script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js">

AFRC Commander Directed Investigation

rickman

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
My commander came out this weekend and briefed that AFRC has directed all commanders to initiate Commander Directed Investigations for any members on LOD that are suspected to be "milking" the system. Apparently some members have been found to be doing activities that violates their profiles/duty restrictions.

With that, be careful of what you do on/off duty where people may find you doing something that you should not be doing. Watch what you post online (pics and stories).

Not saying anyone here is trying to cheat the government, it's just some people may perceive things differently than what you may have intended.
 

Jason Perry

Benevolent Leader
Site Founder
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Infuriating!

As a baseline, I would argue that this may constitute unlawful command influence. Anyone impacted by this "directive" should be cognizant of their rights under Article 31(b) UCMJ:

§ 831. ART. 31. COMPULSORY SELF-INCRIMINATION PROHIBITED
How Current is This?
(a) No person subject to this chapter may compel any person to incriminate himself or to answer any question the answer to which may tend to incriminate him.
(b) No person subject to this chapter may interrogate, or request any statement from, an accused or a person suspected of an offense without first informing him of the nature of the accusation and advising him that he does not have to make any statement regarding the offense of which he is accused or suspected and that any statement made by him may be used as evidence against him in a trial by court-martial.
(c) No person subject to this chapter may compel any person to make a statement or produce evidence before any military tribunal if the statement or evidence is not material to the issue and may tend to degrade him.
(d) No statement obtained from any person in violation of this article, or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement may be received in evidence against him in a trial by court-martial."

In addition, I think that 10 USC 1219 applies:

"A member of an armed force may not be required to sign a statement relating to the origin, incurrence, or aggravation of a
disease or injury that he has. Any such statement against his interests, signed by a member, is invalid."

A "violation of a profile" is not a crime. I cannot state unequivocally that this is not a chargeable offense, but I my research has not revealed any cases where this has been charged.

Finally, I point out that the Air Force disability regulation, AFI 36-3212, states that:
"1.13. Unlawful Influence. No one may attempt to coerce or, by any unauthorized means, influence a PEB or the outcome of any disability case."

I would argue that a violation of this is chargeable as a crime under the UCMJ Art. Article 134 - (Wrongful interference with an adverse administrative proceeding).
 

green594

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
I do not know if my command has been following this protocol but I have seen officers in my command be the subject of 15-6 investigations who have been injured on duty. I have seen injured Soldiers threatened with deployments once their profiles are over, it is a shame. Rickman I was wondering what command you fall under.

Thanks Green
 

rickman

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
I do not know if my command has been following this protocol but I have seen officers in my command be the subject of 15-6 investigations who have been injured on duty. I have seen injured Soldiers threatened with deployments once their profiles are over, it is a shame. Rickman I was wondering what command you fall under.

Thanks Green

I fall under Air Force Reserve Command. I got further "clarification" from my commander. My commander states that apparently in some cases members are using the Line of Duty route to exempt themselves from portions of the Air Force Fitness Assessment. Apparently they are "hurting themselves" so they can get out of components of the test so they are not at risk of being administratively discharged for failure to meet standards.

That sounds to me like a BS answer and there probably is a deeper underlying reason
 

rickman

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
How does violating a profile make a condition not LOD?

Mike

An Air Force Reserve member that does not have access to a real MTF doctor (Reserve MTF docs at my location are not allowed to examine service members due to legal risks) and have to go to a civilian provider to have an evaluation for a condition.

So a hypothetical situation could be:

A Reserve member has been hiding a bad knee for years that he originally injured while not on status. The member is starting to have trouble passing the Air Force Fitness Assessment. That member "claims" he hurt his knee while on AD. The member reports the "incident" and goes to see a Tricare doctor since there is no military doctor present. The civilian doctor finds the problem, documents it, recommends no running and the member reports back to the MTF and an LOD is validated based on the doctors findings. While the member is off-duty, he is out running on the beach having fun. Someone sees him and reports it to his commander.

So now you have a member violating a profile (no running) hence a question is raised about the profile and LOD.

I don't know how a bad knee feels so this scenario may be unrealistic, but hopefully this example clarifies what AFRC suspects may be happening.
 

89Falcon

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Infuriating!


In addition, I think that 10 USC 1219 applies:

"A member of an armed force may not be required to sign a statement relating to the origin, incurrence, or aggravation of a
disease or injury that he has. Any such statement against his interests, signed by a member, is invalid."

A "violation of a profile" is not a crime. I cannot state unequivocally that this is not a chargeable offense, but I my research has not revealed any cases where this has been charged.

Finally, I point out that the Air Force disability regulation, AFI 36-3212, states that:
"1.13. Unlawful Influence. No one may attempt to coerce or, by any unauthorized means, influence a PEB or the outcome of any disability case."

I would argue that a violation of this is chargeable as a crime under the UCMJ Art. Article 134 - (Wrongful interference with an adverse administrative proceeding).

I know when I was recovering, my Dr's verbal instructions were "let your body tell you when it's ready....start by walking...then some short jogs...and build up from there"......all the while, I was on a "no running over 100 yards" profile. The purpose of the profile was to prevent me from being forced to do something that would exacerbate the injury while it was healing.
 

buckstr

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
I have already had to seek ADC Council regarding this. It makes me kind of leery to even make posts on line to either seek advice or try to help others because I feel that I am being watched and monitored, this is one of the reasons why I tell my therapist that I don't trust anyone. I am at the point now that I am afraid to even play with my kids outside because someone may be watching.
It has always seemed hypocritical to me that whenever the system works against a service member "Well that is just the way the system works". However when you do you due diligence and you discover how the system is supposed to work, all of a sudden you are "milking the system or faking". I used the quotations because these are actual quotes I have been told.
 

Belle

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Just to provide my 2 cents as a former squadron commander in the Air Force...yes, there are people who I've "suspected" are hiding behind profiles to get out of deployments or the Fitness Test. But, after many conversations with the JAG and docs, it's difficult to prove what is termed "malingering". Closest I came was a fellow who claimed menieres disease and was on a profile with mobility restrictions. His subordinates came to me with stories of him playing hockey on the weekends (which requires good balance...something a bad case of meniers disease will rob you of). I cornered the guy's doctor on it...who immediately pulled the profile. Today, the guy is deployed to Afghanistan for 365-days.

I will add that as a squadron commander, I also defaulted to the medical opinion as the rule. If a doctor stated someone had a medical problem, then we helped the member ensure the medical system was taking care of them medically and we encouraged them through surgeries/therapy/whatever it took to get healthy again.

And yes, there are folks that "suck it up" for a few months or years before they even tell a doc....because they are afraid to be seen as "weak" if they give into the pain. But, as I've counseled many a troop: you'll only be in the Air Force for a small portion of your life, but you have a long life to live....what will the quality of that life be like when your grandchildren come to visit if you don't get the medical care now?

So, what I'm trying to say, is maybe the AFRC commander is just wanting to call the bluff of those few who may be hiding behind a profile?
 

rickman

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
I have already had to seek ADC Council regarding this. It makes me kind of leery to even make posts on line to either seek advice or try to help others because I feel that I am being watched and monitored, this is one of the reasons why I tell my therapist that I don't trust anyone. I am at the point now that I am afraid to even play with my kids outside because someone may be watching.
It has always seemed hypocritical to me that whenever the system works against a service member "Well that is just the way the system works". However when you do you due diligence and you discover how the system is supposed to work, all of a sudden you are "milking the system or faking". I used the quotations because these are actual quotes I have been told.

I would not worry about this. If you have documented evidence that helps prove you are unfit (X-rays, MRI, test results, etc.) and have people that have witnessed your pain and suffering, they can say what they want.

In my case, I have two main complaints (back (DDD) and hearing (tinnitus)). For my back, my ROM sucks. I feel pain every day but I do my daily activities while taking the pain. Pain meds do help. For my tinnitus, my audiologist has documented the ringing tone I hear all the time by pitch and frequency. If they want to challenge this, I'd be happy to sit in the chair and I will bet I can match the same tone.

So if you have documented proof you are unfit, you should have no worries.

As far as posting on here or anywhere else - yes you should anonymoulize (not a real word) yourself in case you do say something that can come back and haunt you.
 

rickman

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
And yes, there are folks that "suck it up" for a few months or years before they even tell a doc....because they are afraid to be seen as "weak" if they give into the pain.

Sir,

The problem here is that when I was younger and doing damage to my back and not reporting it was because of peer pressure. As an airman, when I got hurt (shin splints), I went to the doc and went on profile. I caught so much Hell from my peers that I decided I would not go see the docs again. During that timeframe afterwards I had to prove myself which caused me to strain my back more than once. So here I am 20 years later in pain everyday because I was pressured into proving I was tough.

Another point is when I returned from deployment in 2005 (a MSgt at the time) I documented that I strained my back. The doc asked when I returned how my back felt and at the time it felt fine. If the docs would have sent me off for evaluations I may not be going through the problems I am facing now.

If the atmosphere was different (eliminating peer pressure through education) and if the docs would take a closer look at complaints, then maybe some of the attitudes would be better for members like me and our force would be more fit.
 
Top