided to a civilian that a doctor raised serious concerns about.


Quote
So I send a letter to your boss from myself, Dr Strangelove, explaining that I have a background in such things and I am therefore qualified to make the assessment I'm making. Sure, you can defend it by simply going to a doctor of your own choosing and getting a letter saying that I'm schmuck, my opinion is shit and you're perfectly able to handle your own finances. And who pays for that doctor visit to get said letter? You do. Why? Because I sent a letter of my own. Is that fair?

Well, "Dr. Strangelove" (love that movie by the way), if you had the qualifications lined up after a search on you, and you were a doctor I actually saw, then I would fully support you making such an assessment, even if I disagreed (meaning I wouldn't be mad or instantly call foul play because of your assessment). There's a damn good reason doctors are afforded a certain kind of authority in such matters, and it's not as trivial as you make it seem. If I did disagree it would be a matter of getting my medical records, including your assessment, and taking to them to another doctor to get a second opinion. I could even get a third opinion if needed. Sure, I might have to pay out of pocket, but providing the other doctor(s) agrees with my statement I could call either tell my new doctor to start a correspondence with you to patch things up, or call into question your qualifications.
Some people need to be beaten with a smart stick.

Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid!

Kein Mitlied F�r Die Mehrheit!