| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Gale J. Thomas | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
| Ms. Marla J. N. Troup | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected by changing the characterization and reason for his separation.
APPLICANT STATES: That he should have been honorably discharged for the convenience of the Government under secretarial authority, or discharged for medical reasons because of his psychiatric problems. In support of his request the applicant submits copies of a mental status evaluation and a psychological report from 1963, and a decision on his claim for social security benefits, dated 22 January 2002.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 16 November 1967 for a period of 2 years.
Between January 1968 and August 1969 the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) on numerous occasions, accumulating over 300 days of lost time.
On 8 April 1968 he was convicted by a summary court-martial of 3 specification of being AWOL from 20 February to 21 February 1968, 6 April to 8 April 1968, and 10 April to 26 April 1968. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 7 days, and a forfeiture.
On 10 June 1968, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 16 May to 20 May 1968. He was sentenced to 20 days confinement at hard labor.
On 18 October 1968, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 27 June to 26 September 1968. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and a forfeiture.
On 26 August 1969 he was charged with 2 specifications of being AWOL from
15 April to 6 May 1969, and 20 May to 13 August 1969.
On 29 August 1969, a medical evaluation cleared the applicant for separation.
On 6 September 1969, after charges were preferred, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. His request acknowledged he understood the nature and consequences of an undesirable discharge which he might receive. He indicated he understood he could be denied some or all veterans' benefits as a result of his discharge and that he may be deprived of rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law. He declined to submit statements on his own behalf.
On 3 October 1969, the appropriate separation authority approved the request and directed that an undesirable discharge be issued. On 21 October 1969 the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He had 1 year, 1 month, and 21 days of creditable service and over
300 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
Documentation provided by the applicant indicates he was diagnosed with childhood schizophrenia in March 1963 when he was almost 15 years of age. He was hospitalized on 11 March 1963 and discharged on 4 June 1963, with the annotation that his condition has improved.
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental Disorders the essential features of Schizophrenia are the same in children as they are in adults, and are a mixture of characteristic signs and symptoms (both positive and negative) that have been present for a significant portion of time during a
1 month period (or for a shorter time if successfully treated), with some signs of the disorder persisting for at least 6 months. The onset of Schizophrenia typically occurs between the late teens and the mid-30s. The characteristic symptoms of Schizophrenia involve a range of cognitive and emotional dysfunctions that include perception, inferential thinking, language and communication, behavioral monitoring, affect, fluency and productivity of thought and speech, hedonic capacity, volition and drive, and attention. No single symptom is pathognomonic of Schizophrenia; the diagnosis involves the recognition of a constellation of signs and symptoms associated with impaired occupational or social functioning. There are five subtypes (paranoid type, disorganized type, catatonic type, undifferentiated type, and residual type). The diagnosis of a particular subtype is based on the clinical picture that occasioned the most recent evaluation or admission to clinical care and may therefore change over time.
The applicant applied for disability insurance benefits from the Social Security Administration, which determined that he was entitled to a period of disability commencing on 3 June 1981 and ending on 31 December 1983. During the period of disability the applicant had the physical residual functional capacity to
perform work at all exertional levels, but was unable to meet the mental demands of work because of marked deficits in concentration, persistence and pace. The applicant’s entitlement to a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, and eligibility for supplemental security income ended effective February 1984, the end of the second calendar month after the month in which the disability ceased.
The January 2002, Social Security Administration’s decision document states that on 30 April 1963, the applicant underwent intelligence testing. On the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, the applicant obtained a verbal IQ of 80, performance IQ of 69, and full scale IQ of 72, placing him in the borderline range. However, because of the variability on test scores, ranging from superior scores in some areas to highly defective performance in others, it was felt that the applicant was not functioning at his true capacity at that time. The applicant obtained a GED in 1982, and thereafter an Associate’s degree in Human Service.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. While the applicant provides evidence of hospitalization and treatment for “Childhood Schizophrenia” when he was a teenager, he provides no evidence that the condition was the basis for his misconduct, nor is there evidence that his condition was mentioned or used in defense of his misconduct.
3. The applicant’s discharge and characterization of service were appropriate considering the frequent incidents of misconduct during his period of active duty.
4. His DD Form 214 accurately reflects the appropriate separation authority and narrative reason for his separation.
5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.
6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__FNE __ __LE ___ __MJNT _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002079434 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030410 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011431C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's father stated that the applicant was abandoned by his natural parents at age 10 months and he did not have the intelligence to understand the concept of responsibility. The available evidence indicates the applicant experienced problems completing his training requirements.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018479
In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004366C070208
The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that his disability did not exist prior to service (EPTS), that it was service aggravated, and, in effect, that he be granted a medical retirement with a 100 percent disability rating. Counsel further states that the PEB's finding that the applicant had a long history of hospitalizations for psychiatric disturbances and schizoid traits is not supported by the applicant's records. The applicant's civilian medical history indicated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010001
The applicant states that he was in the hospital for over two months while he was in the service with the same illness and disability for which he now receives a pension. There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant was diagnosed by competent military medical authorities with an unfitting medical condition prior to his discharge. There is no military evidence of record which indicates the applicant incurred any medical condition that rendered his medically unfit...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060828C070421
The report shows that the examining official had talked with the applicant’s mother, who stated that the applicant had a long pattern of not following directions and rules, and of being rebellious; and that appeared to have been a trend since basic training. The applicant stated at various times that he wanted to get out of the Army as evidenced by a 5 January 2001 counseling report, an 11 January 2001 evaluation, and a 20 March 2001 BMD evaluation. The applicant has been diagnosed as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019061
In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03099080C070212
An 11 July 2003 medical record indicates that the applicant had been admitted to a VA medical clinic and that he was discharged on 11 July 2003 with a discharge diagnosis of major depressive disorder, severe, with psychotic That the applicant was treated for depression is noted as is the diagnoses provide by a VA clinical psychologist subsequent to his discharge; however; the MEB did not include a diagnose of depression in its findings and there is no evidence that this condition was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010486
United States Army Training Center, Infantry and Fort Ord, California, Special Court-Martial Orders Number 124, dated 19 May 1971, noted that only so much of the approved sentences as provided for a BCD, confinement at hard labor for 6 months, forfeiture of $70.00 pay per months for 6 months and reduction to pay grade E-1 had been affirmed. In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00273
Despite the new symptoms and lowered GAF score as previously described in the final outpatient note, the documented MSE was completely normal. There is nothing stated in the record which suggests that the CI was under-employed on the basis of psychiatric impairment. The VA examiner described symptoms of hypervigilance and exaggerated startle response, but did not note the panic symptoms documented in the MEB note.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090390C070212
In the processing of that formal LOD investigation, a statement was obtained from the physician who had made the entry that the applicant had stated she had been taking anti-psychotic medications prior to AT. As the illness progresses, psychotic symptoms develop: The preponderance of evidence supports a finding that the applicant’s schizophrenia existed prior to her entry on active duty during her AT, and there is no evidence of any event which may have aggravated that condition.