PDA

View Full Version : Feres Doctrine



Juggs
01-25-2014, 06:26 PM
I'm glad another member is petitioning to be able to sue regardless of the feres doctrine. His was was forced to do PT while pregnant and subsequently delivered a premature baby that later died.

I cant tell you how many times my wife was forced to go to PT while she was 9 month pregnant and high risk. At one point her boss was so overbearing it pushed her into preterm labor and she was rushed to L&D. I was called back from TDY to deal with this as well. It didnt end there, her boss continually showed up at L&D to talk to my wife. However, the mere presence of this bitch continued to spike my wife's vitals. They put her on a morphine drip just to calm her down. It calmed her down, but didnt have the same results it would on me. I would've been out cold.

Eventually the L&D staff barred her TSgt boss from entering L&D. I dont understand how folks can get away with this type of behavior. I'm glad L&D stepped up and protected my wife when the rest of the military wouldnt. Its damn shame. She was even put on 8 hr days vs 12 and then bed rest. Still got harassing phone calls. My wife told me not to set foot in the ward where she worked because she knew I'd lose it on her boss.

Again, why dont officers or SNCOs step in when they see this crap happening?

AJBIGJ
01-25-2014, 06:53 PM
Again, why dont officers or SNCOs step in when they see this crap happening?

I think the obvious question here is do you know for a fact whether any officers or SNCOs were even aware this was happening?

Juggs
01-25-2014, 06:57 PM
I think the obvious question here is do you know for a fact whether any officers or SNCOs were even aware this was happening?

I think the obvious answer is yes. As I even mentioned it to one of the officers on the floor just in case my wife was worried about reprisal. Perhaps I shouldve just said fuck the chain of command gone to the hospital commander.

AJBIGJ
01-25-2014, 07:00 PM
I think the obvious answer is yes. As I even mentioned it to one of the officers on the floor just in case my wife was worried about reprisal. Perhaps I shouldve just said fuck the chain of command gone to the hospital commander.

Another followup question is what exactly that officer's role was? Were they a doctor or nurse? Something else? Were they even in a position to know your wife or did you just tag some random officer nearby? The latter option is certainly an option if the former indeed was a dead end. I've seen senior officers get fired for less, much less...

Juggs
01-25-2014, 07:04 PM
Another followup question is what exactly that officer's role was? Were they a doctor or nurse? Something else? Were they even in a position to know your wife or did you just tag some random officer nearby? The latter option is certainly an option if the former indeed was a dead end. I've seen senior officers get fired for less, much less...


Seriously? Yes this nurse knew my wife. I knew the nurse. No i didnt just say hey youve got some shiny on your scrubs i'll talk to you. I knew the people on her floor and they knew me.

I think it is simply an example of what our military has become. A fuck you and your family we have a mission to do mentality.

The AF spews family and other typical cheer up BS, but doesnt practice it as a whole. My unit was great about it

AJBIGJ
01-25-2014, 07:23 PM
Seriously? Yes this nurse knew my wife. I knew the nurse. No i didnt just say hey youve got some shiny on your scrubs i'll talk to you. I knew the people on her floor and they knew me.

I think it is simply an example of what our military has become. A fuck you and your family we have a mission to do mentality.

The AF spews family and other typical cheer up BS, but doesnt practice it as a whole. My unit was great about it

I ask the questions because the answers were not themselves readily implied.

Knowing it was a nurse helps, which also it seems apparent she or someone in that office did do something because eventually the TSGT was barred from the L & D, although it is hard to say what. I can't speak for all the docs and desk attendants working there but I imagine they don't initially turn away an individual's Chain of Command unless they are aware that abusive behaviors might be occurring, and I'm sure in other circumstances they might have dealt with an Airman or two who was simply being obnoxious so they may not take your word at face value, no offense. They probably took your information as datapoints and still allowed the TSGT in at least to verify there was actually abusive behavior occurring. The problem here is quite frankly people often confuse slow, methodical action with inaction when more senior individuals are making a decision, because the decision maker weighs the facts before they interfere too readily because if they had, it could bite them in the ass if the TSGT went back to the Chain of Command because the hospital was being uncooperative, only to have a Colonel on the telephone with their boss the next day.

I'm obviously speculating here, I only have the information you have provided thus far, my point here is they may not have been even aware about the specific activities until they were able to see for themselves, and probably would only interfere when they were certain abusive harrassment is actually occurring. If the medical personnel were significantly outside of your wife's direct chain of command, it would only add to the level of reluctance to take immediate action unless the person was absolutely sure.

Part of that is the simple notion of interfering with what we all refer to as "good order and discipline". Part of it maybe a hesitance based on personality. Again, speculating, it's the best you can expect for people who were not themselves present to witness the actions as they were unfolding. If you were looking for "you poor baby" or "that bitch" type of gossip stuff, you can probably find more of that from the wives in your local church establishment.

Juggs
01-25-2014, 08:00 PM
I ask the questions because the answers were not themselves readily implied.

Knowing it was a nurse helps, which also it seems apparent she or someone in that office did do something because eventually the TSGT was barred from the L & D, although it is hard to say what. I can't speak for all the docs and desk attendants working there but I imagine they don't initially turn away an individual's Chain of Command unless they are aware that abusive behaviors might be occurring, and I'm sure in other circumstances they might have dealt with an Airman or two who was simply being obnoxious so they may not take your word at face value, no offense. They probably took your information as datapoints and still allowed the TSGT in at least to verify there was actually abusive behavior occurring. The problem here is quite frankly people often confuse slow, methodical action with inaction when more senior individuals are making a decision, because the decision maker weighs the facts before they interfere too readily because if they had, it could bite them in the ass if the TSGT went back to the Chain of Command because the hospital was being uncooperative, only to have a Colonel on the telephone with their boss the next day.

I'm obviously speculating here, I only have the information you have provided thus far, my point here is they may not have been even aware about the specific activities until they were able to see for themselves, and probably would only interfere when they were certain abusive harrassment is actually occurring. If the medical personnel were significantly outside of your wife's direct chain of command, it would only add to the level of reluctance to take immediate action unless the person was absolutely sure.

Part of that is the simple notion of interfering with what we all refer to as "good order and discipline". Part of it maybe a hesitance based on personality. Again, speculating, it's the best you can expect for people who were not themselves present to witness the actions as they were unfolding. If you were looking for "you poor baby" or "that bitch" type of gossip stuff, you can probably find more of that from the wives in your local church establishment.

No HER office didnt do shit. The nurses in L&D banned the TSgt from visiting after they noticed her vitals going through the roof every time that clown came through.

What is lacking is what we refer to as leadership traits. The AF doesnt create leaders it creates managers.

I dont care if they are IN her immediate chain. If you're an officer in the US military, being medical isnt an excuse for not knowing how to lead.

No I'm good with avoiding wives clubs. Most of them are simply whiney dependa snobs.

garhkal
01-25-2014, 08:55 PM
So she was on lim du which you are supposed to be on when preggers and the command (or just her Tsgt) still forced her to exercise? THEN got in her face when she went to medical? I would take that right to the Jag office.

RS6405
02-01-2014, 05:39 PM
Juggs, I'm sorry to hear about your friend's child as well as what happen to your wife and child.

Yet, have you and your wife or your friend and his wife talked to an attorney? If not, you should considered doing so.

From cases I read, Feres Doctrine is well settled about AD member not being able to sue the US Gov. Yet, exceptions to that doctrine include retired members, and/or AD member's family, including AD members who sue on behalf of their minor children. All of this is well known.

At first, when I read your post, I wondered if you lived in a state that makes intentional acts to a mother that harms/kills an unborn child a crime. Best way to check is to consult with a local attorney. Then after reading your post again, you indicated that both children were born alive, even though any harm that happen to them, happen in utero to an AD member. (I did not research it, but it could be a new legal twist to the Feres Doctrine).

Hence, It would be worth your time to consult with a lawyer in your area. Look for one who is familiar with the Feres Doctrine.


Good luck!

socal1200r
02-04-2014, 07:05 PM
Congress really needs to relax this Feres Doctrine, and enable military members to sue the govt for incompetence, gross negligence, etc. I was a Reservist on AD orders, pinned on O5, then two days later was involuntarily removed from those orders. I had been on AD orders more or less continuously for almost five years at that point, getting the 1095 waivers because I was on contingency orders the whole time. LONG story short, as a direct result of this action taken by USAFR, I had to declare personal bankruptcy, lost a house to foreclosure, had my credit history of 30+ years ruined, and had to appeal my case all the way up to the AF Board for the Correction of Military Records, who agreed with me that this action taken by the USAFR was unlawful. But, because of the Feres Doctrine, I can't sue for damages, only the pay and allowances I lost between the time I was involuntarily removed from orders and the date my case was resolved thru the Disability Processing System (I was entitled to stay on AD orders while my case was being processed, but they removed me involuntarily). It took 15 months before the AFBCMR made their decision, then another 18 months before DFAS paid me any money, and when they did, it went to the wrong account, and it wasn't everything I was owed. So now I have another case for these unpaid monies that are with the AFBCMR yet again.

From my personal experience, the rules and regs are so convoluted that the typical service member will give up, regardless of how righteous their case may be. This whole process is NOT service-member friendly, and is definitely stacked against them. It was basically me and my attorney against the USAFR, but we persevered and "won". But it's somewhat of a hollow victory, because I didn't get all the monies I was entitled to, they can't undo the bankruptcy, foreclosure, or ruined credit history. However, had I been able to sue for damages, like for triple the amount I'm owed, that could've softened the blow somewhat, and helped me to start over again.

garhkal
02-04-2014, 07:46 PM
The main reason i see the govt NOT willing to do this, is it would mean they would have to actually own up to their mistakes and others in the govt.

Juggs
02-04-2014, 07:50 PM
The main reason i see the govt NOT willing to do this, is it would mean they would have to actually own up to their mistakes and others in the govt.

Like that poor SrA that was getting his gall bladder removed to be able to deploy. Comes out of his surgery missing two legs cause the surgeons screwed up.

Sure he gets va disability and medical retirement, but seriously, he should've been able to sue.

socal1200r
02-05-2014, 04:32 PM
Like that poor SrA that was getting his gall bladder removed to be able to deploy. Comes out of his surgery missing two legs cause the surgeons screwed up. Sure he gets va disability and medical retirement, but seriously, he should've been able to sue.

That's the picture-perfect case of gross negligence, incompetence, etc., and he should've been able to sue the govt because of it. They ruined his life, but because of the Feres Doctrine, they're protected. No lawyer will take this case, because there are plenty of precedents where something like this was dismissed under the Feres Doctrine. This happened in a state-side medical facility, not some tent in an FOB, so he should be able to sue and get punitive damages.

garhkal
02-05-2014, 07:17 PM
Exactly. Look at the past 5-10 years of govt. Most every case of negligence or the like, has NOT resulted in anyone being fired (that has been publicized) or jail time/fines.. they are just left to quietly resign with full benefits.
BUT you pull that S#((U$ out here in the real world, and see what happens.

RetC141BFCC
02-06-2014, 02:33 PM
Exactly. Look at the past 5-10 years of govt. Most every case of negligence or the like, has NOT resulted in anyone being fired (that has been publicized) or jail time/fines.. they are just left to quietly resign with full benefits.
BUT you pull that S#((U$ out here in the real world, and see what happens.

I feel the same way. I retired in 03 when I asked for my retirement physical was told no that I had a PHA (think that’s what it is called have CRS now can’t remember shit) 4 months earlier. On my PHA I told them I had a small hole in my nose. AF never did anything kept requesting to see a specialist. I retired went to a civilian Doctor and was told it was cancer four operation latters I have been cancer free for over five years now. My face is scared so bad that the VA pays me 50 percent for disfigurement. I thought I could sue for failure to diagnosis cancer or even to attempt to. PA signed the PHA was told by a lawyer no. I do understand the ferries doctrine as far as military medical malpractice in the field but there should be a limit stateside.

garhkal
02-06-2014, 08:06 PM
Sorry for that for what they did to you. Sounds like one of my comrades. His wife (Army) kept complaining about chest pains for a long time (just over 4 years), but was always just 'given light duty', never xrayed or anything. TILL she colapsed, due to a Duff heart valve. Had they put her in for checks when it was sooner, it would not have been as bad as it got.