It is important, therefore, to emphasize that although current evidence does not indicate that PTSD is necessarily chronic, it has been shown to be a relatively persistent condition, which does not readily respond to psychotherapy or drug therapy .
This is especially true among war veterans, “which show less reduction in symptom severity following pharmacotherapy than other patient groups” (, p. Robjant and Fazel (2010) show that a combination of medication and psychotherapy may result in a clinically significant improvement .
Explaining the Pentagon’s decision of 6 January 2009, Defense Department (Do D) spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said that “PTSD is an anxiety disorder caused by witnessing or experiencing a traumatic event; it is not a wound intentionally caused by the enemy from outside force or agent” . The second part is discussed below, and suffice to say here that 36 years after recognizing trauma as caused by an outside force, such a statement is puzzling.
As for the first part, one should note, that although the DSM-V removed the syndrome from the classification of In an official statement (cited in ), MOPH added that PTSD is a disease, and a treatable one, unlike the loss of a limb or any other combat wound, which they contend, is a permanent loss.
This attitude stands in complete contrast to both Israeli and American data, which clearly obviate the need for suspicion and indicate a low rate of exaggeration and dissimulation. (2014) found 79.4% concordance between electronic medical records and structured clinical interviews for the DSM-IV for lifetime PTSD and 72.3% for current PTSD of American veterans serving in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Of those without concordance, there were varying proportions of false positives and false negatives.Eligibility for the PH award was modified on several occasions and currently includes any member of the U.S Armed Forces who was wounded or died from bleeding wounds sustained in action against an enemy .In the context of the politics of recognition, the history of the term PTSD, and with support evidence from brain studies, the paper contends that in the case of combat veterans, posttraumatic stress should be termed PTSI (posttraumatic stress injury) rather than PTSD (posttraumatic stress disorder).The proposed alteration in terminology may enable eligibility of posttraumatic combat veterans’ for the Purple Heart, and consequently mitigate the stigma of their wounds, help to deconstruct their misrecognition as inferior to physiologically wounded, increase their willingness to seek aid, and improve their chances to heal.Aiming to verify combat exposure history of Vietnam veterans seeking treatment for combat-related PTSD, Frueh et al.(2005) , found objective documentation of Vietnam war-zone service for 93% of their sample, with average length of service of 6.54 years.The study found that 39% of the control group—who had never sought recognition or compensation from the Israeli Defense Ministry for any psychological disability—had suffered from PTSD at various times since the war.Surely, most of the suspicion is raised during compensation discussions and not throughout the diagnosis of PTSD.According to the MOPH, “some may feign illness in order to receive medical treatment at the VA,” but cannot fake a physical wound (Official statement of the MOPH as cited in , para. Kahalani shares the same suspicion: “It’s hard to make the distinction, and we see there are people who are able to get mileage out of it since they don’t have to show a bleeding arm” (, p. The similarity of views is not a coincidence: it reflects the fact that, despite tremendous progress in understanding and legitimizing PTSD, many still deny that war trauma is an injury just like a bleeding physiological wound.Even when PTSD is not altogether denied as a psychological phenomenon with recognized symptoms, denial now extends to suspicions that the afflicted are faking symptoms.