Readers of Tom Philpott's Military Update column sound off.

VA Rating Schedule Is Not 'Liberal,' Just Often Ignored

The phrase at the end of your Sept. 3 column -- "the more liberal VA rating schedule" -- in the context of military MEB-PEB [Medical Evaluation Board-Physical Evaluation Board] processes struck a chord with me and I'm sure many others.

The VA Schedule of Rating Disabilities (VASRD) is the sole government standard for rating service-connected disabilities. It's been sliced and diced and reviewed multiple times since its initial rollout in World War II. One of the recent changes, for example, is the new rating schedule for PTSD.

It's not a question of "liberal" or "strict" rating schedules. Physicians and HR types are required to adhere to the VASRD for body system injuries, illnesses and wounds. A DoD directive requires the services to adhere to this gold standard. Some of the services selectively ignored the totality of service-disabling conditions or just picked a ‘single unfitting condition' as the basis for the disability rating. The result over this long conflict period is that a significant number of service men and women were low-balled. If all their disabilities were rated under the VASRD, many would have been medically retired, vice separated. That's why Congress directed the re-look of low-rated service disabilities from the current conflicts.

The phrase "more liberal VA rating schedule" implies that there is more than one standard. That's clearly not the case from a policy perspective. It is clearly the case, as documented by the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission, why many wounded or ill service members were low-balled: the service ignored or applied its own interpretation of the VASRD.

ROBERT F. NORTON
Colonel, USA-Ret.
Deputy Director, Government Relations
Military Officers Association of America
Alexandria, Va.

Snookered On SBP

There are those of us among 20-year-career military wives who were conned by our husbands into waiving Survivor Benefit Plan coverage with the promise of life insurance to take its place.  Soon after, these men decided to divorce us and we are left without our half of military retirement upon their death. Women should have some say in this.

There was a window that offered a second chance to enroll. But once he had decided to divorce me, I could not force him to acquire SBP. This problem needs to be addressed.  Spouses should be more strongly advised on this waiver and the consequences long term.

I am out probably $500,000 when he dies and I live on.  And I am one of the lucky ones. I insisted on life insurance but got the judge to agree only to a 20-year term policy. If he dies after age 71 and I live another 20 years, I am out of luck.

I feel that when the enrollment window was open again, I should have had some power to make sure SBP coverage happened to protect myself.  There was no fail safe in place. I was at the mercy of the decision of my then-spouse.

LYDIA N.
Via e-mail

Worried Over TRICARE Shift

It should be extremely concerning to TRICARE members that United Healthcare and Aetna are taking over our healthcare in two of three TRICARE regions.

I have been retired from the Air Force for nearly four years now and currently the Director of Clinical Services for a practice in Nashville, Tenn. I am also a registered nurse.  I frustratingly deal with UnitedHealth and Aetna on a daily basis. The level of service is substandard when dealing with either of these insurance carriers, compared to the other major carriers.  Both carriers restrict their members to freely choose their ancillary services.

I deal with large number of patients that have obstructive sleep apnea. Neither United Healthcare nor Aetna will permit practices of their choice to use the durable medical equipment companies needed to take care of patients. We instead have to use inadequate companies they have contracted to. In fact, many practices in the city of Murfreesboro, Tenn., will not take Aetna because their fee schedules are so bad and they are unwilling to negotiate with them.

Good luck in speaking to a U.S. citizen when calling United Healthcare. It seems most all of their representatives are in India!

BILL MINTON
USAF-RET
Via e-mail
  

Retired from the Air Force, I work at another job which has used UnitedHealth Care. They were very inefficient and extremely hard to work with.  They were very slow at paying claims and sometimes we had to get the Insurance Commissioner involved to get them to pay. 

 I am very disappointed that we will now have to use them for our healthcare with the military. I am very worried about their service. I have been very happy with Humana.

DANNY FOGLE
Senior Master Sergeant, USAF-Ret.
Via e-mail

Letters may be edited for clarity or length.  Write to Military Forum, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville, VA  20120-1111, send e-mail to militaryforum@aol.com or visit www.militaryupdate.com