<p>SS,
I guess I just lack the proper training. I certainly don’t understand a patient’s “disturbed energy fields” or the ability to make the diagnosis by hold one’s hands a few inches from the patient. I also have a hard time understanding the meaning and diagnosis of “impaired religiosity.”</p>
<p>One thing that concerns me is the potential uses for all this data on veterans’ religiosity and how it will be used. I haven’t seen anything to indicate that there’s statuatory limits on how this can be used. </p>
<p>To make an analogy with mental health, I have a relative who interned at the local VA in clinical psychology and she told me that anything she put in her notes to indicate that a vet had childhood trauma would be used to deny him or her benefits for PTSD. (The default assumption would be that the PTSD wasn’t due to military service but was a result of childhood trauma).</p>
<p>I hope the veterans would think long and hard before providing the government with this kind of information about their innermost thoughts and beliefs until there is clarification–and transparent disclosure–of what the information may and may NOT be used for. </p>
<p>When my relative was doing her internship, it was quite obvious to her that the VA was underfunded and understaffed and that this situation was affecting her patients negatively. But we’re spending money to duplicate a resource already available in the community for free, instead of addressing the issues that can only be handled in a medical setting.</p>
<p>
Oh God, that is horrible! The govt. trying to weasel out of fulfilling their duty to vets is outrageous.</p>
<p>It’s estimated that one-third of the homeless in this country are veterans. A large number of them are mentally ill. Most of the homeless veterans come from low income families. </p>
<p>But it’s not just the veterans who are having trouble getting treatment for mental health. Remember the soldier charged with raping an Iraqi child and killing her family? He tried to get help for his homicidal urges from a Combat Stress Team. He was given meds and sent back to combat the next day (long before the medication would have had a therapeutic effect).</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.courierpress.com/news/2007/jan/10/soldier-had-mental-trouble/[/url]”>http://www.courierpress.com/news/2007/jan/10/soldier-had-mental-trouble/</a></p>
<p>edad, a big part of the "fuzzy’ language of nursing diagnosises is to differentiate them from medical diagnosises. If both a nurse and a doc examine a patient and find results that indicate an elevated white count, a cough producing thick, bloody sputum, presence of rales & rhonchi in the lungs, and the patient’s chest makes a dull thud when percussed, they will suspect pneumonia. Doc will order x-ray & confirm that medical diagnosis. The nurse’s diagnosis would likely be: “ineffective airway clearance, altered respiratory function, impaired physical mobility, activity intolerance.” Doc treats the disease, nurse helps patient manage its symptoms & cope with all aspects of treatment. This has gone way off topic, I know…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow. How inclusive of you.</p>
<p>Edit:
And BTW, hh if that was a gratuitous dig of some kind (and it would be in extremely poor tatse if it was) it was my father’s choice to be around his brothers (and sisters) in arms at the end of his life. (He was also a 20 year retiree from a major corporation with medical benefits.) Choice is what it’s all about. Not being told by others what is right or wrong or even what God is saying. Personal choice. Independent thought. </p>
<p>Their care was very good on his wing. We appreciated it.</p>
<p>Thank you.
Coming from you I can’t think of any higher praise.</p>
<p>(Trying to keep up with your edits…)
No, it wasn’t a gratuitous dig, (in fact, my husband and I give money to disabled Vets and Vet hospitals), but why would you, the cc expert on gratuitous digs, need to ask that question?</p>
<p>Please stop, btw, or you’ll get the thread kicked off. :)</p>
<p>hh, por nada. 
Glad to help. </p>
<p>I also don’t want you to miss the substantial additional comments on my post above. It would be a shame.</p>
<p>
because I’m in the presence of a master of veiled insults.</p>
<p>Such as
?</p>
<p>Mock the nursing profession? Most of the nurses I know – not to mention faculty at the most respected nursing schools – are flat-out embarrassed by that energy field business and its association with their craft. It is itself a mockery of the genuine, lifesaving care that nurses provide every day. IIRC, it was thoroughly discredited in an experiment designed by a 10-year-old named Emily Rosa and published in JAMA.</p>
<p><a href=“A close look at therapeutic touch - PubMed”>A close look at therapeutic touch - PubMed;
<p>hh, I’m not catching it. What was wrong with “independent thought”?</p>
<p>I don’t care to further “engage,” dear curmudgeon. You scared me when you flattened that kid a third of your age this morning. You are formidable indeed. Quite up to the task of taking on the Christian fascists!!</p>
<p>checking up on me, hh? I’m flattered. At least I think I am.</p>
<p>As to whoever I “flattened” (and at this point I don’t remember ???) , I’m pretty sure they started out needing flattening. And who knows, maybe I’m the one who called in the Mounties .;)</p>
<p>And as to me “taking on” the Christian Fascists among us- I don’t know if that is what I’m doing but I’m hoping the crazies are sane enough to realize that not all of their opponents are pacifists.</p>
<p>I was referring to you checking up on and posting past posts of Fides et Ratio this morning, as you well know, to “flatten” him when he dared to express his belief in the infallibility of the Catholic church, (a dated concept, I know, but I thought we still had free speech in this country?).</p>
<p>(As to the Mounties, yes, your original “flattening” post toward him was mysteriously removed ;)).</p>
<p>Remember it how you wish. I’m sure hayden remembers it a bit differently. Fid’s abusive language which was removed accusing posters (mini and hayden) of heresy (as well as all protestants) and of killing Christianity were vile and insensitive. Not to mention historically flawed and poorly presented. </p>
<p>I thought his previous posts I quoted were very representative of his work. ; </p>
<p>And I have no idea how old he is , but I do know he is out of UG, or so he said in a post. I think that would make him half my age, not a third.;)</p>
<p>Does this refresh your memory, hh ? I’m trying to be helpful because you seem about confuddled. Only the one you make reference to was far worse and more personal. </p>
<p>
Do you believe this, too?</p>
<p>You know, for a while I thought you were fid or more accurately that fid was you. That’s the reason I looked at his old posts to begin with. See. I may admire you as much as you admire me. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree that Jesus almost certainly doesn’t care. And Jesus wasn’t much into elitism, either.</p>
<p>I brought up the fishes in response to what someone said about Mormons sticking together, as an example of how the born-agains stick together too. Evidently it must work: Christians preferring to do business with other Christians.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with it since it doesn’t concern me. I might occasionally pick a Christian business for something if their ad is otherwise good, but never for a plumber - I don’t want to get hassled about my pictures of unicorns and I sure don’t want to have to hide my non-Christian books before they come over. (Some of you might remember the experience I had when I chose a midwife because she was Christian.)</p>
<p>Although, the thought has crossed my mind that some of them might just put the fish on their business card or ad because it is just another marketing too, designed to attract a certain subculture of customers. Other than that, I think they certainly have the right to target whichever market of people they wish. It’s just another bit of data and if some prospective customers prefer to do business with people of their same faith, well, I guess that’s their perogative.</p>
<p>You are too funny.</p>
<p>This is the intellectual, independent freedom of thought you are interested in?</p>
<p>Talk of Protestants as being heretics is abusive language, vile and insensitive? (And historically inaccurate and <em>poorly presented</em>–worst of all sins.)</p>
<p>We must delete these references, but we may leave in ***** talk, and indeed quote the posts talking of *****es?</p>
<p>What times we live in.</p>