Does military veteran status and deployment history impact officer involved shootings? A case–control study

BackgroundDespite veterans’ preference hiring policies by law enforcement agencies, no studies have examined the nature or effects of military service or deployments on health outcomes. This study will examine the effect of military veteran status and deployment history on law enforcement officer (LEO)-involved shootings.MethodsTen years of data were extracted from Dallas Police Department records. LEOs who were involved in a shooting in the past 10 years were frequency matched on sex to LEOs never involved in a shooting. Military discharge records were examined to quantify veteran status and deployment(s). Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of veteran status and deployment history on officer-involved shooting involvement.ResultsRecords were abstracted for 516 officers. In the adjusted models, veteran LEOs who were not deployed were significantly more likely to be involved in a shooting than non-veteran officers. Veterans with a deployment history were 2.9 times more likely to be in a shooting than non-veteran officers.ConclusionsMilitary veteran status, regardless of deployment history, is associated with increased odds of shootings among LEOs. Future studies should identify mechanisms that explain this relationship, and whether officers who experienced firsthand combat exposure experience greater odds of shooting involvement.

Duncan, Robert (Edward) (1919–1988)

Robert Duncan was an American poet, dramatist, and critic central to the San Francisco Renaissance and Black Mountain College. He was born Edward Howard Duncan Jr., renamed Robert Edward Symmes by his Theosophist adoptive parents. He published as Robert Symmes in his early works and finally combined his names to form Robert Duncan in 1941 after his military discharge. After seven years in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and New York, Duncan returned to California in 1945 and remained in the Bay Area until his death in 1988 of kidney disease.

Psychosocial Risk Factors and Other Than Honorable Military Discharge: Providing Healthcare to Previously Ineligible Veterans

Introduction In response to a strong focus on suicide prevention for all veterans, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) recently revised policy to provide emergency mental healthcare for veterans who received Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharges from the military. This current study takes a preliminary step toward identifying demographic, historic, military, clinical, and social characteristics of veterans with OTH discharges. Materials and Methods N = 1,172 Iraq/Afghanistan-era veterans were evaluated between 2005 and 2016 in the multi-site VA Mid-Atlantic Mental Illness, Research, Education and Clinical Center (MIRECC) Study of Post-Deployment Mental Health (PDMH Study). Results Veterans with OTH discharges constituted 2.7% of our sample, approximating the estimated rate in the overall U.S. veteran population. Compared to veterans discharged under honorable conditions, veterans with OTH discharges were more likely to be younger and have greater odds of reporting family history of drug abuse and depression. Further, veterans with OTH discharges reported a lower level of social support and were more likely to be single, endorse more sleep problems, score higher on measures of drug misuse, have a history of incarceration, and meet diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder. A subsequent matching analysis provided further evidence of the association between OTH discharge and two risk factors: drug misuse and incarceration. Conclusion These findings elucidate potential factors associated with veterans with OTH discharges, particularly substance abuse and criminal justice involvement. Results also indicate higher incidence of risk factors that often accompany suicidal ideation and should be a highlighted component of healthcare delivery to this vulnerable cohort of veterans.

No Minor Matter: Underage Soldiers, Parents, and the Nationalization of Habeas Corpus in Civil War America

In the aftermath of the Civil War, state judges lost their long-held right to inquire into the legality of federal detentions, and habeas corpus—once almost solely the business of state courts—was largely transformed into a federal remedy. We argue that the wartime furor surrounding underage enlistees was a key factor in driving this legal change. Scholarship on the use of habeas corpus during the war generally concentrates on cases involving freedom of speech or political association, but thousands of parents and guardians also petitioned Union authorities and state courts to retrieve minor children who had enlisted without their consent. Angrily demanding that the military discharge such youths, they portrayed control over the personhood and labor of minor children as fundamental to American liberty. At the same time, state court judges fought to retrain jurisdiction over such cases as a critical check on federal and military power. We illuminate these conflicts by drawing on a rich array of sources that capture the competing perspectives of federal and state court judges, Lincoln Administration officials, elected representatives, military officers, parents and guardians, and minors themselves. In the process, we show the halting and contested transformation of habeas corpus, the outcome of which ultimately redefined the relationship between American citizens and their government, preventing aggrieved parents from using state courts to safeguard their rights against federal and military authorities, and blocking state courts from querying the legality of federal detentions of any kind.