Albany,n.y. Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 This is a non-partisan post, let's keep it that way. I was watching the local news a couple of nights ago & if what they said is true, it is absolutely disgraceful. The newscast was about Ken Comstock, a soldier who was injured in Iraq breaking numerous (est 500) facial bones. They have set up a fund to contribute to help him pay his medical bills. In the newscast they said that after he is removed from critical condition, he is responsible for his bills. Is this correct? Obviously he will be responsible for his medical bills at some point, otherwise the fund wouldn't be set up. How can anyone justify making a soldier pay medical bills when he got injured in service to this country. Why doesn't the government pay all his bills until he is rehabilitated to the best extent that he can be rehabilitated. Do they consider plastic surgery on a guy whose face has been disfigured a luxury or elective surgery? Anything less than paying 100% is an absolute disgrace!
VABills Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 This is a non-partisan post, let's keep it that way. I was watching the local news a couple of nights ago & if what they said is true, it is absolutely disgraceful. The newscast was about Ken Comstock, a soldier who was injured in Iraq breaking numerous (est 500) facial bones. They have set up a fund to contribute to help him pay his medical bills. In the newscast they said that after he is removed from critical condition, he is responsible for his bills. Is this correct? Obviously he will be responsible for his medical bills at some point, otherwise the fund wouldn't be set up. How can anyone justify making a soldier pay medical bills when he got injured in service to this country. Why doesn't the government pay all his bills until he is rehabilitated to the best extent that he can be rehabilitated. Do they consider plastic surgery on a guy whose face has been disfigured a luxury or elective surgery? Anything less than paying 100% is an absolute disgrace! 9786[/snapback] It's not correct. The only thing is he has to use military/VA hospitals. If he doesn't then the cost is on him. That is his choice, but it's free only if he uses the resources that they make available. They will do reconstructive surgery. They will rehab him forever. In fact, I don't know the story, you refer to, but if he is consider 30% disabled (I don't know how they cam up with that), he gets full military benies for the rest of his life. Commisary, Exchange, medical, dental, etc...
Albany,n.y. Posted August 28, 2004 Author Posted August 28, 2004 Thanks for the answer I really hope the kid gets treated right. I can only guess from your answer that the family wants a non military supplied specialist. Here's some of the story. http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=...t_id=7021&rfi=6
Alaska Darin Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 This is a non-partisan post, let's keep it that way. I was watching the local news a couple of nights ago & if what they said is true, it is absolutely disgraceful. The newscast was about Ken Comstock, a soldier who was injured in Iraq breaking numerous (est 500) facial bones. They have set up a fund to contribute to help him pay his medical bills. In the newscast they said that after he is removed from critical condition, he is responsible for his bills. Is this correct? Obviously he will be responsible for his medical bills at some point, otherwise the fund wouldn't be set up. How can anyone justify making a soldier pay medical bills when he got injured in service to this country. Why doesn't the government pay all his bills until he is rehabilitated to the best extent that he can be rehabilitated. Do they consider plastic surgery on a guy whose face has been disfigured a luxury or elective surgery? Anything less than paying 100% is an absolute disgrace! 9786[/snapback] It really depends. You get hurt on active duty and they pay for everything. There are times when they will allow you to go to "outside the network" specialists and will pay up to what it would have cost them. That is a pain in the ass of epic proportions. The really, really good cosmetic surgeons in the military are VERY hard to see, as are any specialists. It took my kid almost 3 months to get in to see the dermatologist for what ended up being about a 7 minute appointment. They did have the latest UVB machine for him to use, which cured what ailed him in just a couple of visits. Post active duty health care through the VA is kind of a nightmare - especially if you live in a city that doesn't have a large military/veteran presence. They are building a brand new VA Hospital in Anchorage that is twice the size of the current facility (thanks Uncle Ted). Makes sense considering something like 52% of the taxpayers are prior service.
Wacka Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 The newscast was about Ken Comstock, a soldier who was injured in Iraq breaking numerous (est 500) facial bones. Just to correct this small point. Your whole body has 206 bones, a lot of them in your hands and feet. He might have broken 5 bones in his face.
Captain America Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I hate to even think this way but it sounds like some one is taking advantage of the situation , unless of course he receives the money ,all the medical bills ,as stated in this thread previously, will be paid for. Time and again young people fall for the recruiters "your college will be paid for " neglecting to say of course if you live through the experience.
blzrul Posted August 29, 2004 Posted August 29, 2004 It's an unfortunte fact that care in VA hospitals is not always the best. My husband used to go to a VA hospital before he had a job with healthcare. He said it was a nightmare and he wouldn't willingly go back unless it was absolutely necessary. When he saw "Born on the 4th of July" he commented that it wasn't too far off - too many people needing service and not enough staff or equipment to provide the best service (which our soldiers deserve). That's not to say the staff was incompetent or uncaring, but the facilities were old and not in the best repair, they were understaffed, and overcrowded. Not all VA hospitals are like that of course. I have a friend who's a radiologist with a VA facility in Iowa and he says it's a wonderful facility. This soldier may not be able to get adequate care at his VA hospital or, if the recuperation is going to be lengthy and require multiple surgeries, he may prefer to recuperate near family where there IS no VA hospital. It is a shame, but the sad fact is if he won't use the VA facilities then he is just another American without health care coverage.
Tux of Borg Posted August 29, 2004 Posted August 29, 2004 I shattered my right ankle on a parachute jump. I continued to jump for a few years after that injury, but I got nothing for it when I left active duty. I currently hold my medical insurance through the VA. In the area I am in now, I've never had a problem going to a clinic. I've gone to the VA hospital once and that was incident free. However, I've heard many horror stories about the VA hospitals from my other friends through out the country.
Griswold Posted August 29, 2004 Posted August 29, 2004 Huh... so most (but not all) VA hopstials suck? A freind of mine is retired, he uses TRICARE and loves it. Can you use TRICARE anywhere... or if a VA hospital is nearby, are you compelled to use that? TRICARE with civilian providers seems to be the best of both worlds.
blzrul Posted August 29, 2004 Posted August 29, 2004 I don't see anywhere where anyone said most VA hospitals suck, but many of them are old, unquestionably. And they're probably not as fully staffed or equipped as conscientious health care providers would like. In the case of the soldier in question, apparently he's finding it difficult to get the treatment he needs through the VA hospitals. It could be that either they cannot provide the service, or that he cannot use the service due to where he lives or his personal experience with that particular institution. I am sure that there are plenty of caring individuals who work at VA hospitals and that many veterans are satisfied with their services.
aussiew Posted August 30, 2004 Posted August 30, 2004 Have I missed something? I can't see anywhere in the article where it implied that he's not getting good care.
Recommended Posts