Question
When World War I ended in 1918 more than 4.6 million men returned to the United States from war. The American people and the US government were unprepared to reintegrate and care for the men who returned with physical injuries and psychological damage that would affect veterans for the rest of their lives.
According to the Library of Congress, 224,000 soldiers returned home with a permanent physical or mental disability. Of the injured, 4,400 were amputees. Almost 100,000 soldiers had been removed from combat due to psychological injuries and 40,000 of them were subsequently discharged.1 With no government agency dedicated to veteran’s affairs at the time, responsibilities for veterans were scattered between several agencies. On January 29, 1919, “Rules for the Discharge of Disabled US Soldiers” were published in the Official US Bulletin, issued by the US War Department and the Office of the Surgeon General.
Despite the nation’s good intentions, disabled veterans were overwhelmed with confusing paperwork to fill out. Many WWI veterans faced unemployment, poor housing conditions, and inadequate medical care. As a result, veterans and other Americans founded organizations like the Disabled American Veterans of the World War and the American Legion to support and fight for the rights of disabled veterans. Their efforts led Congress to establish the US Veterans Bureau in 1921, which was a precursor to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
EXCERPTS
[“]It is the policy of the War Department to retain, so far as practicable under military control, for the purpose of medical and surgical treatment (a) officers and soldiers suffering from acute diseases or acute exacerbations of chronic diseases or unhealed lesions; (b) officers and soldiers suffering from communicable diseases or who are ‘carriers,’ whose discharge would be a danger to the civil community; (c) officers and soldiers suffering from disabilities incurred in the line of duty which are correctible within their terms of service or enlistment; (d) officers and soldiers suffering from chronic or permanent disabilities incurred in the line of duty, which are susceptible of improvement by measures for mental or physical reconstruction designed to fit them for return to their homes, for the resumption of their former vocations, or, with their consent, for the industrial opportunities or the training courses provided by the Federal Board for Vocational Education.
“In the accomplishment of this policy, it is the intention to restore officers and soldiers, who are held in service as provided above, to health and function as fully as possible, considering the nature of their disabilities, the limitations of the military service, and other provisions which the Government has made for the care of the permanently disabled.
Constructed Response Question
[Extended Response]
Shell shock–now known as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)–was not an unfamiliar result or side effect of war. The sheer numbers of men suffering from it during and after the war was staggering. Hypothesize if the government effectively address this issue? Support your claim with evidence from the source(s).
According to the Library of Congress, 224,000 soldiers returned home with a permanent physical or mental disability. Of the injured, 4,400 were amputees. Almost 100,000 soldiers had been removed from combat due to psychological injuries and 40,000 of them were subsequently discharged.1 With no government agency dedicated to veteran’s affairs at the time, responsibilities for veterans were scattered between several agencies. On January 29, 1919, “Rules for the Discharge of Disabled US Soldiers” were published in the Official US Bulletin, issued by the US War Department and the Office of the Surgeon General.
Despite the nation’s good intentions, disabled veterans were overwhelmed with confusing paperwork to fill out. Many WWI veterans faced unemployment, poor housing conditions, and inadequate medical care. As a result, veterans and other Americans founded organizations like the Disabled American Veterans of the World War and the American Legion to support and fight for the rights of disabled veterans. Their efforts led Congress to establish the US Veterans Bureau in 1921, which was a precursor to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
EXCERPTS
[“]It is the policy of the War Department to retain, so far as practicable under military control, for the purpose of medical and surgical treatment (a) officers and soldiers suffering from acute diseases or acute exacerbations of chronic diseases or unhealed lesions; (b) officers and soldiers suffering from communicable diseases or who are ‘carriers,’ whose discharge would be a danger to the civil community; (c) officers and soldiers suffering from disabilities incurred in the line of duty which are correctible within their terms of service or enlistment; (d) officers and soldiers suffering from chronic or permanent disabilities incurred in the line of duty, which are susceptible of improvement by measures for mental or physical reconstruction designed to fit them for return to their homes, for the resumption of their former vocations, or, with their consent, for the industrial opportunities or the training courses provided by the Federal Board for Vocational Education.
“In the accomplishment of this policy, it is the intention to restore officers and soldiers, who are held in service as provided above, to health and function as fully as possible, considering the nature of their disabilities, the limitations of the military service, and other provisions which the Government has made for the care of the permanently disabled.
Constructed Response Question
[Extended Response]
Shell shock–now known as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)–was not an unfamiliar result or side effect of war. The sheer numbers of men suffering from it during and after the war was staggering. Hypothesize if the government effectively address this issue? Support your claim with evidence from the source(s).
Answers
GPT-4o mini
The government’s response to the issue of psychological injuries, particularly shell shock (now known as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD), among World War I veterans was ultimately ineffective and inadequate. The scale of the problem was far greater than the government’s capacity to address it, leading to significant challenges for returning veterans.
One key piece of evidence from the provided text is the fact that almost 100,000 soldiers were removed from combat due to psychological injuries, with a substantial number—40,000 of them—subsequently discharged. This statistic indicates a severe and widespread issue. However, despite these alarming numbers, the government lacked a cohesive, dedicated agency focused exclusively on veterans’ affairs at the time. Responsibilities for veterans’ reintegration and care were scattered among multiple agencies, creating a disorganized and confusing system. This fragmentation made it extremely difficult for veterans to receive the help they needed.
Furthermore, the bureaucratic hurdles faced by veterans are highlighted in the text's discussion of the “confusing paperwork” they had to navigate. With no specialized support or comprehensive guidelines for handling mental health issues, many veterans struggled to claim the care and rehabilitation they required, resulting in overwhelming feelings of frustration and neglect. The lack of a streamlined process or clearly defined help signals an inadequate governmental response to the post-war mental health crisis.
Although organizations such as the Disabled American Veterans of the World War and the American Legion emerged to advocate for veterans’ rights, it underscores the inadequacy of the government's initial approach. The fact that it took until 1921 for Congress to establish the US Veterans Bureau—recognizing veterans' unique needs—further illustrates that the government was slow to react effectively to the needs of returning soldiers dealing with PTSD and other disabilities.
In summary, the evidence suggests that government efforts to address the issue of PTSD among World War I veterans were insufficient and poorly coordinated. The overwhelming numbers of affected veterans, combined with fragmented governmental responsibility and bureaucratic inefficiencies, indicate a failure to properly support those who had served their country, particularly concerning mental health issues stemming from the war.
One key piece of evidence from the provided text is the fact that almost 100,000 soldiers were removed from combat due to psychological injuries, with a substantial number—40,000 of them—subsequently discharged. This statistic indicates a severe and widespread issue. However, despite these alarming numbers, the government lacked a cohesive, dedicated agency focused exclusively on veterans’ affairs at the time. Responsibilities for veterans’ reintegration and care were scattered among multiple agencies, creating a disorganized and confusing system. This fragmentation made it extremely difficult for veterans to receive the help they needed.
Furthermore, the bureaucratic hurdles faced by veterans are highlighted in the text's discussion of the “confusing paperwork” they had to navigate. With no specialized support or comprehensive guidelines for handling mental health issues, many veterans struggled to claim the care and rehabilitation they required, resulting in overwhelming feelings of frustration and neglect. The lack of a streamlined process or clearly defined help signals an inadequate governmental response to the post-war mental health crisis.
Although organizations such as the Disabled American Veterans of the World War and the American Legion emerged to advocate for veterans’ rights, it underscores the inadequacy of the government's initial approach. The fact that it took until 1921 for Congress to establish the US Veterans Bureau—recognizing veterans' unique needs—further illustrates that the government was slow to react effectively to the needs of returning soldiers dealing with PTSD and other disabilities.
In summary, the evidence suggests that government efforts to address the issue of PTSD among World War I veterans were insufficient and poorly coordinated. The overwhelming numbers of affected veterans, combined with fragmented governmental responsibility and bureaucratic inefficiencies, indicate a failure to properly support those who had served their country, particularly concerning mental health issues stemming from the war.