IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	 11 June 2015 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140015855 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, correction of the following entries on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 18 October 2007:

* item 12c (Net Active Service This Period)
* item 12e (Total Prior Inactive Service)
* item 25 (Separation Authority)

2.  The applicant states:

* her net active service should be 15 months and 18 days (1 year, 3 months, and 18 days)
* her Reserve service not on active duty was from 14 June 2001 to 11 September 2011 and from 16 May 2002 to 16 October 2003
* the separation authority should be changed to Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 6, due to hardship/parenthood (involuntary)
* she was asked to reconsider detachment (deployment) to Kabul due to suffering the loss of her only surviving parent in January 2004 and then giving birth to her only child in June 2004
* since she was the only provider for her child, it was an involuntary decision for her to return to her home of record under a parenthood hardship
* her child was 3 years old
* there were no stable reliable relatives/friends to care for her daughter
* she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and service-connected sexual trauma (currently known as military sexual trauma (MST)) and she did not report it until after she separated for fear of further harassment and retaliation
* she uses private health insurance for treatments and medicines

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Forms 214 for the periods ending 15 May 2002 and 18 October 2007
* physician letters, dated 2013
* Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical records
* VA Form 21-0781a (Statement in Support of Claim for Service Connection for PTSD Secondary to Personal Assault)

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 14 June 2001 for 8 years.  She was ordered to active duty for training on 11 September 2001 and she was released from active duty on 16 May 2002.  She completed her training and was awarded military occupational specialty 92Y (unit supply specialist).  Her DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 May 2002 shows she completed 8 months and 6 days of net active service during this period with 2 months and 27 days of prior inactive service (her USAR service from 14 June 2001 through 10 September 2001, the day before she reported for active duty for training).

3.  She was honorably discharged from the USAR on 6 July 2006 for the purpose of enlistment in the Regular Army.

4.  She enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 July 2006 for a period of 3 years and 2 weeks.

5.  On 12 September 2007, she was notified of her pending involuntary separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-8, due to parenthood.  The unit commander cited that during her Family Care Plan counseling on 27 August 2007 she stated it was not possible to establish an effective Family Care Plan.  She consulted with counsel on 13 September 2007, waived her rights, and elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf.  The separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed the issuance of an honorable discharge.

6.  She was discharged on 18 October 2007 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-8, for parenthood.

7.  Her DD Form 214 for the period ending 18 October 2007 shows in:

* item 12c – she completed 1 year, 3 months, and 12 days
* item 12d (Total Prior Active Service) – she completed 8 months and 6 days of prior active service (her active duty for training from 11 September 2001 through 16 May 2002)
* item 12e – she completed 4 years, 4 months, and 17 days of prior inactive service (her USAR service not on active duty from 14 June 2001 to 10 September 2001 and from 17 May 2002 through 7 July 2006)
* item 25 – Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-8
* item 26 (Separation Code) – JDG
* item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Parenthood

8.  There is no evidence of record showing she was diagnosed with PTSD or was the victim of MST prior to her discharge.

9.  She provided a letter from her physician, dated 5 December 2013, which states her current diagnosis is an adjustment disorder with depressed mood and PTSD by history.

10.  She provided a VA Form 21-0781a, dated 20 August 2014, wherein she reported the following incidents occurred in July 2007 while she was assigned to the “21st” Cavalry Division:

	a.  During field exercises, she was accosted by a lesbian/gay/bisexual/
transgender female in the shower.  She did not report the incident for fear of retaliation.

	b.  She was harassed by a married supply sergeant who was her superior on a weekend non-duty day, suggesting sex in the supply room.  She did not report the incident.

	c.  A sergeant major's girlfriend thought she was involved with the sergeant major and slept with her boyfriend.  She contracted a sexually transmitted disease but did not report it due to humiliation.

	d.  She was ostracized by her unit for not adhering to homosexual activity within the unit in the field.  As a result, she did not receive a recommendation for officer candidacy from her second lieutenant.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the Army.

	a.  Chapter 5 (Separation for Convenience of the Government), paragraph 
5-8 (Involuntary Separation Due to Parenthood), states Soldiers will be considered for involuntary separation when parental obligations interfere with fulfillment of military responsibilities.  Specific reasons for separation because of parenthood include:

		(1)  inability to perform prescribed duties satisfactorily,

		(2)  repeated absenteeism,

		(3)  repeated tardiness,

		(4)  inability to participate in field training exercises or perform special duties such as CQ and staff duty noncommissioned officer, and

		(5)  non-availability for worldwide assignment or deployment according to the needs of the Army.

	b.  Chapter 6 (Separation Because of Dependency or Hardship) states separation under this chapter is for the convenience of the government.  Soldiers of the Active Army and the Reserve Components may be discharged or released from active duty because of genuine dependency or hardship.  The regulation provides that hardship exists when, in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of a Soldier's (or spouse's) immediate family, separation from the service will materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship.  Under this provision, parenthood of married Soldiers and sole parenthood are the two conditions under which separation may be granted.  Soldiers who are sole parents and whose children are under 18 years of age and reside within the household, may apply for separation under hardship.  A sole parent is defined as a parent who is single by reason of never having been married, or who is divorced or legally separated and has been awarded child custody by judicial decree or court order, or who is a widow/widower.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (statutory or other directives), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  SPD code JDG applies to Soldiers discharged for parenthood.

13.  PTSD can occur after someone goes through a traumatic event like combat, assault, or disaster.  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and provides standard criteria and common language for the classification of mental disorders.  In 1980, the APA added PTSD to the third edition of its DSM nosologic classification scheme.  Although controversial when first introduced, the PTSD diagnosis has filled an important gap in psychiatric theory and practice.  From a historical perspective, the significant change ushered in by the PTSD concept was the stipulation that the etiological agent was outside the individual (i.e., a traumatic event) rather than an inherent individual weakness (i.e., a traumatic neurosis).  The key to understanding the scientific basis and clinical expression of PTSD is the concept of "trauma."

14.  PTSD is unique among psychiatric diagnoses because of the great importance placed upon the etiological agent, the traumatic stressor.  In fact, one cannot make a PTSD diagnosis unless the patient has actually met the "stressor criterion," which means that he or she has been exposed to an event that is considered traumatic.  Clinical experience with the PTSD diagnosis has shown, however, that there are individual differences regarding the capacity to cope with catastrophic stress.  Therefore, while most people exposed to traumatic events do not develop PTSD, others go on to develop the full-blown syndrome.  Such observations have prompted the recognition that trauma, like pain, is not an external phenomenon that can be completely objectified.  Like pain, the traumatic experience is filtered through cognitive and emotional processes before it can be appraised as an extreme threat.  Because of individual differences in this appraisal process, different people appear to have different trauma thresholds, some more protected from and some more vulnerable to developing clinical symptoms after exposure to extremely stressful situations.

15.  The fifth edition of the DSM was released in May 2013.  This revision includes changes to the diagnostic criteria for PTSD and acute stress disorder.  The PTSD diagnostic criteria were revised to take into account things that have been learned from scientific research and clinical experience.  The revised diagnostic criteria for PTSD include a history of exposure to a traumatic event that meets specific stipulations and symptoms from each of four symptom clusters:  intrusion, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and alterations in arousal and reactivity.  The sixth criterion concerns duration of symptoms, the seventh criterion assesses functioning, and the eighth criterion clarifies symptoms as not attributable to a substance or co-occurring medical condition.

	a.  Criterion A – Stressor:  The person was exposed to:  death, threatened death, actual or threatened serious injury, or actual or threatened sexual violence, as follows (one required):

		(1)  direct exposure;

		(2)  witnessing, in person;

		(3)  indirectly, by learning that a close relative or close friend was exposed to trauma.  If the event involved actual or threatened death, it must have been violent or accidental; or

		(4)  repeated or extreme indirect exposure to aversive details of the event(s), usually in the course of professional duties (e.g., first responders collecting body parts, professionals repeatedly exposed to details of child abuse).  This does not include indirect non-professional exposure through electronic media, television, movies, or pictures.

	b.  Criterion B – Intrusion Symptoms:  The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in the following way(s) (one required):

		(1)  recurrent, involuntary, and intrusive memories;

		(2)  traumatic nightmares;

		(3)  dissociative reactions (e.g., flashbacks) which may occur on a continuum from brief episodes to complete loss of consciousness;

		(4)  intense or prolonged distress after exposure to traumatic reminders; or

		(5)  marked physiologic reactivity after exposure to trauma-related stimuli.

	c.  Criterion C – Avoidance:  Persistent effortful avoidance of distressing trauma-related stimuli after the event (one required):

		(1)  trauma-related thoughts or feelings or

		(2)  trauma-related external reminders (e.g., people, places, conversations, activities, objects, or situations).

	d.  Criterion D – Negative Alterations in Cognitions and Mood:  Negative alterations in cognitions and mood that began or worsened after the traumatic event (two required):

		(1)  inability to recall key features of the traumatic event (usually dissociative amnesia; not due to head injury, alcohol, or drugs);

		(2)  persistent (and often distorted) negative beliefs and expectations about oneself or the world (e.g., "I am bad," "The world is completely dangerous");

		(3)  persistent distorted blame of self or others for causing the traumatic event or for resulting consequences;

		(4)  persistent negative trauma-related emotions (e.g., fear, horror, anger, guilt, or shame);

		(5)  markedly diminished interest in (pre-traumatic) significant activities, feeling alienated from others (e.g., detachment or estrangement); and

		(6)  constricted affect, persistent inability to experience positive emotions.

	e.  Criterion E – Alterations in Arousal and Reactivity:  Trauma-related alterations in arousal and reactivity that began or worsened after the traumatic event (two required):

		(1)  irritable or aggressive behavior;

		(2)  self-destructive or reckless behavior;

		(3)  hypervigilance;

		(4)  exaggerated startle response;

		(5)  problems in concentration; and

		(6)  sleep disturbance.

	f.  Criterion F – Duration:  Persistence of symptoms (in Criteria B, C, D, and E) for more than 1 month.

	g.  Criterion G – Functional Significance:  Significant symptom-related distress or functional impairment (e.g., social, occupational).

	h.  Criterion H – Exclusion:  Disturbance is not due to medication, substance use, or other illness.

16.  As a result of the extensive research conducted by the medical community and the relatively recent issuance of revised criteria regarding the causes, diagnosis, and treatment of PTSD, the Department of Defense (DOD) acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge.  It is also acknowledged that in some cases this undiagnosed condition of PTSD may have been a mitigating factor in the Soldiers' misconduct which served as a catalyst for their discharge.  Research has also shown that misconduct stemming from PTSD is typically based upon a spur of the moment decision resulting from a temporary lapse in judgment; therefore, PTSD is not a likely cause for either premeditated misconduct or misconduct that continues for an extended period of time.

17.  On 3 September 2014 in view of the foregoing information, 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 civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicants' service.

18.  BCM/NRs are not courts, nor are they investigative agencies.  Therefore, the determinations will be based upon a thorough review of the available military records and the evidence provided by each applicant on a case-by-case basis.  When determining if PTSD was the causative factor for an applicant's misconduct and whether an upgrade is warranted, the following factors must be carefully considered:

* is it reasonable to determine that PTSD or PTSD-related conditions existed at the time of discharge?
* does the applicant's record contain documentation of the occurrence of a traumatic event during the period of service?
* does the applicant's military record contain documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms?
* did the applicant provide documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms rendered by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider?
* was the applicant's condition determined to have existed prior to military service?
* was the applicant's condition determined to be incurred during or aggravated by military service?
* do mitigating factors exist in the applicant's case?
* did the applicant have a history of misconduct prior to the occurrence of the traumatic event?
* was the applicant's misconduct premeditated?
* how serious was the misconduct?

19.  Although DOD acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged UOTHC may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge, it is presumed that they were properly discharged based upon the evidence that was available at the time.  Conditions documented in the records that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge.  In cases in which PTSD or PTSD-related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the UOTHC characterization of service.  BCM/NRs will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC.  Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat-related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct.  PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct.  BCM/NRs will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends she completed 1 year, 3 months, and 18 days of net active service during the period under review.  The evidence of record shows she entered active duty on 7 July 2006 and she was discharged on 18 October 2007 after completing 1 year, 3 months, and 12 days of net active service which is properly shown in item 12f of her DD Form 214.  Therefore, there is no basis on which to amend item 12f of this DD Form 214.

2.  The applicant requests correction of the USAR service shown on her DD Form 214 for the period ending 18 October 2007.  This DD Form 214 shows she completed 4 years, 4 months, and 17 days of prior inactive service.  The evidence of record shows she served in the USAR not on active duty from 14 June 2001 through 10 September 2001 (2 months and 27 days) and from 17 May 2002 through 7 July 2006 (4 years, 1 month, and 20 days) for a total of 4 years, 4 months, and 17 days of prior inactive service which is properly shown in item 12e of this DD Form 214.  Therefore, there is no basis on which to amend item 12e of her DD Form 214.

3.  Although she contends her separation authority should be changed to Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6, by reason of hardship/parenthood (involuntary), there is no evidence showing she requested and was granted a hardship discharge.  The evidence shows she was involuntarily separated for parenthood because she stated she was unable to establish an effective Family Care Plan.

4.  Her separation authority was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations at the time of her separation.  There is an insufficient basis with which to grant her request to change her separation authority.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ______________X___________
                  CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015855



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015855



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1