332639
Veterans With Schizophrenia: How They Fare in Veterans Appeals vs. Other Court Systems
Veterans’ Courts of Appeals are federal courts having exclusive jurisdiction to review decisions of the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The Court provides review of administrative decisions that are contrary to the veteran-appellant's claim of entitlement to benefits for service-connected disabilities and survivor benefits.
The methodological approach in the study is empirical legal scholarship, in which court cases are the unit of analysis. It allows for analysis that is not based on a single organization, service provider, or site.
The data for this study are cases litigated in 2013 and 2014 in state and federal courts obtained through a Lexis Nexis search. Search terms were “Schizophrenia” and “veteran.” There was a total N of 253 for all court levels, including 135 for Veterans Court of Appeals. Multiple coders classified the following data: service-connected, physical and psychological disabilities comorbidity, medications and their various side effects, homelessness, substance abuse, among others.
The analysis of case outcomes included financial compensation awarded (and to whom) and whether there was a need for additional medical care--either for the schizophrenia or for related illnesses. When the VA prevails, it can be viewed that the services provided were, objectively, medically appropriate and the veteran might have been too mentally ill to determine such adequacy of treatment. The results have policy implications for the VA Health System.
Learning Areas:
Planning of health education strategies, interventions, and programsPublic health or related public policy
Learning Objectives:
Compare the medical and physical issues and conditions brought by veterans to Veterans Courts Of Appeals vs. other court systems.
Identify whether medical care provided by the VA Health Systems was medically appropriate as viewed by courts or medically inappropriate as viewed by veterans with schizophrenia.
Keyword(s): Veterans' Health, Law
Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have the following academic qualifications: I hold a PhD and I have several prior conference presentations on the subject of how individuals with schizophrenia fare in courts. I have conducted e and published several journal using empirical legal research methodology. I have the following clinical qualifications: I am a Licensed Professional Counselor, familiar with schizophrenia as a mental illness. My co-author is currently a professional at a VA Hospital.
Any relevant financial relationships? No
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.
Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: Melissa LaVan, MS/MA, is a doctoral student at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology. She has completed clinical training at an inpatient addiction unit at Holy Family Medical Center and an intensive outpatient program for addiction at Jesse Brown VA. Presently, she is doing clinical training at Kennedy-King College. Research interests include cognitive psychology and intersections of psychology and the legal system. Her dissertation is investigating the use of neuropsychology in the US Legal System.
Any relevant financial relationships? No
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.