Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 95
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:49
At the start of your remarks, you talked about genetic evolution, and then you talked about biological evolution.
Do you think there is a difference between genetic evolution and biological evolution?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:51
In the context of these studies that you are funding to try to understand post-traumatic tress, genetic or biological, what link are you making between post-traumatic stress and suicide? Can a study tell us at what stage post-traumatic stress can lead to suicide?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:53
Okay. You also said that there was a difference between members of the Canadian Forces and members of the American armed forces. Can you explain this difference to me? When two soldiers, a Canadian and an American, are in the same theatre of operations, how can they be different?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:54
You said that there is more post-traumatic stress among individuals who are sent to a theatre of operations than among individuals who take part in peacekeeping missions, like the people in the Canadian army. But we have heard from a number of witnesses who have participated in these missions, and I can tell you that a lot of them have experienced post-traumatic stress. They were not allowed to use their weapons, and they saw things that they shouldn't have seen.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:54
That doesn't change the diagnosis. Whether a person is in a theatre of operations or on a peacekeeping mission, the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress is the same. The phenomena are the same. So, whether a person is in one situation or another, if a person experiences post-traumatic stress, they experience it, I suppose.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:54
Based on all these studies, what recommendations would you make to the committee so that members of the Canadian Forces can get training, or something else, to lessen or reduce post-traumatic stress, to control it or manage it better?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-03-02 16:55
If a lot of studies have been done, how is it that people at National Defence are telling us that soldiers are being given barely half a day of training before being sent into a theatre of operations? If there are so many studies, how is it that there isn't adequate training?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-28 15:59
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Colonel, I understand the statistical data you are presenting this afternoon. However, the truth is that, when a member of the Australian Armed Forces is released from the army, as you were saying earlier, they are not monitored by you unless they are taking medication. You keep track of only those who receive benefits. How can you establish a suicide rate of 7% when you are not keeping track of those who have left the armed forces? You have no information about those people, about where they live, where they currently are or about whether there have been suicides among them. So, you have a random figure of 7% that applies to those whom you are perhaps monitoring, but you have no data on those who are not in your system. In a way, the rate of 7% is skewed. It could be 7%, but it could also be 10%, 12% or 15%. Do you agree with me?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-28 16:23
Earlier, you did say that you had established a connection between suicide causes among your armed forces members and suicide causes in society in general. You talked about alcoholism and couple separation. I would like to know whether you conduct a full investigation when one of your members commits suicide. If so, do you provide financial compensation when it is determined that the cause of suicide was post-traumatic stress in the wake of the individual's multiple-year deployment to a theatre of operations?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-28 16:25
If my understanding is correct, an inquiry is not conducted for all suicides. When a veteran or even someone who is still a member of the Canadian Forces commits suicide, we do not conduct investigations in all cases, but only in cases deemed as inquiry-worthy by the staff.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-28 16:27
Yes, but we're talking about people who have hung themselves; they have taken their own life.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-28 16:45
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Colonel, do you think that our two countries should follow up on their veterans in order to find out where they live, what their address is, what they have been doing since they left the army and whether any of them have committed suicide? As I was saying earlier, I understand very well that a coroner inquires into the death to determine the cause of it, but what we are interested in are the reasons for the death. Was a separation involved? Why? Was the individual being treated by a psychologist owing to post-traumatic stress? Do you think that our two countries should make sure not to lose sight of those people once they leave the army?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-28 16:47
You did not answer my question regarding investigations of suicide cases. Should each suicide be the focus of a separate investigation? I believe that it should, since we need to determine not how the person committed suicide, but rather the cause of the suicide. I am talking about further investigation of the reasons that drove the person to commit suicide. Do you agree with me?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-14 15:51
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Larlee.
You startled me earlier when you said that your members receive medical training. How can this medical training help the board members in deciding whether a person suffers from post traumatic stress?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
View Robert Vincent Profile
2011-02-14 15:54
That's a great answer, but I can tell you that this is not what happens in practice. I don't buy the fact that a person with some medical training can be a doctor all of a sudden, and can be handed a case to determine whether or not a patient has post-traumatic stress based on the medical data available to them. Even if these people completed their medical training, they wouldn't be doctors. They cannot give a diagnosis, because they are not doctors. The only person who can make a diagnosis is a doctor.
Once a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress is established by a doctor, either by the attending physician or by the Canadian Forces doctor, I assume that the board members are bound by that diagnosis. If they are not bound by the attending physician's diagnosis, I suppose they go by the decision of the Canadian Forces doctor. If there is a difference between the two diagnoses, if the doctors don't agree, and, for example, the attending physician gives a post-traumatic stress diagnosis whereas the Canadian Forces doctor doesn't, the case has to go to another board. The kind of board that we should have should be made up of doctors, not members with just some medical training, because they don't have the proper training for giving a diagnosis or making a decision.
If that's how your board members reach a decision on a post-traumatic stress diagnosis, I have a real problem with it. They cannot make decisions like that. I speak from experience, since I have worked for 20 years on the CSST board, where they deal with pretty much the same things. We can in fact compare post-traumatic stress cases to accidents that occur in factories. It could be someone whose hand got caught in a machine and was cut off, and other workers were there when it happened. We've experienced cases like that, we've heard of them. The only people able to give a diagnosis and make a decision are doctors, the ones who have the paper to prove it.
You are telling me about cases where, though there is no medical documentation, family members testify to what the people went through. Your legislation should stipulate that medical proof is needed to establish the cause and effect relationship between the diagnosis and the person's condition. It is unthinkable that the testimony of family members would be enough to change the board's decision. At the time of the administrative review decision, meaning the first review after the request, what does your board do to establish the medical relationship if there is no medical paperwork?
Results: 1 - 15 of 95 | Page: 1 of 7

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data