The Ruth Moore Act - Research Paper Example

?The Ruth Moore Act Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Operational Definition of Terms4 Ruth Moore- The brainchild 4 Background and reason for legislation 5 Functions of the bill 8 Cost Estimates 9 The Structure of Estimates 10 Direct spending 10 Spending based on appropriation 10 Support for the act 10 Conclusion 11 References 13 Introduction The bill christened the Ruth Moore Act 2013 or H.R 671 was introduced by Representative Chellie Pingree of Maine and Senator Jon Tester ( D-MT) on February 13, 2013. Following the amendment, the bill H.R 671, would require the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to submit a report every year to the congress on the disability benefits claims given for people who are covered under the mental health conditions following allegations of incurred or aggravated by military sexual trauma for the time ranging from 2014 to 2918. The amendment will transform sense to the Congress as to the Veterans Affairs needs to update and improve the rules pertaining to the military sexual trauma (Otto, 2013). It would also require specific reporting to the Congress as well as to the Veteran claimants every month, the first of such coming fifteen months after the date of enactment of the bill following the amendment. The duration of reporting would be as long as the secretary makes the necessary updates, which will improve the veteran’s affairs regulations with regard to military sexual trauma. H.R 671, as amended, extends the prevailing authority of two rounds down to the nearest dollar percentile increment in the rates of particular assistance relating to educational benefits that changes depending on the annual cost-of-living regulations and adjustments. Operational Definition of Terms Military sexual trauma; the term is used on a military veteran, regarding psychological trauma that is following the judgement of a mental health expert, was brought by a physical or mental assault of sexual type, a series of sexual nature, and sexual harassment that occurred to the victim when in active naval, military, and the air force. Covered mental health condition; This refers to the post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, and or a mental health diagnosis explained in the modern version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders which is a journal published by the American Psychiatric Association and determined by the Secretary as regards the military sexual trauma (Ruth Moore, Act of 2013). Covered claims; These are claims seeking for disability compensation submitted to the Secretary following a process of covered mental health condition where the survivor claims to have incurred the disability while on duty and aggravated by military sexual trauma. Ruth Moore- The brainchild Ruth Moore is a former navy officer who joined the disciplined forces in the mid nineteen eighties at the age of eighteen. Having come from a humble background and a family whose financial strength was meagre, she never made it to college. Ruth Moore was sexually assaulted by her immediate supervisor while stationed in the Azores. Things got worse when she reported the matter because, the officer raped her once more as a way of retaliating towards her efforts to get justice. Surprisingly, no charges were brought towards the supervisor instead, the administrators discharged her from hospital claiming that she was mentally unwell. It took twenty-three years for Moore to fight for her disability benefits. All through that period, Ruth Moore suffered from a sexually transmitted infectious disease caught from the supervisor. She also went through a depression from what she went through and finally lived in her van. However, in two thousand and nine, a veteran Affairs investigator got a glimpse of her medical records and after perusal discovered that the records had been tampered with by both medical and military officers. The veteran affairs officer went to help her win a seventy percent rating on the disability scale consequently receiving her benefits. This opened up other avenues as Ruth Moore managed to contact Congresswoman Pingree in the two thousand and ten. She agreed to give her story to the media on condition that her identity was concealed. However, with time she gained confidence and came out in the public. Moore appeared this year at a press conference when announcing the bill. During the press conference, Ruth Moore, a veteran from Maine whom the bill Is named after, gave a detailed account of her struggles with the aftereffects of the attacks and her attempts to get the veteran’s benefits. She launched a forum dubbed Change.org for the petition with Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN) to raise awareness on ammeters regarding unnecessary burdens that survivors of MST when they apply for benefits (Otto, 2013). Currently, her petition has more than one hundred and fifty thousand signatures, several comments coming from very many veterans who were affected across the United States. Background and reason for legislation The present veterans affairs rules regarding PTSD on matters that deal with in-service military sexual trauma (MST) cases is not effective. The rules are found at 38 C.F.R. 3.303 (f) (5), claims to cut the burden for veterans to attest their claims. The facts on the ground however, show that none of those issues happen. There is also complacency on the part of the veteran affairs to take adequate action to make sure that the full variety of mental and physical disabilities coming from MST are handled appropriately during the compensation process, which comprises of anxiety and depression as well as other opportunistic conditions appearing in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a journal published by the American Psychiatric Asssociation. The Veterans Affairs only approved fifty percent of the PTSD claims for three years running from two thousand and eight to two thousand and ten. On the contrary, the VA only approved thirty-five percent of the claims from the in-service personal assaults. Various factors among them inefficiency of the veteran’s Affairs have contributed to the complications that surround the process of military sexual trauma survivors seeking compensations for the disabilities incurred. Complacency on the part of the veteran’s Affairs comes in various ways the first of which is that most of the majority of sexual assaults occurring in the military go unreported (Fox, 2013). Furthermore, they do not attend to those that are reported. There are no prosecutions that are reported and sometimes the victims are sacked from the military. This works to the disadvantage of the victims because they are scared and opt to keep quiet and save their jobs. Actions of administrators make it impossible for victims to prove their cases confirming that a stressor or an assault took place. The events happening in the VA’ association regarding the military sexual trauma are often not recorded in the service member’s medical file or alternatively, in the in-service department medical records for officers. This is the specific form to record incidents of sexual assault when an officer is on active duty. A case I point is in two thousand and nine when the Pentagon reported that an estimated twenty thousand female and male members of the disciplined forces were sexually assaulted and a paltry fourteen percent of such cases were recorded. PTSD has also been very challenging for the Veteran’s Affairs to deal with because of their nature of occurrence. This form of disability develops gradually therefore, it will take time before it is realized and felt. The veteran’s Affairs secondary markers policy adds to the complexity of the nature of specific of the military sexual trauma reporting and the delayed discovery of the PTSD conditions making matters difficult for the MST survivors. The veteran’s Affairs states that the secondary markers can be used as additional evidence of an assault or a stressor but it has been very sluggish in implementing the same policy. As much as victims of in-service personal assaults fear instigating measures to pursue justice, the situation becomes more complicated if the attacker is senior in command. Everybody knows the rules that guide the chain of command in the military and complexities that come with the same are acceptable. It is good to remember at such point that even if the assailant does not hold a senior military position, the process of reporting active duty assault remains complex and problematic. Overall, the structure, nature, and the entire functioning system of the military inhibits reporting of assault both explicitly and implicitly (Otto, 2013). The situation is difficult because even if a victim takes the initiative to report such an occurrence, it is rarely documented and if it is, it will be tampered with by officers in charge. This seals all the avenues that a survivor would use to seek for justice, compensation, and benefits using due processes. Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN) is a neutral body that has been very vocal in increasing awareness about the military sexual trauma. This makes it a good resource when delving into the matter. Records by the organization concur with those from the Pentagon that eight percent of reported cases were tried resulting in the conviction of only one hundred and ninety-one assailants. The administration of Veteran’s Affairs dismissed two out of three MST instigated cases despite the fact that military sexual trauma cases are the leading causes of PTSD among female veterans between two thousand and eight to two thousand and ten. In two thousand and eight for instance, there were one thousand and twenty reported cases. Functions of the bill The bill provides that veterans who are disabled either partially or fully from an injury suffered while serving in the disciplined forces have a right to get disability benefits. The benefits include entitlement to health care for the injury and a possible monthly stipend subject to different factors. Before the bill was passed into law and awaiting its implementation the veteran’s Affairs requires a veteran who is in need of seeking for disability compensation to fulfil three conditions (Risen, 2012). The first is that, he or she must undergo a diagnosis of a medical, physical, or mental health issue, then proceeded to proof that an event that may include a stressor occurred to him or her while serving in the disciplined forces, and finally proof that there is a link between the stressor and the physical, mental, or medical health issue as provided by a veterans Affairs professional. Victims of the military sexual trauma have found it difficult over time to prove that an assault translating into the stressor occurred a reason that most of the sexual assaults are unreported and the few that are reported are not prosecuted. The Act enforces the current Veteran’s Affairs secondary markers policy ,which allows statements collected from family members that may cite a change of behaviour, drug and other substance abuse as well as rape kits to be used as evidence in proving that an assault occurred. The veteran’s Affairs has been inconsistent in applying the policy. The veteran’s association for fighting veterans application of disability compensation changed its modes to allow the use of lay testimony as a proof that a trauma similar to exposure to a roadside explosion or mortar attack had taken place back in two thousand and ten. Cost Estimates H.R 671 has provisions that extend the regulations of the current law requiring an increase in the monthly rates of particular help on educational needs should be rounded down to the next lower wholesome dollar. It is also a requirement that the Department of Veterans Affairs to give a report regarding disability claims for MST to the Congress and also give the same to the veterans who file MST claims every month. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that once the Act is implemented, it will cut direct spending by almost fifteen million US dollars for the period running from two thousand and fourteen to two thousand and twenty-three. Implementation will also lead to a discretionary cost of four million US dollars over the same period tantamount to the availability of the right amounts. There would also be Pay-as-you-go procedures that would apply just because implementation of the act would affect direct spending. It will however, not have adverse effects on revenues. The act does not mention any intergovernmental and private sector ROLES in its layout under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). The approximated costs of the Act are within the range of the seven hundred budgetary functions including the services and benefits for veterans. By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 (Fox, 2013). CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING Estimated Budget Authority * -1 -1 -1 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -5 -15 Estimated Outlays * -1 -1 -1 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -5 -15 (Fox, 2013). The Structure of Estimates Direct spending The current law stipulates that specific rates regarding monthly benefits for those under the Montgomery Bill and Survivor’s and Dependents’ Educational Assistance programs must be adjusted upwards yearly following particular prevailing economic indices. The Act extends two provisions of the same law by requiring the increase to be rounded down to the immediate lower whole dollar for the next five years (Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 2004). The extended provisions were due to expire at the end of the two thousand and thirteen financial year. After putting into considerations the estimated number of beneficiaries, the Congressional Budget Office projects that implementing some sections of the act would cut direct spending by fifteen million US dollars through a period of ten years from two thousand and fourteen to two thousand and twenty-three. Spending based on appropriation Section 2 of the Act requires the Veterans Affairs to hand in an annual report beginning in two thousand and fourteen through to two thousand and eighteen of the Congressional committee in charge of the veterans affairs containing detailed information on the total number of MST claims filed demanding for disability compensation both approved , denied, pending appeals, on appeal, and the approximate number of day appeals would take (Otto, 2013). Support for the act The Service Women’s Network Action Network (SWAN) was the first organization to applaud Senator Jon Tester and Congresswoman Chellie Pingree for setting the pace in the introduction of the Act. According to Katy Otto, the spokesperson of SWAN , this was the a landmark legislation in the history of the United States. The bill would ensure that the veterans Affairs puts to order unfair and broken disability claims system for the survivors of the MST. Initially, VA had a high degree of proof for the victims and in the process victimizing the survivors even to a a great extent. The American Civil Liberties Union was another body that supported the introduction of the H.R 671. Laura Murphy, the director of the union, send a written message of congratulations to the media as well as the movers of the motion on behalf of its more than half a million members, fifty-three affiliates, and numerous activists and supporters. The director congratulated Senator Tester and Congresswoman Pingree for carrying on with the Union’s fight to end discriminatory treatment within the American disciplined forces. Senator Angus S. KING Jr. (I-Maine), who also sits on the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personal praised the move by the subcommittee n listening to the cries of the MST survivors and acknowledging the importance of Ruth Moore Act of 2013 (Department of defence, 2013). Senator King Jr. explained that the legislation makes it easier for the survivors of the military sexual assault to access the benefits they deserve and claim from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Senator also gave an account what he heard from Brigette McCoy, a former specialist in the army and a survivor of the sexual assault. Conclusion The title of the Act comes from Ruth Moore who represents the epitome of what the specialized claims undergo bureaucracy in a system that appears hell bend on making sure that justice is not received by claimants. Moore had to endure twenty-three years to get justice from the complicated system. The woman suffered from a sexually transmitted infectious disease and depression all because of the assault and yet she also lost her job in addition to being labelled a mental case. Ruth Moore’s story is a tip of the iceberg and an essential course for the VA to act with speed and agility to change its regulations and bureaucratic channels. This should take into account full understanding and appreciation of the disorders within the MST claims. Ruth Moore Act of 2013 will offer relief to the veterans enduring suffering from any kind of disability that resulted from a military sexual trauma. References Department of Defense, annual report on sexual assault in the military:fiscal year 2012, volume 1, 3 (2013). Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, veterans health initiative: military sexual trauma 58 (2004), available at : http://www.publichealth.va.gov/docs/vhi/military_sexual_trauma.pdf. Fox, L. (2013). Legislation Introduced to Cut Red Tape for Sexual Assault Survivors. A journal of US News issue 21(1), 2013. Otto, K. (2013). Landmark Legislation on VA Disability Claims for MST Victims. A journal of SWANvol 1(3) 569-646. Ruth Moore Act of 2013, S. 294, 113th Cong. § 2(a) (2013). Risen, J. (2012). Military Has Not Solved Problem of Sexual Assault, Women Say. An Issue of NewYork Times, Nov. 2, 2012. Read More