Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimrob1
Thanks for the link to the story. I guess its another case of. Thanks for your service but.
|
Apparently, you didn't understand what you read.
"I thought because I was a veteran and I was seeking care at a veteran facility that it would be taken care of," Southerland said.
That's not how it works.
Southerland and apparently you, too, are misinformed.
Injured workers are entitled to worker's compensation. That actually stems from English common law and the Master-Servant relationship.
That poses a problem for military members, since they are employed by the federal government and not by State governments.
It would be manifestly unfair to saddle States with the cost of worker's compensation for military members, thus the need for the VA.
The federal government also has a compelling interest in the treatment and care of veterans.
WW II demonstrated that civilian hospitals were simply not equipped, staffed or trained and educated to deal with the nature of injuries sustained in combat.
The need arose for specialty hospitals that are properly equipped and staffed with personnel trained and educated to deal with combat injuries and non-combat injuries. Of tremendous value is the 17-volume set of medical data produced by medical professionals in the branch services and VA medical staff during the Vietnam War.
This 17-volume tome is in fact the reason civilian hospitals now have trauma centers and are able to deal with trauma-induced injuries. Those soldiers did not die or suffer injury in vain. The knowledge obtained by medics on the battlefield and doctors and nurses at the field hospitals through the attempts to save their lives is saving lives now.
Because the VA medical system exists, it makes perfect sense to utilize those facilities to their greatest efficiency to obtain maximum value, and for that reason medical services are provided to many other veterans, including those who were not injured on the job.
Many veterans are eligible for services at a VA facility.
After determining a veteran's eligibility, the VA then turns to the veteran's financial and insurance status.
Veterans at certain minimum income levels receive free care, others receive free care but have prescription co-pays, or have co-pays for diagnostic services, or co-pays for non-surgical services or a combination.
If an eligible veteran also has health plan coverage, such as Medicare, Medicaid or private insurance, the VA will bill those entities for services rendered.
If you read the cleverly crafted propaganda news article, it never states with particularity that Southerland has a service-connected disability and is receiving VA disability benefits.
The article -- intended to debase and denigrate the VA -- simply says "benefits check."
The article says the "monthly check" -- another avoidance of what it really is -- is "$1,200."
I'm not seeing how any rating level would pay exactly "$1,200" and yet the claim is $201 is being deducted.
Federal law limits collection to not more than 15% of Social Security Retirement, Social Security Disability, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), military pension, VA service-connected disability, VA non-service connected disability, Railroad Retirement Income, Federal Retirement, or Black Lung benefits.
If you owe taxes to the IRS, or student loans, or any debt to any federal government agency, the maximum is 15%.
In order for the VA to deduct $201, then his monthly check must be a minimum of $1,340/month, which is not the same as "$1,200."
All I see is lies and deception in the article.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
