Depends on the thoroughness of the health history. Answering affirmatively to a question about having episodes of depression, for example, might lead to more intrusive questions about sexual matters. Obviously, a vet returning from a combat deployment is a more likely candidate for all types of emotional injuries. It’s only logical to explore spirituality when assessing overall health. </p>
<p>My guess is that the health care professionals in the armed services know just a bit more about the needs of veterans than you do.</p>
<p>You didn’t read the links, then. Or not carefully.</p>
<p>From the first link:</p>
<p>Veterans do have to specifically ask for mental health services.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From the second link:
Veterans do have to specifically opt out of the religious screening:</p>
<p>“Gaylor said the decision was misguided on several fronts. She said it was misleading to call the spiritual assessments voluntary since they are given to every patient” </p>
<p>“I think the public will be startled to learn that if you’re a VA patient and you want a referral to the eye doctor, you have to have a spiritual assessment in order to do that,” Gaylor said.</p>
<p>Your analogy to bowel movements and sexual dysfunction fails this test too. I’ve never gone to get an eye exam and been asked questions that didn’t relate to ocular health.</p>
<p>And yes, the ruling does say this is constitutional because it’s voluntary. But what you selectively omitted is the part that the burden is now on veterans for the first time to opt out. That’s the departure from precedent. Whether this will stand up in court I don’t know. That judge, Shabaz, has been overturned before on establishment of religion is issues.</p>
<p>That’s exactly my point! No one asks a veteran if he’s having problems before asking more intrusive questions! These instrusive inquiries are the DEFAULT position.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re right again! Trouble is, it isn’t nurses and doctors deciding someone is spiritually injured or administering the assessment. It’s chaplains. And this is being done automatically instead of mental health screening by health care professionals. And if it were doctors and nurses doing it, a determination of injury might be based on whether the person is having a problem, as your quote above seems to indicate it would be for other issues.</p>
<p>If one is done automatically, the other should be. And I think both should be done by health care professionals on an objective basis and not by chaplains.</p>
<p>Oh, and this is misleading:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These assessments aren’t limited to returning combat vets. Even veterans who have been back for decades or never saw combat often can’t get an eye exam without forst being assessed for how religious they are. </p>
<p>Mental health services, on the other hand, aren’t being screened for in the population you specifically say is “a more likely candidate for all types of emotional injuries” unless they ask.</p>
<p>I find that relationship and allocation of resources very out of whack.</p>
<p>“The Church, however, interprets it today how it has always interpreted it, since the beginning, almost 2,000 years ago.”</p>
<p>Evidence please? I can cite literally hundreds of examples to the contrary, even after Constantine, where “The Church” changed its collective mind. </p>
<p>“Please continue to keep us up-to-date as to which parts of the Bible we may take literally and which not!”</p>
<p>Well, since he said it, and it is quite clear what he said, the burden would seem to be on those who have decided he didn’t mean what he said. ;)</p>
<p>conyat, thanks for bringing this VA policy to my attention. That has got to be one of the goofiest things I’ve heard of in a long time. It reminds me of the “surveys” they wanted us to do in high school on topics about which we’d rather not share. </p>
<p>They don’t have the right to ask. You don’t know how they’ll use it. Just lie. </p>
<p>Here’s an idea . As long as we are playing with the pencils why don’t we ask all of them about gun ownership before we allow our vets any health care? Number, calibre, brand , serial number, date of purchase , place of purchase, previous owner, and present location. That “intrusion” is sure to go over well with the Buushists.</p>
<p>On another note, I feel like my position here has been misrepresented some, so I’m going to clarify.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with the assessments or the services themselves. It’s veterans having to opt out of them that bothers me. And the fact that veterans’ religiousity is being assessed rather than if they feel they have problems.</p>
<p>If they just asked veterans, would you like a spiritual assessment? or are you having spiritual problems you’d like help with? first, the way they do with mental health, I would be all for it (providing that the assessment was designed to assess problems and concerns, rather than to make value judgements about the veterans’ beliefs and practices.)</p>
Then get a new doc. Every contact with every patient should include an inquiry into overall health. My dentist aks me for health/wellness updates or changes every six months when I get my teeth cleaned. Yours should, too.</p>
<p>From the MSNBC article: "Studies show some troops fear being stigmatized if they acknowledge they have problems such as nightmares, hypervigilance or anxiety. Or, some want to spend time with their families instead of getting mental health help.</p>
<p>To help catch them, Navy Surgeon General Donald Arthur said some of the mental health screening has been delayed a couple of months so that troops can first spend time with their families.</p>
<p>Kiley said the amount of face-to-face counseling of returning troops is increasing, and those who seek help are getting it. In recent years, the military has implemented programs that encourage troops to seek mental help if they need it."</p>
<p>Sounds to me like service men & women eager to see their families, not willing to open up about mental health needs. I think delayed screening is a GOOD idea.</p>
<p>Spiritual assessments are inquiries into holistic health. I think ALL vets can benefit from this assessment. If religion is being forced on the vets, that is wrong. Kick out the inappropriate chaplain, by all means. But where is the evidence of this? </p>
<p>Read the spiritual distress nursing diagnosis link & then decide if attending to a patient’s spiritual health is out of line.</p>
<p>I am confident that my father, a lifer who died in a VA Hospital, would have told them if asked any of those questions “That’s none of your G.D. business”. (Yes, he would have used the initials in mixed company. ) </p>
<p>I’ll be following the case through the appellate process.</p>
<p>SS,
Thanks. The discussion of diagnosis of impaired energy field is especially interesting. I guess nurses are trained to be able to feel energy fields by holding their hands a few inches from the patient. Very impressive skills.</p>
That’s certainly an option, curmudgeon. Not a great one if your helth needs are being ignored because you failed to give accurate information. Read the nursing diagnosis link. It’s really kind of new-agey. Basically assessing if the patient’s desired level of spirituality is functional. Athiests, humanists… no problem. Whatever floats your boat. The nurse just wants to see that boat floating, not sinking. A typical goal would be to ensure the patient is “achieving a sense of wholeness and optimum balance” or being “aided on the journey of self-discovery.”</p>
<p>This is a bit of a tempest in a teapot, I think. Do you remember years ago the panic over the satanic cults that were taking over the armed forces? It was shouted from the rooftops by media mavens. Chicken bones & covens.</p>
One of the links I posted has links to several of them, and I posted a quote that describes their contents. Each VA seems to make its own. Some of them are more/less intrusive than others. One or two of them asks about problems or worries, but it’s usually at the end, after a long list of intrusive questions about belief and practice.</p>
<p>Let me clarify what I said about eye exams. I consider overall health related to ocular health, which is why I said I’ve never been asked a question that didn’t related to ocular health. It didn’t occur to me that I would have to specify that I’ve never been in a situation where before I could make an appointment with an eye doctor, I had to document how often I had a bowel movement or how many times I was having sex.</p>
<p>You yourself have acknowledged that the typical way to go about an assessment is to ask a general question about problems then move to more intrusive questions only if a problem is indicated. But we’re doing the opposite with our vets.</p>
<p>And yeah, Curmudgeon, my dad would have been with yours had he used the VA system he was entitled to for his WWII service. Although devoutly religious, an elder in his church, even, he would not have submitted to obtrusive government inquiries about it.</p>
LOL. My Dad had 23 years in. Veteran of Korea and Vietnam. He would of had something to say I guar-an-tee it. ;)</p>
<p>SS, I don’t have any disagreements with what I looked at quickly in the link provided. My problem is with the initial survey asking questions about religious pratices as a precursor to any unrelated health treatment. </p>
<p>It could have a chilling effect on some vets getting needed treatment. Let’s make it easier for these folks. Not harder. </p>
<p>I have NO trouble with the VA treating spiritual injury as defined in your link. It is kind of new age-y , isn’t it?</p>
<p>About those fishes. I live in an area where people plaster the fish on their business signs, business cards, cars, etc. I don’t have an issue seeing them on cars, but I really think it is disrespectul to use this symbol, which some hold so personally important, as a ‘marketing tool’. I just don’t think Jesus cares which auto repair shop or which plumber I use.</p>
<p>ldmom, the fish is “interesting” but mostly inoffensive to me. It’s not “In Your Face”. What about the Praying Hands and the One Way (with the arrow up) Used Cars (or Plumbing or whatever)? You gotta have those, don’t you? I stay away from those.</p>
<p>And then there’s a different kind of vet (like my Dad) who, though not a believer in organized religion (lovingly called a “Heathen” by my Mom), chatted with our Pastor (a former WWII Roman Catholic chaplain) at the coffee shop after dropping us off at mass on Sundays; listened patiently to the Jehovah’s Witnesses who came to our door; welcomed all sorts of “proselytizers” to the various hospital rooms he had to endure in his later years; and who would most certainly, I can guar-an-tee it, not have taken the least bit offense at questions about his religious beliefs when being admitted to a VA Hospital (though from what I’ve heard of these places, I’m happy he never had to spend time in one).</p>
</p>