The Recruitment, Enlistment, and Deployment of HIV-Positive Military Service Members: An Evaluation of South African and U.S. National, Alongside International, Policies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enoch Assan Ninson ◽  
Heather Morgan

ABSTRACT Introduction Since its detection in the early 1980s, HIV and AIDS have claimed 32.7 million lives. The HIV epidemic continues to plague the world with its most devastating effects felt in Eastern and Southern Africa. The exposure, vulnerability, and impact of HIV have been prominent among military personnel due to environmental, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics. Policies have been developed to mitigate its exposure, vulnerability, and impact on the military. However, there are disparities across these policies, especially on recruitment, enlistment, and deployment. These contentions inspired this evaluation, which was designed to provide vital information and insights for militaries developing new HIV policies, for example, the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF). Materials and Methods Content analyses of key documents and secondary resources from South Africa (SA), the USA, and the United Nations and International Labour Organizations were undertaken. The key documents evaluated included HIV and AIDS policies of the SA National Defence Force (SANDF), the U.S. DoD, UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, and International Labour Organization (ILO); national HIV and AIDS policies; and legislations of SA and the USA. Results The SANDF policy permits the recruitment of HIV-positive applicants while the U.S. DoD policy does not. Mandatory pre-employment health assessments including HIV testing is conducted for prospective applicants. Again, discrimination against persons living with HIV (PLHIV) is discouraged by national policies and legislations of both countries and the ILO policy. At the same time, the SA national policy permits discrimination based on requirement of the job.On deployment, the SANDF policy explicitly permits deployment of HIV-positive service members, while the U.S. DoD policy cautiously does so. Both policies support mandatory pre-deployment health assessments in line with the UN peacekeeping policy and medical standards even though voluntary confidential HIV counseling and testing is recommended by the UN. All HIV-positive service members are retained and offered treatment and care services; however, the U.S. DoD policy retires unfit service members after 12 months of consecutive non-deployment. Further, the UN policy repatriates service members with pre-existing medical conditions and pays no compensation for death, injury, or illness, which is due to pre-existing medical conditions or not mission-related. Conclusions First, the contents of the military policies are not very diverse since most militaries do not enlist or deploy PLHIV except few countries including SA. Implementation and interpretation is however inconsistent. Some militaries continue to exclude PLHIV despite the existence of policies that permit their inclusion. Second, discrepancies exist among the military policies, national legislations, and international policies. The UN policy is not coherent and empowers the military to exclude PLHIV. Also, potential costs to be incurred, in the form of compensation and repatriation, seem to be a major factor in the decision to deploy HIV-positive service members. Harmonization of military HIV policies to ensure uniform standards, interpretation, and implementation and the coherence of the UN policy are essential to guide countries developing new policies, for example, GAF.

2020 ◽  
pp. 0095327X2091839
Author(s):  
Robert Ralston ◽  
Matthew Motta ◽  
Jennifer Spindel

Are Americans aware and concerned about White nationalism in the U.S. Military? Our large and demographically representative survey suggests that while most Americans suspect at least some presence of White nationalism in the military, many do not view it as a serious problem; particularly self-identified conservatives and respondents who hold highly favorable views toward military service members. However, in a between-/within-subjects experiment embedded in our survey, we show that providing information about the issue of White nationalism in the U.S. Military increases the public’s overall concern about White nationalism in the U.S. Military.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collin A Sitler ◽  
Larissa F Weir ◽  
Erin A Keyser ◽  
Yovanni Casablanca ◽  
Erica Hope

ABSTRACT Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI) in the U.S. military and accounts for more healthcare visits than the next two most common STIs combined. Human papillomavirus is preventable with a safe, effective, prophylactic vaccine that has been available since 2006, yet vaccination rates remain low. The vaccine is approved for females and males aged 9-45 years for prevention of HPV-related dysplasia and cancers. Although it is recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), it is not part of the U.S. military’s mandatory vaccine list. Human papillomavirus does not just affect female service members—male service members have a higher reported seropositive rate than their civilian counterparts and can develop oropharyngeal, anal, or penile cancers as sequelae of HPV. Oropharyngeal cancer, more common in males, is the fastest growing and most prevalent HPV-related cancer in the USA. Several countries, such as Australia and Sweden, have successfully implemented mandatory vaccine programs and have seen rates of HPV-related diseases, including cancer, decline significantly. Some models project that cervical cancer, which is the fifth-most common cancer in active duty women, will be eliminated in the next 20 years as a result of mandatory vaccination programs. Between higher seropositive rates and lack of widespread vaccination, HPV dysplasia and cancer result in lost work time, decreased force readiness, negative monetary implications, and even separation from service. With more than half of the 1.3 million service members in the catch-up vaccination age range of less than 26 years of age, we are poised to have a profound impact through mandatory active duty service member vaccination. Although multiple strategies for improving vaccination rates have been proposed, mandatory vaccination would be in line with current joint service policy that requires all ACIP-recommended vaccines. It is time to update the joint service guidelines and add HPV vaccine to the list of mandatory vaccines.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5;23 (9;5) ◽  
pp. E429-E439
Author(s):  
Hunter Jackson Smith

Background: Chronic pain is a growing problem in the military, and the methods by which we have to perform epidemiologic surveillance are insufficient. It represents both a public health and military readiness concern, as those who suffer from it experience adverse impacts on work productivity, physiological health, and quality of life. Objectives: This study was designed to assess the prevalence of chronic pain among active component military service members utilizing 2 distinct, published case definitions. It sought to describe the demographics and military characteristics of those receiving chronic pain diagnoses. The study also aimed to provide improved granularity regarding military chronic pain patients’ pain severity and its impacts on their job performance. Study Design: Cross-sectional analysis for 2018. Setting: This analysis utilized data available from the Defense Medical Surveillance System, a database containing longitudinal data on service members. Methods: Patients: The surveillance population consisted of all active component service members from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines of all grades serving at any point during the surveillance period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. Measurement: Diagnoses were ascertained from the administrative records of all medical encounters of individuals who received care through the Military Health System or civilian referrals. Data from patients’ Periodic Health Assessment (PHA) encounters were also utilized to derive more granular data regarding their experiences of pain. Results: Case Definition 1, more specific for identifying chronic pain, identified a more severe subset of chronic pain patients when compared against Case Definition 2, a more comprehensive method for identifying potential chronic pain patients. Case Definition 1 found a higher prevalence of impactful pain (CD1: 36.7% vs. CD2: 23.5%), and Case Definition 1 patients are more likely to be on limited duty and require treatment related to their pain. Several demographic groups were also found to be at increased risk of chronic pain diagnosis, including women, black non-Hispanic, Army, older age, and enlisted. Limitations: First, in utilizing administrative data, this allows for the possibility of misclassification bias. Second, some deployment data still used ICD-9 coding even in 2018, resulting in a minor underestimation by approximately 30 patients and approximately 60 encounters. Third, the prevalence estimates for the demographics were not adjusted for potential confounders. Conclusions: Chronic pain has been difficult to define via administrative and screening data, and as such its burden and prevalence estimates can vary considerably depending on which case definition is used. This is of particular importance in the U.S. military, as these estimates can significantly impact our calculations for force readiness and the protection of our national security. To our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to examine chronic pain across the entirety of the U.S. armed forces and to utilize granular, annually collected PHA data in this way. The results of this exploratory analysis could be used as a template to better characterize the burden of chronic pain from a populationbased perspective and monitor the effectiveness of pain management strategies. Key words: Chronic pain, military, case definition, surveillance, epidemiology


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tajrina Hai ◽  
Yll Agimi ◽  
Katharine Stout

ABSTRACT Objective To understand the prevalence of comorbidities associated with traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients among active and reserve service members in the U.S. Military. Methods Active and reserve SMs diagnosed with an incident TBI from January 2017 to October 2019 were selected. Nineteen comorbidities associated with TBI as identified in the literature and by clinical subject matter experts were described in this article. Each patient’s medical encounters were evaluated from 6 months before to 2 years following the initial TBI diagnoses date in the Military Data Repository, if data were available. Time-to-event analyses were conducted to assess the cumulative prevalence over time of each comorbidity to the incident TBI diagnosis. Results We identified 47,299 TBI patients, of which most were mild (88.8%), followed by moderate (10.5%), severe (0.5%), and of penetrating (0.2%) TBI severity. Two years from the initial TBI diagnoses, the top five comorbidities within our cohort were cognitive disorders (51.9%), sleep disorders (45.0%), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD; 36.0%), emotional disorders (22.7%), and anxiety disorders (22.6%) across severity groups. Cognitive, sleep, PTSD, and emotional disorders were the top comorbidities seen within each TBI severity group. Comorbidities increased pre-TBI to post-TBI; the more severe the TBI, the greater the prevalence of associated comorbidities. Conclusion A large proportion of our TBI patients are afflicted with comorbidities, particularly post-TBI, indicating many have a complex profile. The military health system should continue tracking comorbidities associated with TBI within the U.S. Military and devise clinical practices that acknowledge the complexity of the TBI patient.


Author(s):  
Andrew Goodhart ◽  
Jami K. Taylor

For most of its history, the U.S. military has maintained a policy of exclusion toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people serving in uniform. The justifications for these exclusions have included the view that being homosexual or transgender is a psychological disorder, that it undermines military morale and effectiveness, and a fear that LGBT people would be vulnerable to foreign espionage. Explicit policies banning consensual homosexual sex—and excluding from service those who engage in it—date to the period between World Wars I and II, but de facto efforts at exclusion have existed since the early days of the republic. Regulations governing homosexuals in the military came under pressure in the 1970s and 1980s as societal views toward lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people changed, and those LGB service members discharged under the policy increasingly challenged their treatment in court. (Public pressure to change regulations governing transgender people in the military arose mostly in the 2000s, though litigation efforts date to the 1970s.) In addition to general shifts in public and legal opinion, the debate over LGB people serving in the U.S. military was affected by the experience of foreign militaries that allow LGB people to serve. United States law began to loosen formal restrictions on LBG people serving in uniform with the passage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) in 1994, but it still required LGB people to serve in secret. Changing public perceptions of LGB people and problems implementing the ban galvanized support for eliminating such restrictions. In 2010, President Obama signed legislation repealing DADT and removing all restrictions on LGB people serving in the military. However, transgender people do not enjoy the same rights. The Trump administration has revised Obama-era rules on transgender service members to enable greater exclusion. The issue is being contested in the courts and appears ripe for further political and legal dispute.


Author(s):  
Kathleen A. McNamara ◽  
Gribble Rachael ◽  
Marie-Louise Sharp ◽  
Eva Alday ◽  
Giselle Corletto ◽  
...  

LAY SUMMARY The U.S. military has undergone several changes in policies toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) service members over the past decade. Some LGBT service members report continued victimization and fear of disclosing their LGBT identity, which can affect retention of LGBT personnel serving in the military. However, there is little research on this population. This study uses data from a survey funded by the U.S. Department of Defense (2017–2018) and completed by 544 active-duty service members (296 non-LGBT and 248 LGBT) to better understand the career intentions of LGBT service members. Of transgender service members, 33% plan to leave the military upon completion of their commitment, compared with 20% of cisgender LGB and 13% of non-LGBT service members. LGBT service members were twice as likely as non-LGBT service members to be undecided as to their military career path. Lower perceived acceptance of LGBT service members in the workplace was associated with a higher risk of leaving among LGBT service members. Lower perceived unit cohesion was associated with attrition risk for all members, regardless of LGBT status. These findings suggest that the U.S. military can do more to improve its climate of LGBT acceptance to prevent attrition.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanne A Krick ◽  
Tyler R Reese

ABSTRACT As the COVID-19 pandemic continues across the globe, the advent of novel vaccines has created a possible path to prepandemic life for many. Still, many individuals, including those in the U.S. military, remain hesitant about getting vaccinated. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently granted full approval to the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (Comirnaty). Consistent with messaging from President Biden, the Department of Defense leadership has instructed the military to prepare for mandatory vaccination. While many have praised this declaration, others have raised concerns regarding the suppression of individual service member autonomy. This commentary explains the different ethical principles relevant to individual autonomy and how they are understood in a military context and then explores the ethical arguments both for and against mandating vaccination for all U.S. service members.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxwell J Mehlman ◽  
Efthimios Parasidis

ABSTRACT Introduction Precision medicine is a significant component of the military medical vanguard. One area of growing interest involves predictive genetic testing (PGT)—which can be used for both medical evaluation and operational planning. Predictive genetic testing is likely to play an increasingly important role in the military, in terms of both medically related testing to predict the risk of disease or injury and testing for non-medical traits that may be relevant to military performance. Materials and Methods This article describes predictive tests that currently are in use by the military or that might be of interest to the military. The article also explores the risks and benefits associated with PGTs, describes the ambiguities in the current laws and directives governing the military use of PGT, and proposes a set of guidelines for the use of PGTs by the military. Results There is no publicly available law or DoD policy that prevents the military from conducting PGT before or after accession. Currently, the only genetic testing routinely employed by the U.S. military is for medical purposes. In addition to non-routine genetic testing to diagnose genetic diseases and conditions, the military also uses targeted testing for predictive purposes. As additional predictive genetic tests are developed and become widely used, the military can be expected to employ those that are of relevance. Predictive military genetic testing of active duty service members could reduce their risk of illness and injury, improve their physical and mental fitness, enhance the health and well-being of the unit, make mission accomplishment more certain and efficient, and reduce medical and other costs for the military and veterans. Moreover, individuals with genetic variants that might enhance the likelihood of successfully completing a military mission could be preferred for certain positions or assignments, such as special operations. At the same time, there are risks that genetic information may be used for improper purposes or may stigmatize service members. Conclusions Predictive genetic testing is likely to play an increasingly important role in the military, in terms of both medically related testing to predict the risk of disease or injury and testing for non-medical traits that may be relevant to military performance. In instances where PGT meets standard scientific measures of validity and utility, test results can be used to promote the health and welfare of individual service members, units, and military missions. In cases where PGT does not rise to the level of meeting standard scientific criteria, officials should proceed cautiously in incorporating the information into clinical care and military decision-making. There needs to be an appropriate method of collectively calculating risks and benefits. Moreover, although military directives prohibit “unlawful discrimination,” this term has received no elaboration in any publicly available military pronouncements. This lacuna should be rectified to provide proper guidance to service members, medical personnel, and the public. Although the promise of PGT may compel military officials to consider ways to maximize the use of test results, the risk of undermining military goals with unverified uses also should be considered appropriately.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Y Kim ◽  
Chester C Buckenmaier ◽  
Edmund G Howe ◽  
Kwang H Choi

ABSTRACT There is an ongoing opioid epidemic in the USA, and the U.S. military is not immune to the health threat. To combat the epidemic, the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) issued new clinical practice guidelines and launched the Opioid Safety Initiative aimed at reducing opioid prescriptions. Furthermore, the DoD continually refined opioid protocols for acute pain on the battlefield, evolving from intramuscular morphine to intravenous morphine administration to oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate lollipops (Actiq) to finally sublingual sufentanil tablets (SSTs, Dsuvia). Interestingly, the newest introduction of SSTs into the military sparked great controversy, as there are concerns over the drug’s potential for misuse. However, although the opioid crisis may understandably foster an aversion to new candidate opioids, the therapeutic benefits of effective opioids in acute trauma settings should not be overlooked. SSTs may offer an improved analgesic option to meet the battlefield’s unmet needs with its non-invasive, sublingual delivery system and favorable pharmacologic properties that mitigate the risk for side effects, addiction, and adverse outcomes. Accordingly, this commentary aims to (1) review the evolution of opioid use on the battlefield and discuss the medical benefits and limitations of SSTs in acute trauma settings, (2) highlight the importance of chronic pain management post-deployment through evidence-based non-opioid modalities, and (3) explore avenues of future research. Ultimately, we propose that SSTs are an important improvement from existing battlefield opioids and that refining, not abandoning, opioid usage will be key to effectively managing pain in the military.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moaz Abdelwadoud ◽  
Jacob Collen ◽  
Hillary Edwards ◽  
C Daniel Mullins ◽  
Sophia L Jobe ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Introduction Sleep disorders’ are highly prevalent among U.S. active duty service members (ADSMs) and present well-documented challenges to military health, safety, and performance. In addition to increased need for sleep medicine services, a major barrier to effective sleep management has been a lack of alignment among patients, health providers, and economic-decision-makers. To address this gap in knowledge, the purpose of the present study was to engage diverse stakeholders vested in improving sleep disorders’ management in the military. Materials and Methods We elicited feedback from ADSMs with sleep disorders (five focus group discussion, n = 26) and primary care managers (PCMs) (11 individual semi-structured interview) in two military treatment facilities (MTFs) in the National Capitol Region, in addition to national level military and civilian administrative stakeholders (11 individual semi-structured interview) about their experiences with sleep disorders’ management in U.S. MTFs, including facilitators and barriers for reaching a definitive sleep diagnosis, convenience and effectiveness of sleep treatments, and key desired outcomes from interventions designed to address effectively sleep disorders in the U.S. military health care system (MHS). Recordings from focus groups and semi-structured interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using QSR International’s NVivo 12 software using inductive thematic analysis. The study was approved by Walter Reed National Military Medical Center Department of Research Programs. Results Active duty service members with sleep disorders often fail to recognize their need for professional sleep management. Whereas PCMs identified themselves as first-line providers for sleep disorders in the military, patients lacked confidence that PCMs can make accurate diagnoses and deliver effective sleep treatments. Active duty service members cited needs for expeditious treatment, educational support and care coordination, and support for obtaining sleep treatments during deployment. Challenges that PCMs identified for effective management include insufficient time during routine care visits, delays in scheduling testing procedures, and limited number of sleep specialists. Primary care managers suggested offering evidence-based telehealth tools and enhanced care coordination between PCMs and specialists; standardized medical education, materials, and tools; patient preparation before appointments; self-administered patient education; and including behavioral sleep specialists as part of the sleep management team. For administrative stakeholders, key outcomes of enhanced sleep management included (1) improved resource allocation and cost savings, and (2) improved ADSM safety, productivity, and combat effectiveness. Conclusion Current military sleep management practices are neither satisfactory nor maximally effective. Our findings suggest that solving the military sleep problem will require sustained effort and ongoing collaboration from ADSM patients, providers, and health systems leaders. Important potential roles for telehealth and technology were identified. Future research should seek to enhance implementation of sleep management best practices to improve outcomes for patients, providers, MHS, and the military as a whole.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document