ABSTRACT
This essay explores the privatization of American civic life and the consequences that privatization may pose for veterans of the United States Armed Forces, particularly those with disabilities, in terms of their reliance on the commitment that the American people have embraced regarding the provision of service- and disability-related benefits. The essay relies on historical, theoretical, and ethnographic perspectives. The conclusions are that, while the commitment made by the American people to veterans is a significant value, it must be considered in light of the distinctions between the ethical prescriptions and moral complexities considering policy issues in a climate of changing national priorities and the embedded nature of social and moral life.
KEYWORDS:
Notes
1. This has also been a challenge for the Department of Defense. Linda Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz (2006) have issued a report through the John F. Kennedy School of Government that is a retrospective study of the economic costs of the Iraq War. As is well known, the Bush Administration relies on at least two appropriations bills to fund the Global War on Terror, one part of the projected fiscal budget and then a later supplemental budget.
2. See CitationBurke (2004) for a folklorist perspective on the mythology of ‘Jody’.
3. Bilmes cites the GAO report (2007).
4. I say “perceived” here because most seriously injured service-members are eligible for TSGLI (Traumatic Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance), which has a coverage range of $25,000 to $ 100,000 dollars. Many service members opt to invest this money or use it to clear past debts. Some patients have critiqued others for making excessive luxury purchases.
5. Confer with CitationJanofsky (2004) for a news account of a soldier with an upper extremity amputation and the variety and costs of prosthetic limbs and “terminal devices” (attachments that serve as hands) that he has received and can expect to receive.