No legal redress for troops... yet.

Although veterans’ groups and patient advocacy organizations have long held that a lower standard of treatment exists in VA hospitals and military medical centers, a half-century-old court ruling prevents our active duty service members from filing malpractice suits against the government's authorized health care providers.  Dennis Romboy at Desert News writes:  The high court ruled in 1950 that the widow of a serviceman named Feres who died in a barracks fire had no right to sue the government for negligence. Courts since then have applied the decision to any injury related to active-duty military service.  It means soldiers like Russell Bridges, who believes he lost the use of his legs through a botched back surgery at a military hospital, have no legal recourse.  In attempt to change that for Bridges and other soldiers, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D- N.Y., introduced the Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act into Congress.

The bill being proposed by the Democratic congressman would, if signed into law, reverse the Feres ruling.  Rep. Hinchey wrote in a letter to the House Armed Services committee:  "Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, federal prisoners and even illegal aliens in the United States have the ability to seek damages from the federal government for medical malpractice, but members of our nation's military still do not."

Stories of the military's substandard health care have been well documented.  It's outrageous that the members of the Bush Administration - and indeed all neocons - who were responsible for the Iraq War have neglected to provide decent medical treatment for troops who serve this country so honorably.  They should be receiving the best care we can offer.  At the very least, those who have suffered from botched surgeries and life-endangering misdiagnoses should be able to seek redress in a court of law.