Eligibility for VA benefits

[MNJOE]

I have posted in the past that I am a veteran and a social worker that works for the VAat theMinneapolis MN, treating vets with addictive disorders and mental health problems.
I have been back to the VA since April of this year and one thing keeps giving me pause and rankles me a little bit, so I thought that I would see what others thought?
I work with vets ranging in ages of early 20's to late 70's who are Korea era, Vietnam era, Desert Storm era and OIF/OEF (Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom) and many who have served in-between.
Up until April of 1980 a veteran could qualify for VA services having as little as 30 consecutive days active duty service with an honorable discharge or general discharge under honorable conditions. After April 1980 veterans are required to have served 180 or more consecutive days of active duty with said discharges under honorable conditions. In addition there are exceptions to these qualifications given specific injury, condition or circumstances as well.
Most veterans I work with have served honorably in the military, but there are a significant number that are eligible for services that were separated/discharge from the militarywhile in initial training, such as basic training or techinical training due to issues such as "inability to adapt to military service," or for behavioral issues, yet get the honorable discharge or general discharge under honorable conditions, thus eligible for VA benefits and services.
For example one veteran only served 36 days consecutive active duty and received services until he chose to leave/it was discovered that he was a level 3 sex offender that left as he did not register and did not wish to.
I struggle with accepting that "veterans" of this ilk, that "did not really serve," are eligible for services, take spots of more deserving and cost tax-payers significant $.
I am curious what others think?

[Strange Biller]

As a vet myself, I understand what you are saying and on the one hand I certainly don't want people who basically voluntarilly separated during basic or were sex offenders taking up money and services that "good" vetsneed. On the other hand, I'm wondering if they allow this because it is a way to cast a wider net, so to speak, for vets that served even a short time but weren't separated for reasons of their own doing. For example, if a guy who really wants to be a soldier blows out his knee in basic and is medically discharged, I think he should get VA services regardless of whether he did it in the 8th week or the second day.

Seems like there must be a better way to determine eligibility without just letting ineveryone who ever threw a uniform on, though.

[Strange Biller]

To me, the length of time really shouldn't have anything to do with it if you were medically discharged - if I go to work for, say, Home Depot and I have a work related injury on my first day, their worker's comp owns me regardless of how long I am disabled for. Seems like it should be the same for the military.

[MNJOE]

I agree with you Strange Biller, that length of time served active duty should not matter and doesn't if there is a service connected physical injury or mental health issue. I guess what I am really talking to is the folks having very limited service, such as the vet with only 36 days, that have no injury or condition, but still qualify due to past or present eligibiilty standards, such as the sex offender that I mentioned.

[Strange Biller]

I see what you mean - I don't think those folks deserve much if anything. Seems like there has to be an easy enough way to weed people like that out.

[MNJOE]

Anyone else have opinions? You do not have to be a vet to have an opinion. My example is sort of like an illegal cuban alien being eligible for social security after being in our country for 30 days.........

[Lanse couche couche]

Dunno, I had about a month of USMC Officer Candidates school before getting discharged out because of stress fractures in both legs. Don't think that it qualifies me to have much of an opinion, but I would think that if someone completes training, then is discharged after any length of time, then they should be eligible for benefits, unless they are rendered ineligible because of negative behavior during their period of service.