- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Ladies and Gentlemen
My youngest son sent this to me tonight.
I had to read it three times before I fully comprehended it, to say I am appalled is to put it mildly.
Having comprehended it, all I can say is WHO in Canada would wnat to become a Regular Service Member.
I realise that the majority of people who post to this site are either children or wanna be‘s ie reservists or civilians who are unable to met the requirements to be regulars or even reservists.
This being the reason why I rarely come here any more.
I just cannot believe that a man who has put his life on the line can be treated in such a way, it is totally beyond me. Even such basket cases of countries such as Bangladesh have responsible pension systems and treatment for their military members mutilated in the line of duty.
For a so called ‘First World Country‘ as Canada to do this to those WHO BELIEVE is really appalling!!!!!
Yours,
G.A.MACKINLAY
April 13, 2003
One soldier‘s war
RICK GIBBONS -- Ottawa Sun
On Sept. 27, 1995 Major Bruce Henwood was on peacekeeping duty in the former Yugoslavia when his vehicle struck a landmine.
The explosion ripped off both legs below the knee. He survived the ordeal, but little did he know that his own private war was only just beginning.
His is a cautious tale for anyone who advocates sending our troops into war zones ill-equipped with clear and fair assurances that they and their families would be cared for in the event of death or serious injury.
A Senate committee would later review Maj. Henwood‘s case and would conclude that he was "set adrift by his own."
Within a year of his injury Maj. Henwood was out of the military. Even today he continues his fight for compensation.
He had risked his life in uniform in the service of his country only to learn that he would receive no long-term disability benefits under the military‘s Service Income Security Insurance Plan, this in spite of his catastrophic injuries.
As a final insult, he wouldn‘t even qualify for the cost of rehabilitation programs.
His appeal for compensation went through the chain of command to the head of the army, who determined that Henwood wasn‘t being denied anything he qualified for under existing medical plans.
A further appeal to the country‘s top general was passed to the military‘s Grievance Board which in the summer of 2002 decided he had received everything he was entitled to -- 75% of his salary but not a dime in compensation for the loss of two legs and the almost certain loss of future income because of those injuries.
In all, Maj. Henwood would spend eight years trying to navigate through a maze of red tape and bureaucracy in search of the compensation he richly deserved but for which, according to the military, he was not entitled.
How is it that a country that prides itself on fairness and equity could be so indifferent about the welfare of people who serve it in uniform?
We would not treat our public servants this way, nor our politicians, as Maj. Henwood would soon learn.
The final insult had to be when Maj. Henwood discovered in the course of his research that the military‘s most senior officers -- colonels and generals -- qualified for a benefit of up to $250,000 in the event of accidental death or serious dismemberment. And they wouldn‘t even have to be anywhere near a war zone to be entitled to it. The benefit applied whether the death or injury occurred on duty or off duty.
The cost of this special AD&D coverage for top military brass was covered by the government under the same plan extended to parliamentarians and senior bureaucrats. As for the military‘s lower ranks, well, they were out of luck, weren‘t they.
"It violates the age-old principle of the military commanders looking after their men first and then themselves," Maj. Henwood would tell a Senate committee.
"They have taken something more important and fundamental than just an insurance policy perk. They have shaken the trust of their subordinates and have degraded the leadership ethos."
A Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs plunged into the case of Maj. Henwood‘s private war for compensation. In February of this year, one day before senior DND staff were scheduled to testify, the government announced changes to its AD&D coverage. As a consequence, all military personnel, regardless of rank, would now qualify for the same compensation already extended to colonels, generals and Parliamentarians.
Maj. Henwood had won his war -- in a sense. Through perseverance he had forced his own government into changing the way it compensates this country‘s soldiers killed or injured in the line of duty.
He may even be compensated himself one day. This week, the Senate committee released a final report urging the government to apply the changes retroactively so that all Canadian military personnel who have been injured in the line of duty, including Maj. Henwood, are properly compensated.
Surely, Maj. Henwood deserves nothing less.
My youngest son sent this to me tonight.
I had to read it three times before I fully comprehended it, to say I am appalled is to put it mildly.
Having comprehended it, all I can say is WHO in Canada would wnat to become a Regular Service Member.
I realise that the majority of people who post to this site are either children or wanna be‘s ie reservists or civilians who are unable to met the requirements to be regulars or even reservists.
This being the reason why I rarely come here any more.
I just cannot believe that a man who has put his life on the line can be treated in such a way, it is totally beyond me. Even such basket cases of countries such as Bangladesh have responsible pension systems and treatment for their military members mutilated in the line of duty.
For a so called ‘First World Country‘ as Canada to do this to those WHO BELIEVE is really appalling!!!!!
Yours,
G.A.MACKINLAY
April 13, 2003
One soldier‘s war
RICK GIBBONS -- Ottawa Sun
On Sept. 27, 1995 Major Bruce Henwood was on peacekeeping duty in the former Yugoslavia when his vehicle struck a landmine.
The explosion ripped off both legs below the knee. He survived the ordeal, but little did he know that his own private war was only just beginning.
His is a cautious tale for anyone who advocates sending our troops into war zones ill-equipped with clear and fair assurances that they and their families would be cared for in the event of death or serious injury.
A Senate committee would later review Maj. Henwood‘s case and would conclude that he was "set adrift by his own."
Within a year of his injury Maj. Henwood was out of the military. Even today he continues his fight for compensation.
He had risked his life in uniform in the service of his country only to learn that he would receive no long-term disability benefits under the military‘s Service Income Security Insurance Plan, this in spite of his catastrophic injuries.
As a final insult, he wouldn‘t even qualify for the cost of rehabilitation programs.
His appeal for compensation went through the chain of command to the head of the army, who determined that Henwood wasn‘t being denied anything he qualified for under existing medical plans.
A further appeal to the country‘s top general was passed to the military‘s Grievance Board which in the summer of 2002 decided he had received everything he was entitled to -- 75% of his salary but not a dime in compensation for the loss of two legs and the almost certain loss of future income because of those injuries.
In all, Maj. Henwood would spend eight years trying to navigate through a maze of red tape and bureaucracy in search of the compensation he richly deserved but for which, according to the military, he was not entitled.
How is it that a country that prides itself on fairness and equity could be so indifferent about the welfare of people who serve it in uniform?
We would not treat our public servants this way, nor our politicians, as Maj. Henwood would soon learn.
The final insult had to be when Maj. Henwood discovered in the course of his research that the military‘s most senior officers -- colonels and generals -- qualified for a benefit of up to $250,000 in the event of accidental death or serious dismemberment. And they wouldn‘t even have to be anywhere near a war zone to be entitled to it. The benefit applied whether the death or injury occurred on duty or off duty.
The cost of this special AD&D coverage for top military brass was covered by the government under the same plan extended to parliamentarians and senior bureaucrats. As for the military‘s lower ranks, well, they were out of luck, weren‘t they.
"It violates the age-old principle of the military commanders looking after their men first and then themselves," Maj. Henwood would tell a Senate committee.
"They have taken something more important and fundamental than just an insurance policy perk. They have shaken the trust of their subordinates and have degraded the leadership ethos."
A Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs plunged into the case of Maj. Henwood‘s private war for compensation. In February of this year, one day before senior DND staff were scheduled to testify, the government announced changes to its AD&D coverage. As a consequence, all military personnel, regardless of rank, would now qualify for the same compensation already extended to colonels, generals and Parliamentarians.
Maj. Henwood had won his war -- in a sense. Through perseverance he had forced his own government into changing the way it compensates this country‘s soldiers killed or injured in the line of duty.
He may even be compensated himself one day. This week, the Senate committee released a final report urging the government to apply the changes retroactively so that all Canadian military personnel who have been injured in the line of duty, including Maj. Henwood, are properly compensated.
Surely, Maj. Henwood deserves nothing less.
Go to **** , Gordon.
