In July and August of 1943, General George S. Patton slapped two soldiers in Sicilian military hospitals after accusing them of cowardice. Although Patton later apologized, this incident exposed many military leaders’ belief that psychiatric casualties were not legitimate. Until March of 1943, the military did not seriously address mental casualties. Under the guidance of William Menninger, the Army’s top neuropsychiatrist, the military attempted to screen out those who showed mental weakness. A new mindset had to be created when it came to mental trauma, and people such as Yale professor George Pratt worked to achieve that. New terminology was created to extinguish the idea that soldiers suffering from battle fatigue were weak. In her article, “If he comes home nervous,” Christina Jarvis says “military personnel and the public readily embraced the terms because they destigmatized psychiatric wounds by conveying a sense of masculine toughness rather than weakness” (p. 101).
Non-white US soldiers faced many more difficulties in treating their injuries. Biased doctors would reduce disability on claims that soldiers had acquired injuries before entering the military. Philip A. Coxe was in the 93rd Infantry Division and lost his hands and eyesight. He was given a 90 percent disability rating, but his Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office reduced it to 30 percent and suspended his pension benefits. An eye specialist at the VA told him that, “there was nothing wrong with me and that my condition was normal” (Jefferson, p. 1119). The doctor proceeded to ask a white veteran on crutches if Coxe deserved more compensation than he was getting. Coxe goes on to say, ” The whole thing just frustrates and confuses me because I know there are more Colored Veterans who have suffered because of the meanness of local VA groups” (Jefferson, p. 1119).
U.S. soldiers were not the only ones who suffered frustration at the end of World War II. Red-Army soldiers were promised a hero’s welcome and “a special status unimaginable in the capitalist West” (Dale, p. 115). They blamed these failings on officials who shirked front-line duties who they dubbed rear-line rats. Places such as Leningrad had suffered severe destruction, so veterans were unable to return to their homes or their jobs. Leningrad did not have the resources to give their veterans special treatments, and many civilians simply wanted to forget the war. Unfortunately the experiences of Soviet veterans were shared by many European soldiers of the 2oth century, albeit less extreme.
When I was reading these articles I kept thinking, why is it so hard to treat our veterans well? Our country tends to glorify our soldiers when they are actively defending us, but the moment they are not in the field, we have no more use for them. A lot of the issues discussed in these articles are still relevant to our veterans. I grew up in a military family and the Department of Veterans Affairs was akin to a curse word. I exaggerate slightly, but I never heard good things about the VA, especially when it came to veterans with PTSD. There are so many failings when it comes to reintegrated soldiers into civilian life, and many do not make the transition well. I find it shocking that these people are willing to lay down their lives in service, but we can not get them decent medical treatment and therapy in return.
Bibliography:
Hearing that your family as a whole dislikes the Department of Veteran Affairs I think helps shed some light on a huge culprit of the struggles veterans faced, with that being the VA. Its easy to pin problems on Americans simply being racist as a whole, or mental health being too stigmatized to be widely recognized and treated easily, but at the end of the day it was the officials at the VA actually making these discriminatory/harmful decisions. I hadn’t really been considering the individuals as being the main ones at fault, and honestly I’m not really sure why. Systemic problems certainly exist, but I think they can be significantly shored up by the people with actual direct influence doing the right things. Sadly this didn’t happen, but I think they should be seen as at fault more than they maybe are currently.
Good question about why it was so hard for people to appreciate veterans once a war has ended. The US had its troubles with determining how to treat veterans with psychological problems and the USSR simply failed its veterans in many respects, but another case to look at is Japan. Japanese society, having been highly concerned with honor, shunned veterans who returned home having failed to prevent the US from advancing across the Pacific Ocean. Not only that, but the surrender of the Japanese government after the atomic bombings left Japanese soldiers who were ready and willing to engage US soldiers in combat abruptly denied that opportunity.
I think that the story of the “slap heard round the world” highlights the lack of belief in psychological wounds following the war. This view was one shared by many that slowly was changed mostly so that veterans could still maintain their manhood and dignity. I also find it disappointing how little we do to assist our veterans on their transition back into civilian life and the lack of progress we’ve made in trying the upgrade these systems.
I think you capture a really good theme surounding the acceptance of mental illness before the war and after, the idea of slaping it out of soeone is n idea I too grew up with. Without that slap reform might have taken longer i which more vetrans would have suffered.