:
Thank you, Mr. President.
First of all, I was told that I had ten minutes, so I'm ready for ten minutes. I'll present it in French, if you don't mind.
[Translation]
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would also like to thank the members of this committee for having allowed us to come and testify before you today.
[English]
I am sure that you will understand that I'm a little nervous being here, so I will try the best I can to explain our situation to you.
[Translation]
It is with great interest that we have been following the work of the committee and it is a privilege to be able to contribute to furthering a cause that has profoundly affected our respective lives, as well as the lives of our four children.
My husband, Sergeant Claude Rainville, retired from the Canadian Armed Forces in December 1998, at the age of 37, after 20 years of loyal services. As a traffic technician, he spent most of his career aboard a Hercules C-130. He participated in a large number of missions, including 17 months in Haiti and in Damascus. He also participated in the Gulf war, the Iran-Iraq war, the Rwanda mission, etc.
In July of this year, he received a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder from the Ste. Anne's Centre. Since then, he has been undergoing intensive treatment and taking medication.
It was a real challenge for him to be here today. The past years have been difficult and demanding, but today, we finally understand why. I would also like to inform you that he is willing to answer your questions, but that he is still very vulnerable. It is for this reason that, if he should be unable to answer questions due to an emotional reaction, he would like to have me answer on his behalf, Mr. Chairman.
First, I would like to briefly explain why he was not diagnosed until nine years after having received an honourable discharge from the Canadian Armed Forces.
First, in 2005, a burnout forced him to stop working yet again. In despair, he sought to return to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Second, in February 2006, he learned that he had been refused due to a severe depression, diagnosed before he left the forces in 1998. Only then did we read the content of his military medical file and realize that a major error had been committed. When he was discharged, he was assigned the rating 4(a), indicating that he was in perfect health and that there were no restrictions on his returning to the Canadian Forces. However, the physician who examined him upon his discharge had indicated that he suffered from severe depression.
Therefore, in March 2007, on the recommendation of his brother, who is also a former serviceman, my spouse contacted Veterans Affairs Canada in order to obtain psychological assistance, because he no longer knew where to turn. I should mention that in the years following his discharge, he consulted a number of health professionals because he needed help returning to the civilian world and dealing with his many problems.
At the outset, I have no opinion to offer on the programs provided by Veterans Affairs Canada, because we are still awaiting answers. Far be it from me to criticize the current system, but I feel that the program access could, in some respects, be better adapted to the needs of the clients. Allow me to explain.
When my husband first contacted VAC, in March 2007, he clearly requested help, and this was a last resort. He was then asked about the nature of the physical and psychological problems he was experiencing. The pension officer's assistant explained that she would send him some forms and that all he had to do was fill them out and return them with the medical opinions required by mid-July. She also explained that he would be contacted in order to schedule a psychiatric assessment with the Ste. Anne's Centre.
Up until then, the process seemed relatively simple to me, but my spouse was convinced that Veterans Affairs Canada was in cahoots with the Canadian Armed Forces and that they would do everything in their power to harm him.
At the time, I would like to point out, we had begun a battle—and I do not use the word lightly—with the Canadian Armed Forces in order to have the error made in 1998 officially recognized and to change the grounds for the discharge that had been assigned at the time. I will spare you the details, but believe me, I could say a great deal to the national defence committee on this topic.
In short, my spouse was extremely wary with regard to Veterans Affairs Canada, due to his psychological state, but also because he was not familiar with this organization. Indeed, shortly after his first contact with VAC, we received a plethora of forms to fill out: applications for a disability pension, applications for rehabilitation, etc.
I can't remember how we were put into contact with a resource person from the OSISS, who scheduled a meeting with us to give us some tips on how to fill out the forms associated with my husband's physical and psychological problems, and to briefly inform us of what we would have to do next.
I have had experience managing a local grants program, and as part of this project I had to help communities fill out applications for provincial and federal grants. During the meeting, it was clear that the person was not acting on behalf of Veterans Affairs, and I quickly realized the amount of work in store for me.
I therefore filled out all the forms, one for each of my husband's problems. I spent hours asking my husband questions, searching through his military files and his photos and trying to get him to talk about his painful experiences. It was as painful for him as it was for me, and I felt powerless in the face of so much suffering. But the result appeared satisfactory, because my husband's pension officer told him that it was only the second time that he had seen such a complete file and that he would be able to send the files to Charlottetown for analysis without making any changes. With a few exceptions, each of the applications was between 10 and 20 pages long.
It is difficult for me to believe that Veterans Affairs leaves it up to the clients to fill out such forms, without providing any real support. I realize today that any assistance we receive depends on these very documents, along with the medical opinions. It is thus clear to me that there are inadequate services in this regard.
The pension officer's assistant did tell us that we could contact her as needed, but she probably would not have spent hours on the phone with us, asking my husband about the links between his current problems and his military service, or trying to evaluate the impact of these problems on his quality of life. She would probably not have taken the time to look at his photos along with him in order to tell him which one would best support his application.
Contacting the people responsible for the file is not easy either. Often, we cannot even leave a voicemail message. After asking us the reason for our call, the person who answers at the call centre in New Brunswick, or some place, tells us that she will leave a message for the person responsible and that we will be contacted later. Sometimes—and this is something that I have experienced—the message is given to the wrong person. Neither are we told if someone else is available to answer our questions. Nothing. When the client is already emotionally fragile, this does nothing to help him.
In September of this year, I tried to contact one Mr. Goyer, the boss of my husband's pension officer, in order to tell him about the situation. I explained to his secretary that the services were inadequate and I even went so far as to offer my services if ever a pilot project was developed. I knew full well that this would probably not make a difference, but at least I felt that I had done my civic duty.
A few weeks later, a coordinator, whose name I no longer recall, contacted me in order to convince me that the process was efficient. However, I maintain my position that it is not.
In any case, thanks to the psychiatric assessment required, my husband was taken on by the Ste. Anne's Centre and now receives services there. We can only commend the professionalism, dedication and efficiency of this extraordinary team. During his first consultations, my husband was so emotionally fragile that I am sincerely convinced that without the assistance given by the members of this team, he would not be with us here today.
There is still a long way to go, but already my husband is doing better.
The team at St. Anne's Centre has become a lifesaver, both from a psychological standpoint—of course—and from an administrative standpoint. That takes me to another point involving the clarification and coordination of roles played by all parties who work on cases.
Health care providers at St. Anne's Centre can see the seriousness of my spouse's condition. As well as they can, they try to work with Veterans Affairs Canada to accelerate the process of examining files and allocating financial aid, focusing particularly on the pension officer and advisor for the sector.
At present, services are poorly assigned and coordinated. Let me give you a tangible example. My spouse withdrew from professional activity on July 23rd of this year. I should point out that, even though he was officially working, for years I had been doing over 70% of his work in addition to my own. We had no other option, because his military pension and my salary were not enough to support our family. Thus, after he stopped work as ordered by St. Anne's Centre, the social worker who dealt with my spouse informed VAC officers of the fact, so that he could quickly receive benefits under the assistance program. In July, I myself sent an email to my spouse's pension officer to tell him that he had stopped working. Here is what the officer said to my spouse, and I quote:
[English]
“We won't let you down, Mr. Rainville.” Since then, no news.
[Translation]
Now, four months later, my spouse has exhausted his 15 weeks of employment insurance sickness benefits, and is not entitled to private-sector insurance because his mental health problems are not directly work-related, and he has had other periods during which he stopped working. To date, we still do not know what kind of assistance he could actually be entitled to.
Even though he cannot, he is still considering going back to work in January to help us make ends meet, not because he is able to work but because my salary alone is not enough to support the family. Fortunately, we are well organized—in October of last year, my spouse's sector advisor asked him to return a rehabilitation form that she was unable to find. We managed to send her the copy that we had digitized in April.
Yesterday, we learned that rehabilitation assistance was pending. Since my spouse has no pension number and since that service is also pending the psychiatric evaluation from St. Anne's Centre, a document that we had already sent to other VAC services, he himself had to contact his social worker to ensure that his examination and report could be faxed that very morning.
Would there be some way of assigning a file manager to a given client, a file manager who could receive, coordinate and route information that concerns and directly affects the client to all the departments and sectors that need them? Once again, that lack of coordination simply delays the process and increases my spouse's anxiety, as well as my own.
Lastly, I would like to point out that, since 2000, all the health care professionals my spouse has met outside the Forces—be it his family physician, two psychiatrists ans a psychologist, among others, have entered in his records, either as part of an official assessment or in his file, that he suffers from post-traumatic stress syndrome. However, nobody has referred or directed him to St. Anne's Centre, or at least informed him of its existence. If only one of those health care professionals had mentioned the hospital, these last few years would have been far better for our entire family. Is this because the hospital is not well enough known? I have no answer to that question.
I would like to say that living with someone who has post-traumatic stress syndrome has impacts and repercussions on all members of the family. Without blowing my own trumpet, however, I believe I have succeeded in minimizing the damage. I am 35 years old, and sometimes I feel 70. I would really have appreciated the help provided by St. Anne's Centre for Claude, for us all and for our children before this summer.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
:
I sleep beside Claude. But he is very agitated in his sleep. He has nightmares, he wakes up in a panic, and a sweat, and tries to catch his breath. I know that he is having a nightmare. I remember his nightmares, though he does not. I can tell you what he dreams about, and he dreams a lot.
He does not get enough sleep, he has difficulty in maintaining some kind of balance within the family. There is an effort to try to have a normal family life, but we cannot deny that there is some kind of dysfunction within a family where someone has post-traumatic stress syndrome. And when there are children in the family, they experience the repercussions directly, be it because of alcoholism, anxiety attacks, aggression, or other things that come along with all that.
As I said in my testimony, my spouse has managed to keep working all these years. But over the last nine years, he has held twelve jobs and has stopped work three times. There is always financial uncertainty, and there is always the issue of whether he can work, will leave, or will be fired.
The repercussions on the spouse are dreadful. I feel under terrible pressure when I tell myself that I mustn't crack—because if I crack all the family will go under. If I crack, there will no longer be a filter between what my spouse says or does, or other people's attitudes towards him. I don't blame my spouse—and I want to be very clear on that. He is a victim. If there is no filter, it's the children who will suffer.
I consider myself lucky because I am strong. I have enough strength to have succeeded in controlling some of the drift and in minimizing its impact. I am lucky, Mr. Perron, but I know others who are less lucky. There are divorces, there is lack of understanding, there are children who no longer speak to us or don't want anything to do with us any longer. That is how things are. I know friends of my husband, who were in the forces as well, who are in the same situation we are and are socially isolated.
There are many people around us who did not know what was happening with my husband before July. I no longer have any contact with my family. Our friends were no longer coming over. We were completely isolated, because people didn't understand what was happening, and that led to frustration between my husband and myself. When someone would come over and would react, then I would respond. It isn't pleasant having people over like that.
When you don't know what you are dealing with, there is even less understanding. Since July, at least we have a diagnosis. So we can read about PTSD and understand all kinds of things. But before we had the diagnosis, we were working in the dark, wondering when we were going to pack it in and get a divorce. But we are still very attached to each other. I know my husband, and I can't let him down. I refuse to give up on him, but I won't hide the fact that I have thought about it.
[English]
Mr. Chair, I would like to ask my husband if he feels comfortable answering the next question.
No, he has asked me to speak on his behalf.
[Translation]
Yes, there have been periods during which he did think about suicide. As I said earlier, if it had not been for Ste. Anne's Centre—and I am really not trying to make you pity me—I would be a widow today. That is how low we had got. He has had periods of feeling suicidal, along with alcoholism and drug abuse. That is what happens as soon as there is rejection.
Now, I would like to talk to you about periods of rejection, because rejection does not just come from the wife or family, but also from the workplace. My husband went into the Canadian Armed Forces at the age of 17, and came out when he was 37.
During all the years in which we were having problems, after he left the army, I would say: “Darling, it's just because you are having trouble adapting to civilian life.” But during all that time, we were trying to determine why his jobs did not make him happy, why everything was always unsatisfying, why he always had those highs and lows, very low lows. Every time they happened and he realized he had to quit because he did not feel right, that was rejection. He was told that he was useless, good for nothing, and worthless to society.
In 2005, when he said he would like to go back into the armed forces, it is because he thought that during the entire time he was in the army, in the air force, he was somebody, he was successful, he had a rank, promotions and privileges. He felt like a man. After he left the army, he no longer felt like a man.
Since he has been in treatment at the Ste. Anne's Centre, I have occasionally called his case manager, in tears. I said that we were getting to a point where responses just were not the same, that I was worried, and I asked her to do something. I sent her what amounted to a call for help.
Yes, there have been periods where my husband felt suicidal, and at one point I was really afraid that he might do it.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning to both of you.
I certainly want to thank you for sharing in a very honest and open way what is no doubt a very troublesome time—and that's putting it mildly. I certainly sense the hurt, a little bit of anger, and frustration in your voice.
I come from Labrador, which has a strong military history, or at least parts of it have a strong military history. In a certain part of Labrador that I go to—“the Straits”, we call it—I can't go into a household where there is not a picture of somebody in one or the other of the branches of the armed forces. I talk to family members, and even in those short conversations sometimes there is a sense of urgency, a sense of stress, associated with their sons or daughters being in the armed forces and serving in various campaigns. Many of them have gone to Afghanistan.
I want to acknowledge that what has happened to you should never happen to a veteran, to someone who has served our country. I want to thank you, sir, and I want to thank your family for your contribution.
Some hon. members: Hear, hear!
Mr. Todd Russell: Your presentation is quite timely, because you'll read newspaper reports that many of our military are now being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. I would be very disappointed and angered myself if this is the norm—that we have conflicts between various departments, that people are put through the wringer, not just in serving, but once they come out of active duty and want to assume a certain type of normalcy and get the help they require.
You must talk to other people who are veterans. Is your experience a common experience with other veterans in a similar situation? How prevalent do you think it is, just from your own conversations and experiences? Can you maybe make one or two suggestions of how we can improve this?
We have to take it forward. We have a government that touts the military, touts veterans. We have a veterans charter. What the hell is the government doing if it's not responding to the urgent needs? This is not something we can put off. This is in many ways life and death. If the government is not responding to our veterans, then it is a shameful mark on the government and on us as a country.
I want you to share with us for a couple of minutes whether others have experienced this and maybe one or two suggestions of some way we can move this forward. We can't let it stay the status quo.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Mr. Russell.
[Translation]
Yes, I have one or two recommendations I would like to make.
We are far from being alone among the people we know. All the couples and all the families that go through this have similar profiles, if I can call it that.
In my view, the biggest problem is that people still do not know what resources are available. In the current health care system, I often feel that people do not really know much about post-traumatic stress disorder and do not really know how to deal with the experience of armed forces personnel who come to see them.
For example, I could remind Mr. Russell that my husband over the years regularly saw psychologists and psychiatrists. But nobody referred him to Ste. Anne's Centre, the place where he got help.
These veterans have to know about existing resources that are appropriate for them, and those resources have to be made available to the veterans. That is my first recommendation.
People know that I work in the Quebec health care system. Our former army friends know that I work on establishing suicide prevention networks. They call me, and I am the one who tells them that Ste. Anne's Centre is there for them. I am not an expert. And I do not want to criticize the health care professionals who are committed and have incredible workloads—it is just that I really think they are not properly equipped to recognize and treat these veterans, whose circumstances are extremely specific, at least in my corner of the world.
So, Mr. Russell, my recommendations would be to ensure that people know what resources are available, and to make those resources available.
Every two, three or four months, for example, my husband receives a kind of pension statement. It would be so easy to slip a little note in there. Two or three times a year, we get mailings on his pension. That is all I am asking. Over the past few years, I would have read it, seen it, and perhaps recognized our case there. It would at least have encouraged me to seek initial contact.
When the wheel keeps going round but nobody can help you, you end up becoming completely discouraged and wondering where to turn. That is where my husband was at when he contacted Veterans to tell them that he needed help, and that no one could help him. Nobody seemed to understand what he was experiencing, and what he had.
That is my answer.
:
Thank you very much for joining us today, Jenifer and Claude. It's a very poignant story you've told.
I had an opportunity at the beginning of this meeting to speak to you about happier times and better issues, and I was delighted to hear that you had served at Mount Lolo in my riding of Kamloops. I would invite you to come and visit another time; that would be wonderful.
I've been writing notes madly here, trying to put things down as you said them.
What this committee is currently in the process of doing is looking to improve the veterans independence program, as well as reviewing health care, which is part and parcel of that. So your testimony today is extremely helpful in terms of building on the health care review.
I did hear one very constructive piece of advice from you today, that veterans must be made aware of the services available. I was under the impression we were doing that, but perhaps we're not doing it well enough. Your point about advertising the available benefits in the correspondence going out to veterans is a tremendous idea. That will certainly go forward.
On some of the other things I've listened to, I'm very happy to hear you received some help this summer. I share your view of Ste. Anne's. They do a fantastic job.
In terms of what this government is trying to do, we are trying very hard to respond to the needs of our veterans. We value them highly, and we appreciate the fact that we enjoy the democracy we have today because of their service.
So we've put in place $10 million for OSI, or operational stress injury, clinics, which will help many soldiers, and we've put in place an ombudsman. It was $10 million for the first, and $5 million for the second. Now the ombudsman is going to be in a position to help people who are in the circumstances you've been in, too. This is going to be beneficial.
If I heard you correctly, you said that no PTSD victim should have to attend alone, because the paperwork is overwhelming. I think that's another very constructive point. I'm very surprised, though....
You did say—I think I heard you correctly—that the department offered to help, but you didn't feel there was going to be help one-on-one. There was an offer for help—
:
That is a good question.
I am going to tell you what I think about that, because, as I was saying, I certainly understand that these forms have to be filled in, and that conclusive data is required in order for the officials to make a decision.
So people are asked to fill in forms, to comment on their quality of life, to talk about the difficulties they are having such as post-traumatic stress disorder, and they are asked for medical expertise.
I do understand that it is important that people mention the restrictions they face as a result of their condition. Indeed, medical expertise can show that people have limitations in particular areas. For example, in everyday life, if my husband tells you that he cannot be in a crowd, medical expertise can prove that or demonstrate it. However, the fact that he can never attend his children's musical presentations, for example, gives some idea about his quality of life, that he feels strongly about mentioning.
So the idea is to simplify the processing and to lighten the questions to come up with a form that is better adapted to people's situations. In any questionnaire about quality of life the same five or six questions are asked—whether the person is dealing with post-traumatic disorder, lumbar problems or hearing difficulties. So when people are asked whether they can drive a vehicle, it becomes difficult to answer, because the back problem means that they cannot drive, but the post-traumatic stress disorder does not. In the case of some questions—and they are always the same ones—people are afraid of shooting themselves in the foot because there is nothing geared to their particular problem.
So the forms could be simplified and streamlined. Veterans Affairs Canada could, at the very least—and I come back to this once again—provide help in filling in all these forms.
I do not want to table the document I have been referring to, but it contains answers to the questions. People are asked to include photos to explain... I do not want to table the document, Mr. Chairman, first of all, because it is in French only, and second, it does contain private information. I just want to give you an idea of how much work I did for my husband for just one medical problem. The fact is that he has five medical problems, including post-traumatic stress disorder.
We have to look up what he did from a particular year to another year, to give his rank, his duties, and the year of his promotion. We are asked for a great deal of information. This requires a huge amount of research. We had to go through my husband's military reports page by page, as well as his medical records. Personally, I can do that, but not all spouses can.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Jenifer and Claude, I appreciate, as does everyone, your taking the time to come and being so personal with us in terms of what you have experienced and still are experiencing. That's important for us to hear again.
In June we did table a report on PTSD, as you know. This committee has studied and heard numerous witnesses. In many cases we continually, unfortunately, hear the stories that you have portrayed to us today. As was mentioned earlier, we had hosted a group of families so that they could talk to us as families. That was likely one of the most riveting events in terms of all the witnesses who had come before us. Usually they're the professionals. But I think that has been said.
With that, you're relaying some issues. I believe those have been part of...since I don't have the report in front of me. On those issues that you've relayed to us—the process, the communications barriers—I don't think there is a lack of compassion but a lack within the process, or barriers within the process, to communicate adequately.
As Ms. Hinton has indicated, we need to be doing things that are easy for people. I don't care what level of education you have or what your situation is; easy, simple communication is always the key to success within our families and within committees like this—everywhere.
Another thing that's been mentioned is that the ombudsman is in place. We're working on the VIP program now. That is really what we're trying to do. What can we do for our veterans so that we can encourage them, and to go beyond the encouragement, what can we do in terms of ways of keeping them in their home? It has many benefits. It has family benefits and it obviously has financial benefits, but it has social benefits beyond anything financial.
One of the things we heard from all the witnesses is that we continually come up against the lack of professional people out there, and we have it within our public system, with doctors, psychologists, and those professional people we need to help us in Veterans Affairs. I wouldn't mind hearing your comments, if you have some thoughts on how we could get some priority for veterans from those folks when we know that even in our public system we don't have enough to go around. So that's a bit of a concern also.
I was glad to hear you indicate—and you have continually said this, quite honestly—that you were treated well; it's just the process. So I think the message is strong. Unfortunately, in government, it seems to be the process that wrinkles things up. We're trying to simplify that.
To go back a bit, maybe you can help us on expansion of the process. You've talked about the forms, but I'm talking about especially the professional people. Do you have any ideas on how we could integrate and actually use the professional people? You're in the health system, so you might have some ideas.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Of course, one of the concerns we always have is that when anybody in either opposition or government says they're going to do something, then you assume they're going to do it. I'm glad to see that the VIP has been discussed, because we have a letter here, dated June 28, 2005, to a widow of a veteran that said if they formed government they would immediately—and it used the word “immediately”—extend the VIP program to all Second World War and Korean War veterans regardless of the situation, and it hasn't happened yet.
That's an old story that we've sung and danced around for a while, but I feel in many cases that a lot of the folks with PTSD don't have much time; that PTSD will be with your husband, from my understanding, for the rest of his life; and that PTSD also affects the spouse. We've heard that before. But the concern we also express is that PTSD can be transferred from the individual who has it, not only to the spouse, but to the children as well. So this is a generational problem. And we pray it never happens, but your oldest may, unfortunately, without knowing it, then pass it on to his/her kids.
One of the problems we have, of course, is that as the Government of Canada tries to solve the situation of dealing with the individual and the spouse with PTSD, the transferring, unknowingly, of that PTSD to their children and then their children's children causes tremendous problems and unforeseen expenses down the road. What would you recommend to the government that they should do?
I know that you said Ste. Anne's is very helpful for yourselves. But what about the kids? When they call up looking for help, who do they turn to? If, for whatever reason, dad is having a bad day and mom's having a bad day dealing with dad's bad day, who do they turn to? Would you recommend to the government that they put programs or anything in place to assist the children? How would you see that happening? Or should that be a coordinated effort with, say, military family resource centres, with the province, with health boards? How would you, working in the health department....?
I guess I should word it this way: If you're the minister and you see a child of a veteran come to you looking for help, what would you do, or what would you recommend?