The Supreme Court agreed last week to consider if two veterans were improperly denied medical benefits needed to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) thought to have arisen during their military service.
“An individual may experience this as emotionally or physically harmful or life-threatening and may affect mental, physical, social, and/or spiritual well-being,” the association’s website reads.
“[People suffering from PTSD] have intense, disturbing thoughts and feelings related to their experience that last long after the traumatic event has ended. They may relive the event through flashbacks or nightmares; they may feel sadness, fear or anger; and they may feel detached or estranged from other people.”
U.S. Air Force veteran Joshua Bufkin and U.S. Army veteran Norman Thornton, the petitioners in the Supreme Court case, argue that their compensation claims were denied despite medical evidence that demonstrated their conditions were related to their military service. They say that even if the case for their entitlement to treatment is marginal, they are entitled to treatment under the benefit-of-the-doubt rule, which requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide treatment when it is a close call as to whether the applicant qualifies.
They argue that the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals failed to properly apply the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in upholding the denial of benefits.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the ruling, holding that the lower appeals court was only required to determine if there was a clear error based on the department’s factual findings.
Mr. Bufkin served in the Air Force from September 2005 until March 2006. He sought counseling services to discuss the mental health of his wife and the effect her health was having on his training, according to the petition.
A department psychiatrist could not identify what had caused his PTSD or whether it was related to his service in the military.
He was informed that he had only two choices: He could divorce his wife and remain in the military or he could accept a general discharge and leave under a hardship. He sought termination of his service and was discharged.
Mr. Thornton joined the Army in October 1988 and received an honorable discharge in December 1991. He then joined the National Guard, serving until 1996, according to the petition.
In 1991, he was deployed to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait for six months, where he worked on a tank crew and as a combat lifesaver, rendering advanced first aid and lifesaving procedures to soldiers injured in the first Gulf War. He was exposed to chemicals with no protective gear and had to assist in the recovery and burial of bodies, as well as “killing enemy soldiers and civilians, including children,” the petition states.
After leaving the military, he suffered from PTSD, according to his longtime physician. He was treated for PTSD with a 10 percent disability rating and for Gulf War syndrome with a 40 percent rating. Disability ratings range from zero percent to 100 percent and are assigned in 10 percent increments. The higher the rating, the more serious the disability and the higher the monthly compensation payment.
Years later, Mr. Thornton applied for an increased disability rating for PTSD. It was raised to 50 percent. He appealed to have the rating raised above 50 percent but lost his case.
The two men said in their petition that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule applies and was not observed in their respective cases.
“That rule, which has been observed for more than a century, is now codified at 38 U.S.C. [Section] 5107(b): ‘When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination’ of a benefits claim, the Department of Veterans Affairs ‘shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant,’” the petition reads.
The Biden administration had urged the Supreme Court to not take up the appeal.
The court is expected to hear Bufkin v. McDonough in its new term, which begins in October.
The case was about whether a veteran who qualifies for education benefits under multiple GI Bill programs is required to use up or abandon the benefits of one program to take advantage of benefits under another.
The decision, a defeat for the Biden administration, means as many as 1.7 million post-9/11 veterans could become eligible for additional education benefits potentially worth billions of dollars. The Biden administration disputes the 1.7 million figure, saying it’s closer to just 30,000 veterans.
The Supreme Court ruled 7–2 on April 16 that a veteran may take advantage of benefits earned under both the Montgomery GI Bill and the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
The nation’s highest court ruled that the man may take the benefits in any order as long as he does not exceed the aggregate 48-month cap established by federal law. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
