Do this look like I was still fit for duty

[8541forever]

Hi, I'm trying to get others opinions about being labeled "fit for duty" when the Dr notes seem to contradict this. I don't want to put to much out there and want to keep this simple to understand.

Came back from Iraq in 2005 where I was sniper for that entire year. Lots of documented combat experiences as you might expect from my MOS during that period.

Got back from Iraq and because of stop loss, most of my battalion had about 5 weeks left before we all ets, we were just basically turning in our gear and going through demobilization. No time for anything else as everyone was out processing.

So I was flagged for behavior health after my pdha.

A week after returning from deployment with about 30 days left before ets, I was sent to BH. The psychiatrists said that " SM is a moderate risk to harm others in a variety of situations in the future". Put me on anti depressants and anti psychotics. Said I have anger issues, irritability, anxiety. Notes said I told him my nightmare are enjoyable becuase I'm killing people and I get a rush and I fantasize about what I will do if I go through with this referring to my interaction with police afterwards.

He then says I'm fit for duty ( only 4 weeks to ets from stop loss) and says come back if needed and never sees me again for follow up or to see if medication is working. Doesn't even considered ptsd instead says I have an anti social pd and adjustment disorder. I got a clean honorable discharge no mention of any PD.

Again, never to be seen again for any follow up. I end up up getting 100 ptsd the day after my ets, and even ssdi 3 months after ets for ptsd. In the 3 months after my discharge I had 3 separate Dr diagnosed me with ptsd, no anti social PD ever.

Does this sound correct, that a trained sniper with kills and serious issues in my thought process that specially say I'm a risk to others and obviously my comments about nightmares at the time, seem like I was fit for duty?

I feel I was pushed through to ets so the army didn't have to med me out and I think possibly the misdiagnosis of anti social pd and adjustment disorder prevented the med.

So I'm looking for an outside perspective as I know I'm biased towards myself. I only recently got these old psychiatric notes last year when looking for evidence for retroactive Purple Heart due to TBI from a head injury form VBIED attack.

Does this sound like I should have gotten referredw to meb? And do you think I could ask for new meb from abcmr.

Ran though Ai and they all say I have a high chance of success, and that the psychiatrist notes about harm to others made me non deployable and a security risk, and that no follow up was against regulations. I know these ai seemed to be biased so I'm looking for a real human advise.

Thanks

 

[seaairmariner]

Are you still at the board level requesting a DOD medical discharge, with CRSC so you can receive both VA and DOD with no offsets?

A fit for duty, determination, is erroneous, Made by some random doctor in the military, after seeing you once, is a bastardization of common sense.
A fit for duty, can only be determined after a full DES PEB process which this military doctor did not enter you into.
Common sense, how is a military medical doctor, who identified a problem, and only sees you one time, outside the DES Proesss, feel they can make a legal determination that you are fit for duty. Fit For Duty, again, is only after a problem is identified, medical care is rendered, and many officers look at you, and determine fit for duty, in a full DOD PEB. I am pissed to see this kind of stuff. I am almost 100 percent sure I am understanding the process correctly, as read in alll the manuals for the DES MEB PEB. Fit for Duty is a determination, mentioned by phrase and defined, in these DOD DES MANUALS. Challenge me anyone on this.

If the Board denies you this, then your next step would be be the Court of Federal Claims for a DOD Medical Retirement as opposed to a meaningless honorable discharge that has no disability benefits or CRSC. A honorable discharge would be evidence at the court of federal claims, that you were indeed fit for duty and could reenlist. You did not reenlist, because you were messed up and in need of medical from the disability. If they put you trough a board in service, they could of retained you as fit for duty, as you were honorably serving, and reenlisted you, and made a waiver, and given you medical care for your conditions, but obviously they did not put you through the DES.
Your case if it makes it to the Court of Federal Claims would be interesting to read and see how the government, the DOJ, reacts. The government, the lawyers at the DOJ, would most likely stick their own foot in their mouth, and agree with the Board of Corrections

From reading and following the Board of Federal Claims Military Pay cases, that are for DOD military medical retirement, there is not one that the government ever instantly sided with and granted, benefits for military injury, in the first instance, All I have seen, is bearocrats, DOJ lawyers, Judges, none of which joined at 18, that I can find, do nothing to act like a bulwark, a true 3rd party arbitrator, that sides with a injured service member and corrects dates for disability benefits. What I have seen, is they use good service, your honorable discharge in this instance, as evidence to state you were indeed fit for duty, and deserve no disability benefits for that time period, no matter what your medical record states in service, or the improper and lack of proper diagnosis of PTSD as opposed to PD.

 

[seaairmariner]

Here is but one quote from a Court of Federal Claims Military Pay case that should boggle and alarm any young man or woman who ever dared to serve and give their all.

The Court is also not persuaded by the government’s argument that Mr. ------- claim for disability retirement accrued when he was discharged because at that point he had “sufficient actual or constructive notice of his disability, and hence, of his entitlement to disability retirement pay.” Chambers, 417 F.3d at 1226 (citing Real v. United States, 906 F.2d 1557, 1562 (Fed. Cir. 1990)); see Def.’s Mot. at 7–10. As the court of appeals has explained, this exception to the first competent board rule applies where a service member “knew [at the time of discharge] that he was entitled to disability retirement due to a permanent disability that was not a result of his intentional misconduct and was service-connected.” Chambers, 417 F.3d at 1226. There is no evidence in the record that Mr. ------ knew at the time of his discharge that he had any permanent service-connected psychiatric disorder. Nor is there evidence that he should have known that his psychiatric illnesses were permanent in nature. Indeed, as described in greater detail below, even the military doctors who examined Mr. ------ in 1999 and 2000 did not diagnose PTSD, and they attributed his depression and related symptoms to circumstantial stressors. See Hassay I, 150 Fed. Cl. at 471–72. Moreover, nothing in the record suggests that Mr. ------ consulted any non-military medical providers, received any nonmilitary mental health care, or otherwise questioned the assessments of his military physicians.


--------

The take away? The precedence?

"Constructive Notice" would be given, for a problem ands is cause by the military, through a proper DES process, where you get medical care, limdu and even your own nice little lawyer called a PEBLO to protect your rights as a injured human, that ultimately can lead to a not fit or Fit For Duty Determination. They can retain an injured service member, even amputees, with waivers, and determine you fit. But now you have "Constructive Notice" the injury and its military cause,

When you go to court, at Court of Federal Claims, they can quickly see if you were ever put through a DES in service.
The DOJ acting with the utmost "HONOR" on military disability, will attempt to throw your case out, because of something based on statute of limitation.
The federal court, will stop that and identify you had no "Constructive Notice" Basically you were in shock, trapped in a military assignment you could not get out of, injured and no one was giving you any care or "Constructive Notice"

But the federal court does not go one step further and correct the record for disialbity benefits which are the only g-d da-n thing that matters for a military caused injury, not a honorable discharge.

The government, judges will indeed identify, you were never given any "Constructive Notice" of anything.

Nope, in 2026, it seems the federal government, is setting precedence, can see, their is nothing in your record, where you were given a chance, helped, or otherwise given any care by the system, to review you and give you understanding of your medical issues and the causation by your military.

The referenced 1999 2000 in service doctor notes diagnosed major depression and bipolar disorder with no follow up and no referral to the DES!!!!

They honorably discharged this kid, put him in the street, within 2 weeks was already getting medicated, released, confused at a civilian psychiatric hospital.

The same case referenced above, used his good service, his honorable discharge, as evidence, he was fit for duty, with never being put through a DES and given no medical care in service, for a proper Fit For Duty determination.

It boggles a logical mind if this is really a human, that writes these non logical legal briefs for all things considered, something as important, a the need for medical care, military disability, in a timely fashion, and the problems created on the young service member if this does not happen.
What is even more baffling is they use you good service as evidence you do not need help, no matter how bad your medical issues as created by military service,

What is the true meaning of HONOR in this new kind of usage of such a term. No medical care, because you are honorable. What is the opposite? .Bad Conduct, and you Get medical care and disability benefits from the DOD at discharge without question?

Were is logic here?

One or more of these points, should be of major concern, to those who care, and want a society that is healthy, as represented by those kids, undeveloped at 18, naive. and run into walls for some highly developed older beaurocrats, who did not voluntarily sign those documents at 18, to "SERVE"

 

[8541forever]

Are you still at the board level requesting a DOD medical discharge, with CRSC so you can receive both VA and DOD with no offsets?

A fit for duty, determination, is erroneous, Made by some random doctor in the military, after seeing you once, is a bastardization of common sense.
A fit for duty, can only be determined after a full DES PEB process which this military doctor did not enter you into.
Common sense, how is a military medical doctor, who identified a problem, and only sees you one time, outside the DES Proesss, feel they can make a legal determination that you are fit for duty. Fit For Duty, again, is only after a problem is identified, medical care is rendered, and many officers look at you, and determine fit for duty, in a full DOD PEB. I am pissed to see this kind of stuff. I am almost 100 percent sure I am understanding the process correctly, as read in alll the manuals for the DES MEB PEB. Fit for Duty is a determination, mentioned by phrase and defined, in these DOD DES MANUALS. Challenge me anyone on this.

If the Board denies you this, then your next step would be be the Court of Federal Claims for a DOD Medical Retirement as opposed to a meaningless honorable discharge that has no disability benefits or CRSC. A honorable discharge would be evidence at the court of federal claims, that you were indeed fit for duty and could reenlist. You did not reenlist, because you were messed up and in need of medical from the disability. If they put you trough a board in service, they could of retained you as fit for duty, as you were honorably serving, and reenlisted you, and made a waiver, and given you medical care for your conditions, but obviously they did not put you through the DES.
Your case if it makes it to the Court of Federal Claims would be interesting to read and see how the government, the DOJ, reacts. The government, the lawyers at the DOJ, would most likely stick their own foot in their mouth, and agree with the Board of Corrections

From reading and following the Board of Federal Claims Military Pay cases, that are for DOD military medical retirement, there is not one that the government ever instantly sided with and granted, benefits for military injury, in the first instance, All I have seen, is bearocrats, DOJ lawyers, Judges, none of which joined at 18, that I can find, do nothing to act like a bulwark, a true 3rd party arbitrator, that sides with a injured service member and corrects dates for disability benefits. What I have seen, is they use good service, your honorable discharge in this instance, as evidence to state you were indeed fit for duty, and deserve no disability benefits for that time period, no matter what your medical record states in service, or the improper and lack of proper diagnosis of PTSD as opposed to PD.

Yea I just started this process so it will be a while for me. I just sent in my packet to the ABCMR. No one was concerned about tbi and ptsd while in combat in 2004 to the point that you went to your command for help, especially in an infantry unit. Not trying to sound macho, but that just how it was. The BH psychiatrist just labeled me a threat to others gave me anti psychotics and anti depressants and never saw me again, not even to check if the meds were working. Don't see how that was ethical. I had to go to a civilian DR even before the VA about a month after my ETS. Both gave me severe PTSD diagnosis, never any PD. PD was a misdiagnosis I had severe PTSD symptoms.

 

[seaairmariner]

Yea I just started this process so it will be a while for me. I just sent in my packet to the ABCMR. No one was concerned about tbi and ptsd while in combat in 2004 to the point that you went to your command for help, especially in an infantry unit. Not trying to sound macho, but that just how it was. The BH psychiatrist just labeled me a threat to others gave me anti psychotics and anti depressants and never saw me again, not even to check if the meds were working. Don't see how that was ethical. I had to go to a civilian DR even before the VA about a month after my ETS. Both gave me severe PTSD diagnosis, never any PD. PD was a misdiagnosis I had severe PTSD symptoms.

You should update your board argument as such.
A Fit For Duty out side of the DES PEB process is erroneous. Even if you agree you were fit for duty, you were still injured and in need of care of the DES PEB process to include LIMDU Medical Care, a PEBLO Officer etc. Basically a Fit For Duty is not a legal statement you are not. injured and need of care from the military while in the military, and should have been processed with DOD disability to include tricare at ETS. Throw in you were not given any constructive notice of your rights and entitlements to military DOD disability at ETS because the Military Doctor did not enter you into the DES although he questioned your fitness because he did indeed make a errroneous fit for duty determination outside the DES. Don't let them define Fit For Duty as a clean bill of health outside of the DES. Challenge them that a Fit For Duty is only to be made in a complete DES PEB process.