CFB Edmonton nurse charged with trafficking steroids

[The Bread Guy]

I was picking up T3s at the Pharm O in Edmonton today, and I asked if I could have a side of Vitamin S.

Apparently it is, in fact, too soon.....

:rofl:

 

[RubberTree]

Miss Bouchard is back in the news and has admitted selling steroids to undercover MPs. The story is here:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/touch/story.html?id=9868650

But what I found interesting is this quote from her...

"I made a horrible mistake,” she said. “I foolishly did not understand how wrong it was to do this. I foolishly allowed my PTSD to cloud my judgment."

 

[vonGarvin]

There it is...PTSD.


I swear that I'm the only member to deploy to not get PTSD.

 

[GAP]

There it is...PTSD.


I swear that I'm the only member to deploy to not get PTSD.

Feeling left out? 

Yeah, I look around from my own generation and,  though I hear about it occasionally, I can't evoke any of the issues talked about.  :dunno:

 

[George Wallace]

There it is...PTSD.


I swear that I'm the only member to deploy to not get PTSD.

Ah!  But you do.  You just have not been diagnosed with it yet.  >

 

[medicineman]

There it is...PTSD.


I swear that I'm the only member to deploy to not get PTSD.

Maybe you're just better at channeling or coping with it?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

MM why is your font so small?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Guys,

Do I have to repeat myself yet again? PTSD is a medical diagnosis. One that is made by professionals in that field. There are checks and balances throughout the process that must be adhered to. Those professionals have the experience and the tests to weed out, in most cases, who really has it and who doesn't.

So, once again, I'll ask that you please stop making armchair quarterback assessments of someone else's medical conditions, without having the degrees, professional status, clinical input and access to med files.

Does she have it? I don't know, however I'm not going to discount it because (1) I don't know her, (2) I am not a physician, (3) I am not within the scope of the investigation to try figure out why she did what she did.

Don't have it yourselves. Good for you Superman. Lots do. They acknowledge the fact and are seeking help to try get straight.

I'll fall back to what George said:

Ah!  But you do.  You just have not been diagnosed with it yet.  >

However, I'm not joking about it. Next person that questions someone's medical diagnosis without first hand, medical knowledge of the case, goes on the ladder.

And if you do have that knowledge, I'll probably ban you for disclosing personal medical information vis a vis, patient\ med practitioner confidentiality.

I'm tired of repeating myself.

---Staff---

 

[Towards_the_gap]

recceguy -

I'm in no way casting dispersions on anyones specific medical diagnoses, nor am I claiming any medical experience and ability to judge, via the internet, the veracity of anyones claim.

HOWEVER.

Is it such an emotive issue that ANY discussion of the possibility that some individuals would claim a hard-to-diagnose mental health issue as a mitigating factor in the conduct of a crime, is therefore shouted down as 'YOU CANNOT DIAGNOSE PEOPLE' and 'YOU'RE PERPETUATING STEREOTYPES'???

People DO fake PTSD. It's a known fact.  But we've gone so far the other way from 'it's a lack of moral fibre/cowardice' that the minute someone shows up at a CDU with a stress/mental health issue, the big P-T-S-D word gets thrown out immediately. I was eventually diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury but, at first, the burden of proof was on me to show that it wasn't PTSD!!!! I actually had to tell the MO 'No, it's not PTSD' at one point.

But back on point. Without judging anyone or diagnosing anyone, I do find it odd that PTSD was mentioned AFTER an admission of guilt.

Discipline me if you want, but we should be able to talk about this.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Discipline me if you want, but we should be able to talk about this.

I concur completely.  I sense that we are over-diagnosing.  The immediate result of hiring more people whose job it is to diagnose mental health issues is that there are more diagnoses of mental health issues...

 

[vonGarvin]

I criticize her use of PTSD as an excuse for criminal behaviour.  That is all.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

recceguy -

I'm in no way casting dispersions on anyones specific medical diagnoses, nor am I claiming any medical experience and ability to judge, via the internet, the veracity of anyones claim.

HOWEVER.

Is it such an emotive issue that ANY discussion of the possibility that some individuals would claim a hard-to-diagnose mental health issue as a mitigating factor in the conduct of a crime, is therefore shouted down as 'YOU CANNOT DIAGNOSE PEOPLE' and 'YOU'RE PERPETUATING STEREOTYPES'???

People DO fake PTSD. It's a known fact.  But we've gone so far the other way from 'it's a lack of moral fibre/cowardice' that the minute someone shows up at a CDU with a stress/mental health issue, the big P-T-S-D word gets thrown out immediately. I was eventually diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury but, at first, the burden of proof was on me to show that it wasn't PTSD!!!! I actually had to tell the MO 'No, it's not PTSD' at one point.

But back on point. Without judging anyone or diagnosing anyone, I do find it odd that PTSD was mentioned AFTER an admission of guilt.

Discipline me if you want, but we should be able to talk about this.

Discuss it as you will. However, you better have the hard facts to back up your assertions.

Better yet, do you realize how people that have been diagnosed feel every time someone around them, on here, in the mess lumps people, or individuals, together with PTSD as fakers, simply because the accuser says so? It calls into question their own diagnosis. "People will just call me a faker, because they say they weren't affected by the same firefight, IED, accident." So they suffer in silence, because of the ignorant, ill informed people that want to, unwittingly, stigmatize them.

Then people are asking why the suicides, why aren't people seeking help, why do they quit or refuse to come forward?

A lot of it can be traced back to the fact that, contrary to what everyone says, those that suffer are impinged by their peers.

Also, you can trust me when I tell you it's not simply a matter of "that the minute someone shows up at a CDU with a stress/mental health issue, the big P-T-S-D word gets thrown out immediately."

There is a lengthy process of observation, tests, questionnaires and hours of sessions with professionals to reach the diagnosis. In fact, done properly, a person could have started over a year ago into the process and still not be completely assessed yet.

So go ahead and call her a liar, but be ready to defend yourself if you get called on it.

Discuss the system to your hearts content.

Leave singular and personal accusations and dispersions to yourself. That's the broad 'yourself' not you individually. This and the last post were meant for everyone in the community.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Fair points RG, but I will say this.

I know people who ARE suffering in silence, not because of those doubters, but because they see people who cannot possibly fit the criteria, as laid down in DSM 5 - http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/PTSD%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf who are subsequently awarded nice VAC payouts, SISIP LTD, med discharge etc etc etc....

and think ' I don't want to be lumped in with that group, I'll soldier on'

Isn't that as equally a severe problem as the much maligned stigma?

And I totally concur with TV, the real problem in this case is not whether or not she has PTSD, but the fact that she 'claims' to have it, and only brings it up after she pleads guilty.

Her doctor/social worker/VA case manager didn't come forward with her med docs and state, on record, that she has PTSD.

She just told the press that she does.......

 

[Strike]

And I totally concur with TV, the real problem in this case is not whether or not she has PTSD, but the fact that she 'claims' to have it, and only brings it up after she pleads guilty.

PTSD or not, she contradicts herself, thus using her (possible diagnosis of) PTSD as an excuse.  When she addressed the court she said:

"I foolishly did not understand how wrong it was to do this. I foolishly allowed my PTSD to cloud my judgment.”

But when she was selling to the MP, it was reported:

“During the meeting, Bouchard asked Sgt. Boivin not to tell anyone because she did not want to lose her job,” said an agreed statement of facts presented in court.

She agreed to that statement.  So which is it?  Did she know what she was doing was wrong?  Or didn't she?

 

[Tibbson]

I criticize her use of PTSD as an excuse for criminal behaviour.  That is all.

Agreed.  One of my CWOs was diagnosed with PTSD years ago and spoke about it openly when someone wanted or needed to talk.  He often said his diagnosis was his diagnosis, not an excuse for his behaviours and he was still responsible for his actions. 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Fair points RG, but I will say this.

I know people who ARE suffering in silence, not because of those doubters, but because they see people who cannot possibly fit the criteria, as laid down in DSM 5 - http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/PTSD%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf who are subsequently awarded nice VAC payouts, SISIP LTD, med discharge etc etc etc....

and think ' I don't want to be lumped in with that group, I'll soldier on'

Isn't that as equally a severe problem as the much maligned stigma?

And I totally concur with TV, the real problem in this case is not whether or not she has PTSD, but the fact that she 'claims' to have it, and only brings it up after she pleads guilty.

Her doctor/social worker/VA case manager didn't come forward with her med docs and state, on record, that she has PTSD.

She just told the press that she does.......

I'll go with that line of thinking. PTSD is not an excuse for behavior. People, properly diagnosed, have the means at their disposal to deal with unethical, dangerous or out of control life factors.

So we'll meet in the middle and say she 'might' have PTSD, but that's not our call. However, the use of real or fictional PTSD is wrong to use as her scapegoat for behavior.

That I can live with.

Cheers.

I concur completely.  I sense that we are over-diagnosing.  The immediate result of hiring more people whose job it is to diagnose mental health issues is that there are more diagnoses of mental health issues...

Of course there is more diagnosis. The more people looking and identifying will naturally raise the bar. Just like more infantrymen in the field during a battle will increase the amount of enemy casualties. Or the more cars on the road the more accidents that will happen.

I would, however, not hesitate to ask a MCpl, RSM, Lt or full Col what makes them more qualified to ascertain someone's medical condition and why they would put their own layman's opinion above that of a true professional in the field. Kinda like a politician telling a CO how to deploy troops and run your battle during an engagement.

All that aside, I suppose we could decide not to take the professionals word for it.

You could always use the Brits solution during WWI and order your subordinates to execute, by firing squad, a soldier suffering from shell shock because you didn't believe the Doctors.

Or be like Gen Patton, during WWII, who physically assaulted troops because he didn't believe the Doctors either.

You choose your path and if it's the wrong one, hope it doesn't come back and bite you in the ass because you second guessed a Doctor ten years ago.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Of course there is more diagnosis. The more people looking and identifying will naturally raise the bar. Just like more infantrymen in the field during a battle will increase the amount of enemy casualties. Or the more cars on the road the more accidents that will happen.

At the risk of splitting this thread into it's own entity, I will add that it also seems, within the last 10 years, that there are more people looking for problems when there isn't any. People have been almost been led to believe that you WILL suffer PTSD from a traumatic event, not that you actually only have about a 20% chance of long-term problems.

Example: in the city I work for, there was a particularly bad call a while ago. The critical incident stress team held a 'debriefing'. Guess who was coming forward with claims of 'being affected by it'?

The people who weren't at the call. Isn't that curious?

I'm not advocating the WWI british approach of shooting shell shock victims, nor am I saying that slapping people will cure it. I'm just saying let's have some balance and accept that not everyone gets PTSD, some people fake it, and some people claim it after they've been an idiot. And perhaps, callling those fakers out and not just blindly accepting everyone who substitutes their own personality disorders for the mental health issue du jour may in fact help those who are suffering in silence. I always say, I don't worry about the people who come out and tell you 'I've got PTSD', I worry about the ones who don't.

 

[RedcapCrusader]

At the risk of splitting this thread into it's own entity, I will add that it also seems, within the last 10 years, that there are more people looking for problems when there isn't any. People have been almost been led to believe that you WILL suffer PTSD from a traumatic event, not that you actually only have about a 20% chance of long-term problems.

Example: in the city I work for, there was a particularly bad call a while ago. The critical incident stress team held a 'debriefing'. Guess who was coming forward with claims of 'being affected by it'?

The people who weren't at the call. Isn't that curious?

I'm not advocating the WWI british approach of shooting shell shock victims, nor am I saying that slapping people will cure it. I'm just saying let's have some balance and accept that not everyone gets PTSD, some people fake it, and some people claim it after they've been an idiot. And perhaps, callling those fakers out and not just blindly accepting everyone who substitutes their own personality disorders for the mental health issue du jour may in fact help those who are suffering in silence. I always say, I don't worry about the people who come out and tell you 'I've got PTSD', I worry about the ones who don't.

Speaking from experience, dispatchers can be traumatised too. All it takes is a busy call list, not enough available units, and a crystal clear camera feed. I've witnessed 4 brutal suicides, 1 rape, and a murder sitting comfortably in my chair at Public Safety Communications. Did I jump up and claim PTSD? Have I been diagnosed? No. But I did have nightmares and paranoia for many weeks after each incident.

Just because they weren't "there" doesn't mean they can't be affected. Obviously, it depends on how connected they were to the call, I'm sure you can pick out the bullshitters pretty easily but don't discount everyone.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

PTSD or not, she contradicts herself, thus using her (possible diagnosis of) PTSD as an excuse.  When she addressed the court she said:

But when she was selling to the MP, it was reported:

She agreed to that statement.  So which is it?  Did she know what she was doing was wrong?  Or didn't she?

THIS is what the discussion should center around, vice a  :slapfight: about PTSD.

 

[medicineman]

So we'll meet in the middle and say she 'might' have PTSD, but that's not our call. However, the use of real or fictional PTSD is wrong to use as her scapegoat for behavior.

Thank you for that - I wasn't on when the rest of the discussion happened and it kind of looked as if it were heading in a direction of "don't dog pile on her because of her diagnosis"...the dog pile was her not owning up to her actions which were obviously premeditated and with full cognizance of the possible repercussions of those actions.  Hopefully the court of public opinion will see that as well.

MM