Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Insanity Exemption to Other than Honorable Discharge for the Purpose of Claiming Benefits: The Role of the Mental Health Examiner

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Former service-members are barred from veteran benefits if their character of discharge is other-than-honorable due to willful and persistent misconduct. One exception is if it is determined that the service-member was legally insane at the time of the behaviors resulting in discharge. Offering an expert opinion on a mental state years or decades in the past is complicated. Yet, cases involving such opinions are assigned to veterans affairs-based mental health professionals without additional training or resources. This article fills this gap by discussing the unique legal statutes that define insanity for the purpose of benefit eligibility. In addition, it shares available resources and highlights themes resulting from having opined in such cases and having reviewed 30 Board of Veterans Appeals decisions involving claimed insanity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 18 U.S.C. § 17(a), 2012.

  • 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(d), 2015.

  • 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(k), 2015.

  • 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(n) (1), 2015.

  • 38 C.F.R. § 3.12, 2015.

  • 38 C.F.R. § 3.12(d) (4), 2015.

  • 38 C.F.R. § 3.354(a), 2015.

  • 38 C.F.R. 3.102, 2009.

  • 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 2006.

  • 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(a) (1), 2012.

  • 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b), 2012.

  • 38 U.S.C. § 5303(b), 2012.

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.

  • Beck v. West, 13 Vet. App. 535, 539 (2000).

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014a). Docket No. 11-03 903, Citation Nr: 1423942, Dec. Date 05/28/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014b). Docket No. 11-03 903, Citation Nr: 1423942, Dec. Date 06/06/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014c). Docket No. 10-24 062, Citation Nr: 1428904, Dec. Date 06/24/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014d). Docket No. 07-26 444, Citation Nr: 1435568, Dec. Date 07/26/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014e). Docket No. 7-26 444, Citation Nr: 1435568, Dec. Date 08/08/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014f). Docket No. 08-15 634, Citation Nr: 1436766, Dec. Date 08/15/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014g). Docket No. 10-26 039, Citation Nr: 1437024, Dec. Date 08/29/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014h). Docket No. 11-29 005, Citation Nr: 14444081, Dec. Date 10/03/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014i). Docket No. 10-05 271, Citation Nr: 144880, Dec. Date 10/082014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014j). Docket No. 07-07 385, Citation Nr: 1446194, Dec. Date 10/17/2014.

  • Board of Veterans Appeals (2014k). Docket No. 10-13 310, Citation Nr: 1448125, Dec. Date 10/30/2014.

  • California Association of County Veteran Service Officers. (2012). Character of discharge and VA benefits. Retrieved from http://www.cacvso.org/assets/cacvso%20sd%202012/character%20of%20discharge.pdf.

  • Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995).

  • Cartright v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 24, 25 (1991).

  • Cropper v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 450 (1994).

  • Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990).

  • Grachek, J. E. (2006). The insanity defense in the twenty-first century: how recent United States Supreme Court case law can improve the system. Indiana Law Journal, 81(4), 1479–1501 14th ser. Retrieved November 11, 2016, from http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol81/iss4/14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harder v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 183, 188 (1993).

  • Lande, R. G. (1990). Disposition of insanity acquittees in the United States military. American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 18, 303–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laruan v. West, no 96-197 (1998).

  • LeShore v. Brown, 8 Vet App 406 (1995).

  • Lockey, C. J., & Bloom, J. D. (2007). The evolution of the American Law Institute test for insanity in Oregon: focus on diagnosis. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry Law, 35(3), 325–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • M’Naghten’s case (1843) UKHL J16 (19 June 1843). Retrieved October 11, 2016, from the British and Irish Legal Information Institute http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1843/J16.html.

  • Moering, R. G. (2011). Military service records: searching for the truth. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mona, M. L., Diebold, C. J., & Walton, A. B. (2006). Update on the dispositions of military insanity acquittees. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 24(4), 538–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, S. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of psychology and law: Insanity Defense Reform Act (IDRA). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulta-Ali, U. and Panangala, S.V. (2015). Congressional Research Service. Veteran’s benefits: the impact of military discharges on basic eligibility. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43928.pdf.

  • Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008).

  • Office of the United States Attorneys. (n.d.). Insanity—present statutory test—18 U.S.C. § 17(a). Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-637-insanity-present-statutory-test-18-usc-17a.

  • Reonal v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 458, 460 (1993).

  • Ridgway, J. D. (2011). Mind reading and the art of drafting medical opinions in veteran benefit claims. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 171–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolf, C. A. (2006). From M'Naghten to Yates—transformation of the insanity defense in the United States—is it still viable? River College Online Academic Journal, 2(1), 1–18 Retrieved October 14, 2016, from https://www.rivier.edu/journal/ROAJ-2006-Spring/J41-ROLF.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Benitez v. West, 13 Vet. App. 282 (1999).

  • Scott, C. (2011). Congressional Research Service. Veteran’s benefits: dependency and indemnity compensation for survivors. Retrieved from http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40757.pdf.

  • Stringham v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 445, 449 (1995).

  • Struck v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 145 (1996).

  • U.S Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. (2014). Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Benefits Report. Retrieved from http://www.benefits.va.gov/REPORTS/abr/ABR_FY2013_Compensation_07172014.pdf.

  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Talent Management Systems. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.tms.va.gov/learning/user/login.jsp.

  • United States Armed Forces. (2000). Manual for courts-martial, United States, rules for courts-martial. Retrieved from http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/mcm.pdf.

  • United States Armed Forces. (2012). Manual for courts-martial, United States, rules for courts-martial. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/MCM-2012.pdf.

  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of General Council. (1997) Definition of insanity (VAOPGCPREC 20-97). Retrieved from http://www.va.gov/ogc/opinions/1997precedentopinions.asp.

  • Veterans Benefits Administration. (2012a). VA adjudication and procedure manual, M21-1, part III, Subpt. iv. CH.5, § 5(c).

  • Veterans Benefits Administration. (2012b). VA adjudication and procedure manual, M21-1, part III, Subpt. iv. CH.5, § 2(a).

  • Veterans Benefits Administration. (2015a). VA adjudication and procedure manual, M21-1, part III, Subpt, V. CH.1, § B1(a).

  • Veterans Benefits Administration. (2015b). VA adjudication and procedure manual, M21-1, part III, Subpt, V. CH.1, § D1(a).

  • White v. Principi, 243 F.3d 1378 (Fed Cir 2001).

  • Worthen, M. D., & Moering, R. G. (2011). A practical guide to conducting VA compensation and pension exams for PTSD and other mental disorders. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zang v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 246, 254, (1995).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Jeffrey Garbelman

Authors
  1. Jeffrey Garbelman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey Garbelman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (national and institutional). Informed consent was not required as all data was retrieved from public domain databases.

Animal Rights

No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garbelman, J. The Insanity Exemption to Other than Honorable Discharge for the Purpose of Claiming Benefits: The Role of the Mental Health Examiner. Psychol. Inj. and Law 10, 177–190 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-017-9285-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-017-9285-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation