Panorama - Army on the Run - What are your views?

[Sheefa]

Don't know if anyone saw the Panorama doc last night, but it was a little worrying and wondered what the views were on this.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6479769.stm

 

Would most like to hear from people in the Forces like Andy (SupraAyf) etc or people looking to join, not just opinionated people who post for the hell of it!

 

I was a little shocked to hear the stories, especially the clear lack of physcological support provided by the Army. However, I have 3 very close mates in the Forces and a Cousin based at Hereford (Er hmmm SAS) and they've never gone on the run despite being posted on tour many a time and in fairly savage places.

 

Are these just weak people, or are the sights they're seeing actually so vividly sick and distrubing that they're changing their frame of mind?

 

Discuss.

 

Greg

[chilly]

I'm in the RAF and although i've never been to anywhere harsher than the Falklands and Cyprus, there is a mentality in the forces that if you mention anything to do with your mental state then your are generally laughed at (basket weaver!!). However everyones state of mind is different and when put in extreme situations (graphic blood and guts) we all react different.

 

The 4 guys that were sat in the pub just looked and sounded like scallys. If they weren't in the Army then they would have ended up in prison.

 

At the end of the day the Army will always attract a minority of people who would not make it in any other form of work. I feel the programme only portaryed this minority.

[Snooze]

In my opinion (and this is purely speculative), I would tend to hang on the important point raised in the report that the majority of the 2,700 cases are actually repeat cases and soldiers nipping off to sort out personal affairs.

 

I'm not saying this is all cases: In such a stressful job as military service, there are ALWAYS going to be some that aren't emotionally suited to the work.

 

So in conclusion - although I feel sorry for the individuals affected - I don't think it's possible to say whether this is really an issue in the bigger scheme of things without knowing what real percentage of military servicemen go AWOL because of inadequate support services..... (edit: as chilly says: probably a real minority)

 

.....especially at a time when the general populace are looking for reduced military spending and tax cuts!

 

What I don't understand is why they don't just let these people go? I don't understand how the costs involved in hunting them down and forcing them back into service are worthwhile if these AWOLs are not suited to the job anyway. It's not like it's WW1 out in the Middle East: it's not like there's a shortage of people ready to join the military at the moment, is it?

[chilly]

Snooze

 

There isn't as many people that want to join the Army as you might think.

 

When i first joined the forces in the late 80's there was loads wanting to join. However back then Northern Ireland was the worst you were going to get.

 

I remember watchin a programme on Northern Ireland and the same thing was happening then. Soldiers returning who had mates who had been killed were going ment.

 

This is not new. You'd have to think lond and hard about joining the Army these days, as within the first 18 months you are more than likely to be in conflict in which you stand a high chance of being shot or atleast witnessing some atrocity.

 

As an 18 year old these things are bound to affect you mentally. It needs to be sorted where the ones who are going AWOL just to take the piss are kicked out and the ones with genuine mental problems are looked after properly.

 

IMO the British forces for me are still the best trained in the world, i know 'cos i'm part of that training regime. What we are being let down by is the 1940's atitude to dealing with these problems.

[Snooze]

As an 18 year old these things are bound to affect you mentally. It needs to be sorted where the ones who are going AWOL just to take the piss are kicked out and the ones with genuine mental problems are looked after properly.

 

Chilly,

 

relating to your previous comment, do you regard the looking after of these people with genuine problems as a military issue, though? The problem seems to be that it is the military that appears to be expected to pick up the tab for supporting and rehabilitating them on what (I assume) is a too-small budget.

 

If, as you suggest, these are people with underlying problems anyway, shouldn't they be handed back to a national rehabilitation system (NHS?) rather than being a military burden?

 

Thanks for the insight,

 

ben

[chilly]

When you join the military, its like joining a new family, for some its their only family. You all share your experiences, the soldiers are putting their lives on the line for their Country and imo if they are having problems should be treated in the best way. I think the military often discards the 'problem child' by throwing them back into civvy street and let them join the already long waiting list on the NHS.

 

Our Army is the best and as so derserves the best.

[Sheefa]

Interesting points guys. I'm applying for the RAF at the moment but certainly would like to be clear in the fact that the RAF support ALL personnel in circumstances which may cause mental instability.

 

I'm not worried about breaking down or having an episode or anything, quite the opposite, but I would be worried as an Officer leading 30 men into a conflict zone that this could, or is, happening to one of them.

 

Greg

[Charlotte]

It's not like it's WW1 out in the Middle East:

 

I don't know what you mean by that?

 

I watched the programme and I did definitely feel sorry for the guy with the mental problems.

 

There should definitely be support for them within the army. Why should they be spat out at the end with mental problems and be left for the community to deal with?

[Mike_Mac]

Hi,

 

I am writing this from Basra City and have been in the Forces for 10 years, initially as an Other Rank and then later as an Officer. I've had operational experience in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq at all levels. If what I say offends you, then please remember that I am stating my opinion as per events and people I have know and seen. I do not claim to know it all about every situation and type of individual, but am trying to explain my point of view as fairly as possible.

 

I think there are broadly two types of people:

 

Firstly, there are people currently deployed to Operational Environments, such as Iraq, who never go outside the camp perimeter. Due to the Logistical effort required to maintain any fighting force that is Operationally Deployed these support elements form the majority of the personnel in theatre.

They face Rocket or Mortar attacks, which are reasonably intense in several of the City areas, but sporadic in all the others. For the majority of forces, then, who are not out on the ground that is it. The actual danger from these attacks is (touch wood!) significantly reduced, due to the protective measures that are in place. Their main experience then is unpleasant working conditions, the requirement to hit the deck when the alarm goes off and seperation from loved ones. This is, however, still wearing to a person's psyche and repeated tours and separation add to these worries, especially with younger servicemen and women who may have new familes to support.

 

The other type of person is one that has the same situation while on camp and then also gets out on the ground. Not just a Soldier, there are Medics, Engineers and many other supporting elements who deploy alongside and support the guys at the pointy end. They are at risk from IED attack, well-aimed shots and machine-gun fire from insurgents, RPG attack etc etc. They also will quite often see some pretty nasty stuff while out and about. I will not go into details.

 

Both types of people has pressure on them in different ways and everyone handles pressure differently, which is why I've tried to explain the differing problems faced by each type. As has been discussed some people from both groups will return and go sick, or become noticed for psychological reasons. In my opinion these split into 2, very broad, types of case.

 

The first type of case is the person who comes back, goes on Post-Operational Tour Leave and doesn't return. At the same time they go to a Doctor, claim depression, that they feel suicidal and they are promptly signed off for a few months to recover because the Doctor doesn't want to make a wrong call and wind up responsible for a suicide. That, to me, is an opportunistic scally playing the system for a free ride and I personally loathe people that pull that trick. I am NOT saying that people who go sick on POTL are chancers, just that I have seen several people pull a fast one that way.

 

The second type is the peson who will do a job, see something, carry on and then later start having problems as the memories come back. Because the majority of these people are trying to maintain their professionalism they tend to bottle things up and end up with psychological issues, which need a great deal of specialist time and effort to overcome. Any member of the medical profession is in short supply in the Armed Forces just now, never mind specialists (Again I won't go into why that is - I'll let everyone draw their own conclusions!) Therefore it is difficult to support these people inside the Military. I don't know enough about the rest of the article to comment about the level of care given outside or inside, that is just my opinion on why it might be. I am certainly not claiming the Military is perfect and agree with Charlotte that we have a duty of care to Servicemen and Women suffering mental issues.

 

My final comment is this; The scumbags that claim falsely that they are suffering from psychological issues can cause real problems for those who genuinely have them. This also deflects proper medical support from those who genuinely need it. Unfortunately, as we move further into the 'no responsibility for our own actions', 'where there's a blame there's a claim' and 'it's not my fault' culture, there are more and more people who think nothing of trying to rip the system off for an easy ride. It's just a pity that the minority of people in the Forces who have this attitude can cause genuinely ill people to be tarred with the same brush about what is a very difficuly subject to raise at the best of times.

 

Sorry for the rant. Apologies if I have offended anyone and if I am out of line please come back at me with corrections.

[chilly]

Mike Mac

Has perfectly summed it up, there are too many young people these days willing to piss about with the system.

 

This can affect how we deal with true cases of serious mproblems.

 

We are all guilty of tarring with the same brush syndrome.

 

As a member of the forces who has not served in any kind of harsh environment, i do not know how i would react to been put under constant stress and pressure situations and losing mates in battle.

 

I just hope that if i was in that situation, that the correct course of action would be taken.

 

At the end of the day the vast majority of the armed forces are doing a fantastic job under intense situations, more frequently.

 

If anyone reading these threads is thinking of joining the armed forces you will never get a better opportunity to meet great people and receive the best training. I have been in the RAF for 18 years and wouldn't change a thing.

[chilly]

Sheefa

 

What trade you joining?

[Sheefa]

What a fantastic post Mike and no offence taking at all. From a Civvie standpoint I think you're bang on and want to know about such conditions of the mind should I join and have to deal with such.

 

Chilly - Looking to join the RAF Regiment mate, application already underway. Other chosen branches of interest, and a little different to the Reg!! are Fighter Control and Intelligence.

 

What branch are you in then matey?

[chilly]

usually you dont associate regiment with intelligence!

 

I'm a scopie, which is remotely linked to ATC.

 

So you doing it the hard way or becoming an officer?

[Sheefa]

usually you dont associate regiment with intelligence!

 

I'm a scopie, which is remotely linked to ATC.

 

So you doing it the hard way or becoming an officer?

 

I know

 

LOL the hard way, cheeky git. Nope, Officer application matey but if I don't get in as that, I will be doing it the hard way from the ground up. There's nothing that I personally want more than to be in the midst of action.

[chilly]

Well if your joining the RAF, to get in the thick of the action, its gonna have to be Regiment.

 

I hope you are successful, just remember to give the troops respect and they'll return it. Theres too many officers that don't do that and dont have the respect of the troops.

[Snooze]

I don't know what you mean by that?

 

I watched the programme and I did definitely feel sorry for the guy with the mental problems.

 

There should definitely be support for them within the army. Why should they be spat out at the end with mental problems and be left for the community to deal with?

 

Oh - don't get me wrong - I feel sorry for these people with genuine problems too, and I understand that MANY forces guys suffer mental problems and really should get the necessary support to help them. After all, we need these guys to be at the top of their game, and I would be wholeheartedly behind offering as much support as is required to keep them healthy.

 

My point is that we are talking about the really extreme cases here. The ones for whom the support that is available within the forces is insufficient. From the statistics and the indications of others, I think this is quite a small minority - the people with REAL mental issues, who probably shouldn't ever be touring again. These people are the responsibility of the whole nation, not just the army, and (IMO) their care should be funded as such - from the "bottomless" coffers of the whole nation, rather than the limited budget of the forces.

 

 

Ah - and the line about WW1 was more regarding the "scallys" and "chancers" discussed - back in the WW1 days, even these individuals were needed by the army, who just wanted bods in the trenches, so it was worth the army's time and money to try and re-enlist AWOLs (esepcially with the HUGE numbers of deserters back then). My question was asking whether this sort of time and investment was still required for the modern-day forces.

 

ben.

 

Good thread this. Some really enlightening stuff. Thanks, guys.

[SupraAyf]

Greg mate,

 

In response to your very valid question but one of the main stumbling blocks is that related to the careful selection of personnel during the recruiting phase. I have to be honest and say that the military is not as selective as it should be due to the issue of rapid manpower turnover (poor retention) and this is now having a serious derogatory affect on the operational capability within the whole of the Armed Forces.

 

The military recruiting system is almost prepared to take anyone and everyone in a desperate attempt to retain manning figures, and this causes issues as the people that may be able to pass selection; may not necessarily be of the correct mental 'toughness' to go to war!

 

It is very difficult to judge an individuals character during the initial selection processes but it is an area which could be developed to omit some of the unsuitable elements.

 

The other side of the coin is that the British Military (mainly the Army in this case) is having a real shitty time of it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan is simply an atrocious environment at the moment for our Infantry guys so no one can tell me that it doesn't affect them. It has certainly altered my outlook to life after all of my years of frontline service.

[Sheefa]

Greg mate,

 

In response to your very valid question but one of the main stumbling blocks is that related to the careful selection of personnel during the recruiting phase. I have to be honest and say that the military is not as selective as it should be due to the issue of rapid manpower turnover (poor retention) and this is now having a serious derogatory affect on the operational capability within the whole of the Armed Forces.

 

The military recruiting system is almost prepared to take anyone and everyone in a desperate attempt to retain manning figures, and this causes issues as the people that may be able to pass selection; may not necessarily be of the correct mental 'toughness' to go to war!

 

It is very difficult to judge an individuals character during the initial selection processes but it is an area which could be developed to omit some of the unsuitable elements.

 

The other side of the coin is that the British Military (mainly the Army in this case) is having a real shitty time of it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan is simply an atrocious environment at the moment for our Infantry guys so no one can tell me that it doesn't affect them. It has certainly altered my outlook to life after all of my years of frontline service.

 

Thanks for the response Andy mate

 

Agreed, tougher measure for recruitment should be a priority mate - more along the lines of IOT for the RAF and the Cranwell assessments perhaps, or again can that lead to flawed results. No way of telling I suppose.

 

I'm sure conflicts, especially in there volatile places where as Mike mentioned your getting bloody RPGs fired at you completely changes your outlook on life.

 

Looks like I'm in for a shock I'm willing to take though

 

Greg

[stupra]

Greg mate,

 

In response to your very valid question but one of the main stumbling blocks is that related to the careful selection of personnel during the recruiting phase. I have to be honest and say that the military is not as selective as it should be due to the issue of rapid manpower turnover (poor retention) and this is now having a serious derogatory affect on the operational capability within the whole of the Armed Forces.

 

The military recruiting system is almost prepared to take anyone and everyone in a desperate attempt to retain manning figures, and this causes issues as the people that may be able to pass selection; may not necessarily be of the correct mental 'toughness' to go to war!

 

It is very difficult to judge an individuals character during the initial selection processes but it is an area which could be developed to omit some of the unsuitable elements.

 

The other side of the coin is that the British Military (mainly the Army in this case) is having a real shitty time of it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan is simply an atrocious environment at the moment for our Infantry guys so no one can tell me that it doesn't affect them. It has certainly altered my outlook to life after all of my years of frontline service.

 

Well said fella.

[chilly]

I'm sure there must be some kind of mind test that boffins could do to test your mind and how you react mentally in certain situations.

 

Theres a test for everything else.

 

If there was a test that could be done at recruitment level which would maybe highlight certain individuals weaknesses.

 

I agree though these days recruitment cant be too picky and the forces are so light on the ground.

 

However getting back to the original thread, i think most men are too stubborn to ask for help especially when its something to do with their mental state. Most will just 'soldier on', before they know it they are heading down that darkened path.

 

I know the RAF are no way involved as much in the blood and guts stuff that the Army do, but we really do have a pretty good 'duty of care' in place for all individuals, especially new recruits.

 

You do get the odd few who are all too ready to blame everything other than the fact they are just lazy, whinging, det dodging losers. Who are quite happy to pick up the Queens Shilling and not carry out the tasks they signed up for.

[colsoop]

Greg mate,

 

In response to your very valid question but one of the main stumbling blocks is that related to the careful selection of personnel during the recruiting phase. I have to be honest and say that the military is not as selective as it should be due to the issue of rapid manpower turnover (poor retention) and this is now having a serious derogatory affect on the operational capability within the whole of the Armed Forces.

 

The military recruiting system is almost prepared to take anyone and everyone in a desperate attempt to retain manning figures, and this causes issues as the people that may be able to pass selection; may not necessarily be of the correct mental 'toughness' to go to war!

 

It is very difficult to judge an individuals character during the initial selection processes but it is an area which could be developed to omit some of the unsuitable elements.

 

The other side of the coin is that the British Military (mainly the Army in this case) is having a real shitty time of it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan is simply an atrocious environment at the moment for our Infantry guys so no one can tell me that it doesn't affect them. It has certainly altered my outlook to life after all of my years of frontline service.

 

Wise words indeed

 

As has been said retaining experienced soldiers is becoming harder and harder, these are the guys who take the young soldiers under their wing and teach them their skills and experiences.

Unfortunately they are leaving in droves meaning inexperienced soldiers are bumped up to senior positions before they are really ready-to fill the gaps physicvally and emotionally.

[ChrisSZ]

However getting back to the original thread, i think most men are too stubborn to ask for help especially when its something to do with their mental state. Most will just 'soldier on', before they know it they are heading down that darkened path.

 

You do get the odd few who are all too ready to blame everything other than the fact they are just lazy, whinging, det dodging losers. Who are quite happy to pick up the Queens Shilling and not carry out the tasks they signed up for.

 

Nail + Head = :d

 

The 'macho' culture pretty much precludes anyone from admitting they have issues/problems etc. with their duties until it is too late:( By the time it is actually too late, the Military is very ill-equiped to deal with the consequences (have a look at how many of the wounded are currently treated!!!). This has always been the case - welfare, in it's tru sense, has never been a military strong point.

 

There are also far, far too many youngsters who think that they can join up simply to pick up a trade, do a couple of years and quit to earn lots more in civvy street - they forget that wearing green pyjamas means you become a legitimate target in a war zone and, yes, you bloody well DID join up for this!

 

Only a fool would join up (especially in the current worldwide political situation) and expect to not risk the chance of getting sent somewher were someone is gonna bung sharp shit at you!!

 

The days of people joining to be 'solidiers' are, unfortunately, fading :(

[Sheefa]

The days of people joining to be 'solidiers' are, unfortunately, fading :(

 

Good point Chris. I for one am not such a person. I can't wait to join the RAF Reg providing I get in and get into the midst of things.

 

Then again though, I went into the Armed Forces Career Office the other day and met 11 wannabe recruits, all going for the PTI role