Advertising Disclaimer

eLetters is an online forum for ongoing peer review. To submit an eLetter please go to the article you wish to respond to and click on the link that reads "eLetters: Submit an Eletter." Submission of eLetters are open to all health care professionals and experts in related fields.

For full eLetters guidelines,click here


eLetters to:

COMMENTARIES:
Carl E. Stafstrom
Counseling Youth About Military Service Options and Selective Service Registration: An Integral Part of Anticipatory Guidance of Adolescents
Pediatrics 2007; 119: 1199-1203 [Full text] [PDF]
*

eLetters published:

[Read eLetters] Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …”
Jed Jacobson, Edward Saltzman, Arnold Tanis, Robert Pittell, Philip Levin, et. al.   (1 June 2007)
[Read eLetters] Re: Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …”
Lars E. Kula   (20 June 2007)
[Read eLetters] Science or political agenda
R. Michael Green, none   (3 July 2007)

Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …” 1 June 2007
 Next eLetters Top
Jed Jacobson,
Pediatrician
Pediatric Associates (South Florida),
Edward Saltzman, Arnold Tanis, Robert Pittell, Philip Levin, et. al.

Send letter to journal:
Re: Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …”

jjj2{at}ix.netcom.com Jed Jacobson, et al.

I found Dr. Saftstom’s interesting commentary advocating pediatric anticipatory guidance regarding military service provocative, in the best sense of the word. It’s a subject that has received little if any attention in the pediatric literature. He makes several cogent points describing the risks of military service and strategies for interfacing with current military recruitment efforts and anticipating potential changes in the laws regarding future conscription. He clearly makes an effort to avoid politicizing a very contentious issue and on the whole presents a well balanced statement.

Having served in the US Navy in South Vietnam in 1967 as one of several pediatricians caring for Vietnamese children, I may have a somewhat unique perspective. While I personally found my tour of duty rewarding; there are certainly grave risks to military service, as there are obvious and subtle risks to claiming Conscientious Objector status. Who amongst us, in a busy pediatric practice, has the time and factual information to present this topic in a balanced comprehensive fashion? If we are willing to discuss alleged recruiting abuses and risks of combat, are we also going to discuss the social contract and the responsibilities of citizenship? How do we keep our personal philosophy from biasing our presentation? My concern is that by including this discussion in our counseling, not only will it decrease the time available for addressing more familiar issues such as substance abuse, smoking, safe sex, obesity, education, etc.; it also has the potential to place us on a slippery slope towards proselytization, and consequently adversely affect our credibility when dealing with more prosaic topics. Clearly, pediatricians can discuss any subject with their patients, including their personal views; but I believe that our roles as honest brokers of useful information can be compromised when we present unbalanced information about divisive issues; which I fear in this case is unavoidable. In my opinion, this topic is best left to public forums and open discussions where personal views can be expressed, announced, and understood.

Jed J. Jacobson, MD FAAP

Conflict of Interest:

None declared

Re: Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …” 20 June 2007
Previous eLetters Next eLetters Top
Lars E. Kula,
Pediatrician
Holliston Pediatrics

Send letter to journal:
Re: Re: Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …”

kula{at}massmed.org Lars E. Kula

Counseling Youth About Military Service Options and Selective Service Registration: An Integral Part of Anticipatory Guidance of Adolescents: In Reply

To the Editor,

Dr. Carl Stafstrom’s insightful commentary(1), on the consideration of military service by our nation’s youth, reviews issues critical to the lives of these adolescents. Dr Stafstrom highlights the moral duty we have to protect and nourish the health and well-being of our teenagers. His call to better inform potential recruits fits easily into the mission of the American Academy of Pediatrics, being “committed to the attainment of optimal physical, mental, and social health and well-being for all infants, children, adolescents and young adults”.

I must respectfully differ from the P3R response of Jed J. Jacobson, MD, FAAP(2), commenting that “our roles as honest brokers of useful information can be compromised when we present unbalanced information about divisive issues…” I feel that there is a moral obligation of disclosure, and these issues must be raised with parents and patients. Sir William Osler stated, “The practice of medicine is an art, not a trade; a calling, not a business; a calling in which your heart will be exercised equally with your head. Often the best part of your work will have nothing to do with potions and powders, but with the exercise of an influence of the strong upon the weak, of the righteous upon the wicked, of the wise upon the foolish.”

I cannot remain neutral about such an important threat as the possible death and disability of adolescents and young adults serving in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. The adolescents of my practice who consider military service deserve full disclosure of all threats, and all options available to them.

Recently, military fatalities surpassed 3900 deaths, and wounded totaled over 28,000(3). Blast exposures are now the most common form of injury. Data from the Joint Theater Trauma Registry (US Army) reveals that 22% of injured soldiers coming through the military’s Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany reported injuries to the head, face and neck(4). Many of these soldiers have Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), with lasting neuropsychological impairments. Additionally, estimates of psychological stress are summarized in “The Psychological Needs of U.S. Military Service Members and Their Families: A Preliminary Report,” American Psychological Association, February 2007(5). Psychological issues due to combat experiences are estimated between 11 and 18%. The most common disorder is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and it is found with greater frequency amongst soldiers with longer deployments.

As Pediatricians, we must remember the additional risks to the children and families of these soldiers during and after deployments. This APA report states that there are 1.2 million dependent children of our 1.4 million soldiers in active duty. Amongst the National Guard and the Reserve, there are 700,000 dependent children for the 900,000 forces. These children suffer the psychological burden of deployment, or the death or disability of a parent, and deserve our attention.

Finally, we must not forget the untold suffering of the children of Iraq and Afghanistan. As fellows of the Academy, our moral and professional responsibility is to advocate for the health and well-being of our community’s children. But, in this modern age, the community of our children must extend to the youth of all nations. We must speak out and promote open discussion about the war. We must fully inform our adolescent patients about military service. And we must support our returning servicemen and women, and their dependent families, in their struggle of readjustment. We cannot be frozen by a desire to maintain professional neutrality.

Albert Einstein, the renown physicist of German birth, was sixty years old in 1939. He was already living in the United States, and was granted US citizenship in the following year. He stated “the world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.”

References

1. Stafstrom, Carl E. “Counseling Youth About Military Service Options and Selective Service Registration: An Integral Part of Anticipatory Guidance of Adolescents” Pediatrics 2007; 119: 1199-1203. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/119/6/1199

2. Jacobson, J. “Counseling Youth About Military Service Options …” June 1, 2007 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/eletters/119/6/1199#8118

3. US Department of Defense, June 19, 2007 http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf

4. Okie,S., “Traumatic Brain Injury in the War Zone” NEJM, Vol. 352:2043-2047 May 19, 2005 Number 20 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/352/20/2043

5. Johnson, SJ, et al., in “The Psychological Needs of U.S. Military Service Members and Their Families: A Preliminary Report,” American Psychological Association, Presidential Task Force on Military Deployment Services for Youth, Family and Service Members. February 2007 www.apa.org/releases/MilitaryDeploymentTaskForceReport.pdf

Conflict of Interest:

None declared

Science or political agenda 3 July 2007
Previous eLetters  Top
R. Michael Green,
Primary Care - Internal Medicine-Pediatrics
Trinity Medical Associates,
none

Send letter to journal:
Re: Science or political agenda

neergm{at}comcast.net R. Michael Green, et al.

Many of my colleagues have mentioned that they have cancelled their aap membership over the last few years. I have continued mine. The prevailed opinion among many pediatricians that I come in contact with is that there has been an increasing political and social agenda pushed through the aap and publications. Another way to look on this is that there has been an absence of filtering of political or social opinion in a medical organization. The causes that have flourished have been distinctly liberal.

I have remained silent on this, thus far. I do not know if you read Pediatrics, but in the June edition there is an article that has me on the brink of canceling my membership. This article has elements that are objective and needed. The article proposes discussing military options with adolescents. A good idea. The author simply crosses the line when he make it clear that we, as pediatricians should be ready to provide information to persuade teens to avoid their obligations to register or become conscientious objector. The article even includes a link to a web site with Cindy Sheehan.

Does the officer address anything positive regarding military service? No. Does he mention the incredible sacrifice brave and patriotic young men and women have made for centuries for our freedom? No.

Do such political opinions belong in a pediatric journal? No. Why should I contribute to an organization that continues to allow a subtle liberal bent with a nice coat of academia?

R. Michael Green

Conflict of Interest:

None declared