# Guelph Man Says Military "Ill-prepared" To Battle Substance Abuse- Article



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Sep 2011)

I won't post the whole article as it is quite long but I'm having a hard time believing lots of it. Either that or I want my 'hush' money too. :-X

http://www.guelphmercury.com/news/local/article/588951--an-enemy-called-addiction





*
About a year after he was discharged, someone or some agency injected more than $31,554 into his bank account. He believes it was government “hush money” intended to silence him about his experiences. “I asked other guys, and they didn’t get that kind of money when they left the military,” he said.

Ford, the government spokesperson, said there is likely a reasonable explanation for the deposit, “so we caution against speculation.” She was not able to immediately add further clarification.*


----------



## ModlrMike (4 Sep 2011)

WRT the deposit... severance and return of contributions immediately come to mind.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (4 Sep 2011)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> WRT the deposit... severance and return of contributions immediately come to mind.



$31,554  seems kind of excessive for someone who only spent a few years in the military. Heck, I spent 31 years in, retired as a Warrant and only collected $36,000 in severance.


----------



## Franko (4 Sep 2011)

32 weeks straight in the field and claiming PTSD  from it and also having never served on a tour.

Whatever.          :


----------



## ModlrMike (4 Sep 2011)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> $31,554  seems kind of excessive for someone who only spent a few years in the military. Heck, I spent 31 years in, retired as a Warrant and only collected $36,000 in severance.



In retrospect, yes. I admit I didn't read that part clearly, so add one more point that doesn't jive.


----------



## Teeps74 (5 Sep 2011)

Might I suggest an "over pay" on his severance and return of contributions? Which, if that is the case, he needs to watch for the "opps" letter, and be ready to pay back, or pay back through taxes later. Lord knows that mistakes do happen, but one of them is not "hush money"... 

On the other hand, the article fails miserably to do any fact checking at all (lazy reporter looking for a sensational story?). Would it have been too difficult to ask to see the bank statement to show where the money comes from? My account statement reads "Pre authorized Credit CANADA-FED" for all of my military pay. I am pretty sure that the bank can come up with a source of the money pretty quick, at least for the banking client.


We have here, a self admitted drug addict who got pinched, and is now seeking to blame everyone but the one person he should be blaming. I am finding it hard to feel sorry for him.


----------



## 9nr Domestic (5 Sep 2011)

I believe he got the money but it probably was a combination of return of contributions, severance, and possibly back pay. Six years of return of contributions adds up quick. (Unfortunately when you retire with a pension you don't  receive this) I could be wrong but this might have been around the time Land duty pay came in effect therefore giving him a nice amount for back pay also. 

Just because I am not staying in my lane tonight, in my opinion the military should be releasing or dealing with these drug addicts better than they currently are.


----------



## Infanteer (5 Sep 2011)

9r domestic said:
			
		

> Just because I am not staying in my lane tonight, in my opinion the military should be releasing or dealing with these drug addicts better than they currently are.



I'd be curious to see what you think "better" could be, or are you just making some baseless sensationalist remarks like the reporter?

Do you know the disciplinary/administrative system that exists for soldiers who have issues with substance abuse?


----------



## 9nr Domestic (5 Sep 2011)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I'd be curious to see what you think "better" could be, or are you just making some baseless sensationalist remarks like the reporter?
> 
> Do you know the disciplinary/administrative system that exists for soldiers who have issues with substance abuse?




I do understand that I am out of my lane but based on your curiosity I am basing my opinion on a small number of individuals on a small base. I watch certain individuals go through the disciplinary/administrative system and yet 3 years later they still have a job. Maybe I am impatient, Maybe I don't see the big picture, but I would like to see these individuals released much earlier. If these individuals truly have a medical condition then yes they should be treated. If they joined the forces as a drug user and are now progressed to being a drug addict then I don't agree with them being paid a fair wage with good benefits.


----------



## Teeps74 (5 Sep 2011)

9r domestic said:
			
		

> I believe he got the money but it probably was a combination of return of contributions, severance, and possibly back pay. Six years of return of contributions adds up quick. (Unfortunately when you retire with a pension you don't  receive this) I could be wrong but this might have been around the time Land duty pay came in effect therefore giving him a nice amount for back pay also.



Good point on the LDA... Suddenly this no longer looks like an "over payment", but rather just what is owed upon release.



			
				9r domestic said:
			
		

> Just because I am not staying in my lane tonight, in my opinion the military should be releasing or dealing with these drug addicts better than they currently are.



In fairness, EVERYONE could do everything just a little bit better... BUT, our system does demand a level of responsibility for one's own actions, which frankly, I am not seeing here. He got caught in a urine test. He did not come forward with his problem. I do not want a drug addled, paranoid creature in my platoon with access to belt fed machine guns. We have several systems in place for those that want help, and he did not want help until he got caught. 

We all know the consequences, and we are all expected to be adults about it. Doing drugs is absolutely 100% NOT acceptable in our culture. Period.

ETA: Seeing your above post, I acknowledge and share your sentiments 9r domestic.  I am leaving the above up to stress my own personal opinion about drug use in the CF, and how unacceptable I view that little nastiness.


----------



## Infanteer (5 Sep 2011)

9r domestic said:
			
		

> I do understand that I am out of my lane but based on your curiosity I am basing my opinion on a small number of individuals on a small base. I watch certain individuals go through the disciplinary/administrative system and yet 3 years later they still have a job. Maybe I am impatient, Maybe I don't see the big picture, but I would like to see these individuals released much earlier. If these individuals truly have a medical condition then yes they should be treated. If they joined the forces as a drug user and are now progressed to being a drug addict then I don't agree with them being paid a fair wage with good benefits.



Ahh, when you use the term "better" you mean "quicker".  Your explanation helps clarify your earlier statement.

Releasing a member for drug use is an administrative process; any disciplinary measures are simply additional points to support the administrative process.  A soldier caught with drugs is tested and his file is referred to DMCA where a specific sequence of actions are taken in accordance with the DAOD on drug use.  This includes an automatic C&P; if a soldier is caught a second time, the following step is generally release from the Forces.  So, it is feasible for a guy to be in, get caught and complete his C&P, only to be caught again a few years later with the next step of administrative action (recommendation for release) being actioned.

While it may appear to be a labourious process at times, in the end it ensures fairness so nobody is railroaded (which is why I have trouble with the tone of the article above) and it prevents the member from marching into a recruiting center after being booted to reapply and show up 6 months later.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (6 Sep 2011)

9r domestic said:
			
		

> I believe he got the money but it probably was a combination of return of contributions, severance, and possibly back pay. Six years of return of contributions adds up quick. (Unfortunately when you retire with a pension you don't  receive this) I could be wrong but this might have been around the time Land duty pay came in effect therefore giving him a nice amount for back pay also.



Very possible, but it still smells to me. When I was released I sat down with the release clerk and she explained how much money I was receiving in severance pay and when I would receive it. I would expect the same thing would have happened with this gentleman. My second point is that a couple of years ago I had $2,000.00 dollars "mysteriously" deposited into my bank account. However, it was obvious where it came from (Revenue Canada), a fact confirmed by my bank and by CRA when I called them to make sure it wasn't some mistake. 

When money is deposited/debited to/from your bank account there is code that tells you who the transaction pertains to. Sometimes it obvious e.g. "GWL" stand for "Great West Life Insurance Co.". Other times it might not, but the back would be able to tell you. So, for him to say that +31K appeared in his bank account and he doesn't know where it came from I would say is a bunch of BS.


----------



## medicineman (6 Sep 2011)

I'm sure it was explained to him...likely his brain cells weren't firing when this occured of course, especially if he was blasted at the time.

MM


----------



## frank1515 (6 Sep 2011)

No worries. If the Queen realizes that she over payed a subject, she'll just kindly ask for that amount back...   ;D


----------



## BadEnoughDudeRescueRonny (6 Sep 2011)

This article is just further evidence of the epidemic of opioid drug abuse sweeping the nation. Be it from sketchy doctors or from street-level dope peddlers, the truth is, opioid addiction is skyrocketing in Canada and it's clearly hitting all parts of society, including the military.

Now, that aside, soldiers returning from deployment with PTSD and/or injuries should receive medication if it is deemed absolutely necessary and even then, should be carefully prescribed with follow-up monitoring.

I read in the article that the individual in question was taking Dilaudid. That's the exact same medication that I was given for pain during my battle with testicular cancer. It's seriously powerful stuff and there's no way you'd ever be able to function in any capacity. Sobriety would be out of the question. Throw in the additional medications that were listed, specifically the benzodiazepines, and this guy would be absolutely wrecked. This is a case of complete mismanagement of addiction, which is surprisingly common. Thankfully, the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons is starting to ramp up physician training in addiction management, but unfortunately, this only deals with the civvie side of things. 

Bottom line: I think that addiction management training should be included in all physician training, whether it's civvie or military. Like I said, opioid and prescription drug addiction is skyrocketing in this country, and something needs to be done about it, because the damage that it's inflicting is tremendous.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Sep 2011)

Probably half the inmates on my floor right now are hooked on Oxys....


----------



## medicineman (7 Sep 2011)

BadEnoughDude said:
			
		

> Bottom line: I think that addiction management training should be included in all physician training, whether it's civvie or military. Like I said, opioid and prescription drug addiction is skyrocketing in this country, and something needs to be done about it, because the damage that it's inflicting is tremendous.



I'll think you'll find it is - largely during the various psychiatry, anaesthesia/pain medicine and family medicine rotations.  It also might interest you to find that military physicians in this country are actually trained in civilian medical schools with civilian programs...the Basic Medical Officer Course is designed to make them at least pretend to think like soldiers and tune them in to some of the occupational health issues they'll have to deal with, not train them to be doctors. 

MM


----------



## dapaterson (7 Sep 2011)

+1 to MM.  The CF doesn't run a "medical school",_ per se_, it runs a school to take doctors and make them military.  Every CF doctor is registered in a province or territory - it's a requirement for them to practice in the CF.


----------



## GnyHwy (7 Sep 2011)

That was a long article.  I will paraphrase it for everyone in one word.  Horseshit.  I would pick apart each part individually, but don't have the time.  Reading the article was already 10 min I'll never get back.

I had a much harder time searching for possible truths than finding the glaring inaccuracies and improbabilities.  I'm guessing a apology from the writer will follow at some point.

The only thing I can believe is true is the money deposit.  The police probably put it there to see where he would spend it.


----------



## medicineman (7 Sep 2011)

Any comments I'd have to make violate a form I signed when I released about violating certain confidences.  I've run into this clown before ( and many like him) and that's all I'm allowed to say.

MM


----------



## Cdnleaf (7 Sep 2011)

Sounds like he was bagged during the R3 screening in Gagetown. I've run into a few similar during my recovery; though was always quite fond of the trg area down there even in the rain ;D. Anyways, my personal tmt by the 'system' has been outstanding, including my CDU GP who is extremely well trained and experienced in the comorbidity of addictions, depression and PTSD.  His 15 mins should be over by now, selling crazy usually has a self life. Have a great army day.


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Sep 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Any comments I'd have to make violate a form I signed when I released about violating certain confidences.  I've run into this clown before ( and many like him) and that's all I'm allowed to say.
> 
> MM



I was going to refrain from comments about this, but if MM states this guy is a clown.....then he is a clown.

MM when you coming into the Peg to say hi?


----------



## ModlrMike (7 Sep 2011)

Jim, we should have a WPG M&G.


----------



## medicineman (7 Sep 2011)

Jim, unless my parents decree something, it looks like my W/E dance card is pretty empty...if my doc doesn't want me to work until Monday, I'm going to do some pers admin and chat up some folks in MacGregor that weren't around when I last wandered in.

MM


----------



## Haligonian (7 Sep 2011)

Being that I was in 2 RCR when this went down (not that I knew the soldier) and found that many of my former soldiers knew this guy personally I wrote the author of the article two days ago asking him what kind of fact checking he did on the article.  He has yet to respond. I can also assure you this guy did not spend 8 straight months in the field as I'm sure you were all aware of.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Sep 2011)

Thank you Haligonian.  

Since this is my hometown I wanted to respond also but then I would be doing the same thing this *cough* reporter did, reporting second-hand stuff as `facts`.

If anyone else who was around then wishes to send off something I would appreciate it.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Sep 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> If anyone else who was around then wishes to send off something I would appreciate it.


And here's the reporter's e-mail address - dhalfnight@guelphmercury.com 

A reminder:  If you're going to share info, remember that ANYTHING you say/write to a reporter will be considered on the record unless you say it isn't _very clearly_.  Something like this at the start and end of the e-mail should make it clear:  "This is off the record - you can only use this information as background, and only without attributing it to me or my e-mail address".  

And blind copy yourself to CYA.

And I hope I don't have to remind you not to do this from a work computer  ;D

Some free advice, worth every cent you paid


----------



## kstart (7 Sep 2011)

If no physical injury/illness, why would they prescribe duiladids?  

If identified as an 'addict', and if benzos were prescribed for 'stress'-related conditions (anxiety, ptsd, etc), that's normally in limited amounts.  If for stress, short-term, e.g. clonazepams (short-term, 2 weeks worth at a time), longer than that and in need to stablize, would be other meds prescribed (e.g. atypical anti-psychotics, in conjunction with SSRI/antidepressant- which can reduce some anxiety, re-stablize hyperousal, de-regulated stress response).  Ativans, common to re: anxiety/stress/panic but if a person identified as an addict, those quantities also tend to be in controlled amounts.  IME, and IMO re: observance of normative treatments.  If there was a chronic pain condition, + knowledge of existing addiction problem, would more likely get prescribed a slow-release patch (e.g. Fentinol -- more work to abuse those, cook down, etc.), vs pill.  

My docs are careful, dx'd with ptsd, no addiction, and they're still very careful about benzos, controlled amounts.


There also does appears to be quite an underground economy re: opiates, diuladids, oxy's, etc, some doctor prescribed (and then sold > and that's wrong, or those who deliberately fake injury to get those in order then sell them or trade them for something else-- con behaviours, or addict conning/dishonest with the the doctor to get them-- which can happen).  Re: benzos and 'stress disorders' (anxiety, ptsd, etc) seems there are standards in place from approximately the past 10 years, special attention to controlling the amounts and time allowed to use them, because they can become addictive and/or when mis-used, causing new problems.


----------



## Jimmy_D (8 Sep 2011)

This member dug himself into a hole, he had family issues when he was in and because his family didnt want him in the military, so he went on TRIPS TO THE FIELD to get away from family. Then when they finally left him, because he was already into junk, and knew his stint in the field was fake, he decided to take everything to the extreme and blame the military for everything.

How do i know, Ive baby sat the guy for some time when i was a no hook. He definatelly has issues that need to be dealt with but on a military perspective, he is excately where he should be. OUT.


----------



## kstart (8 Sep 2011)

Jimmy_D said:
			
		

> This member dug himself into a hole, he had family issues when he was in and because his family didnt want him in the military, so he went on TRIPS TO THE FIELD to get away from family. Then when they finally left him, because he was already into junk, and knew his stint in the field was fake, he decided to take everything to the extreme and blame the military for everything.
> 
> How do i know, Ive baby sat the guy for some time when i was a no hook. He definatelly has issues that need to be dealt with but on a military perspective, he is excately where he should be. OUT.



Addiction sickness, active addicts do lie and can become attached to their own lies, the story-lines they tell themselves to 'justify using' (the blame others for not having it together) and really they believe them too (and it's reinforced by the 'reward' of the 'high', self-perpetuating looping-cycle away from self-honesty, thus difficulty with honesty with others); it's self-deception, confusion about personal responsibilities, gets distorted, displaced.   It's a sickness and it can be very frustrating to deal with that happening in another person.  

I'm impressed with those who do roll up their sleeves and get down to facing the music, accepting and staying commited to the recovery/treatment plans and accepting with honesty and humility, the challenges to self-deceptions, mis-attributions, allowing themselves to be challenged; learning to face their dis-ease with honestly and courage and committment to staying clean, each day with each choice.  To even take that leap of faith, and stay commited so that they can achieve greater clarity and maintain that.

This fella sounds like he has a long way to go towards wellness.  There's abstaining from the junk and then there's learning how to abstain from the junk from within (re: misattributions, "stinkin thinkin"  ).

Personal accountability, reliablity, honesty and trust, I imagine are very important attributes and foundations re: military service, working with a unit (not against it), so I can understand discharge being completely reasonable, safety of unit and person depends on it. 

I still get those 'drunk and dial' calls from time to time  and I generally keep some distance (often opting to not answer the phone, as it is energy-consumming for me and I have to protect my own energy levels as I've got my own battles with ptsd [which they can't recognize, when it's all about them, blurred to sense of other]).  

But I'll confront those 'story lines' and 'dramas' which abdicate self-responsibility for choices, doesn't figure into the 'equation' for them.  I listen to the attempts to the 'excuses' and then the attempts to 'change the subject' when I call them out on it.  I bring it back to the lie, then I hear more excuses, and I redirect back to the lie, until they finally admit to their personal responsibility and the lie they're telling themselves  (re: choice to drink, their choices of reaction, and view of things).  A fairly fruitless exercise as the truth is forgotten by the time they drink again, they can't remember, it's and the self-deceptive habits remain.  There's confusion and they can't see how they are doing this to themselves.  They lie to themselves, "not hurting anyone else", everything to defend their habit, and denial of the consequences, re: loss of job, relationships, etc.  I maintain my position re: treatment.  I can recognize the human being that is there, but I also recognize the oppression of the human being by the weight of the addiction sickness, habits, etc.  Almost like two-personalities, the 'addict part' with it's deceptions, and mis-attributions often wins.


Definition of Insanity:


> Doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results.
> ~ Albert Einstein



Maybe taking a lot of liberty in generalizing from my experiences confronting addictions.  Just saying it can get messy, and head-tripping, and challenging re: one's own energies for it (especially when honesty is an important value, it's hard to tolerate consistently dishonesty, that addiction sickness can create).  I've known some strong people who've achieved sobriety and have actively maintained it for years and great people, fearlessly honest, clarity, direct, freed from habits of manipulation, working on clarity on a day-to-day, their best selves.  I respect this and the product of these efforts re: on-going development producing great Character strengths. 

They have to chose to lead that path, can't chose it for others.


----------



## X Royal (15 Sep 2011)

This statement in the article caught my eye.
*"Shelley Ford, a spokesperson for Canadian Forces Health Services, confirmed in an email that combat deployments are correlated with risky drinking and substance abuse.

But she was quick to add a recent Canadian Forces survey suggested military personnel now use alcohol and drugs less than the general population. Only three per cent of Canadian Forces members admitted to using marijuana in 2008-09, compared to 17 per cent among civilians." *

Her reasoning is because less Forces members _admitted_ to using marijuana than did civilians admitting to it, than it follows "military personnel now use alcohol and drugs less than the general population." :facepalm:
I'm sure the consequences for admitting drug use are the same for the military members as the civilians. :


----------



## medicineman (15 Sep 2011)

CF Health and Lifestyle surveys are quite anonymous, so you can pretty much say what you want.  You can even fudge the rank, gender, etc.

MM


----------



## Edward Campbell (15 Sep 2011)

Back in the days of my misspent youth both alcohol and drugs were readily available. I recall arriving in the battalion as a new officer - but not a newly joined subaltern - and being told about the delights that awaited us all in e.g. Amsterdam and Copenhagen. The emphasis was on women and beer - now and again someone would comment, disapprovingly, on the availability of drugs. We did have _some_ drug use problems but not, I am convinced by the evidence of my own observation, on the scale of either the general population or some allied military forces. (One of the latter being, in my opinion, essentially crippled by drugs and some other social problems.) 

(Alcohol was the 'drug of choice' and its abuse was a problem, and many, officers and soldiers alike, are still paying the price to sanctioned heavy drinking. Our _military culture_ was a bit warped. The pendulum may have swunhg a bit too far in the other direction but I believe today's (rather restrictive) alcohol policies are better then the anything goes policies of the 1960s.)

Some years later, when I was commanding a major unit, I had occasion to try several (eight, I seem to recall) soldiers on drug charges; I awarded some pretty harsh punishment - about half had to be approved by a superior commander (and they all were). I practiced a technique called _"management by wandering about"_ and, just after that trial, I noticed a generally high level of satisfaction with my handling of the situation. Most soldiers didn't like drugs. Some, a fairly small percentage used them, most did not and they disapproved of those who did.

All that is my way of saying that I think Shelley Ford, a spokesperson for Canadian Forces Health Services, is right. I suspect that drug use, while a problem for us you is below the levels in society at large.


----------



## GAP (15 Sep 2011)

I would agree with ER....the mentality for drug use is not there in any great amount, whereas the proscription of avoiding drugs tends to be already inherent  in those applying....it goes with the territory...

I did see a fair amount of marijuana use in Viet Nam, but it was severely (as in NOT TOLERATED) frowned upon in the field.  Heroin and other opiates were dismissed as a matter of principle. That's not to say it didn't happen, but it was not part of the lexicon.....


----------

