MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           1 March 2001                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000047953

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John H. Kern		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his undesirable discharge be corrected to either an honorable discharge or a discharge due to medical disqualification.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he suffered from undiagnosed mental disorders, schizophrenia and major depression while he was in the Army.  He also had a history of having difficulties with authority figures, especially his father, prior to his entry on active duty.  His mental disorders were finally diagnosed in 1988/1989.  He contends that since his mental disorders and his psychological problems with authority figures were not taken into account during his discharge processing, his discharge was inequitable.

In support of his application he submits letters from his mother and brother who state that the applicant had exhibited behavior consistent with schizophrenia prior to his induction into the Army.  They contend that the applicant had departed AWOL while in the Army because he couldn’t cope with Army life because of his mental illness, and the psychological trauma of being arrested and imprisoned aggravated his mental illness.  The applicant’s mother contends that the applicant would never have been enlisted if he had been given a psychiatric evaluation prior to his enlistment, and that the Army should compensate the applicant for aggravating his mental illness.

Also submitted is a letter from a psychiatrist and a social worker.  The psychiatrist stated that he has treated the applicant between 1990 and 2000.  The psychiatrist explains that the applicant’s history makes it apparent that he had a schizoid personality when he was in the military, which made him vulnerable to a psychotic breakdown when placed under the stress which would accompany military service.  The psychiatrist attributes the applicant’s AWOL to his schizoid personality.  In the unsigned letter from the social worker it is stated that the applicant lived at home with his mother after his discharge from the Army, and in 1989 became increasingly anxious and sought medical help which resulted in his diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder and depression.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He was inducted on 26 December 1967.  When he was being processed for induction he was given a questionnaire in conjunction with his physical examination.  In that questionnaire he stated that he had never had frequent or terrifying nightmares, he never had depression or excessive worry, and he never had any nervous trouble of any sort.  However, he did say that he had frequent trouble sleeping.  While in basic combat training, he departed AWOL from 

25 March to 20 June 1968; 29 June 1968 to 19 May 1969; and 21 August 1969 to 19 January 1970, a total of 541 days of lost time prior to the expiration of his term of service (ETS), and 24 days of lost time subsequent to his ETS.

On 3 February 1970 the applicant submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial for AWOL.  When he submitted his request he was given a questionnaire in conjunction with a separation physical examination.  In that questionnaire he stated that he had never had frequent or terrifying nightmares, he never had depression or excessive worry, he never had any nervous trouble of any sort and, contrary to what he said in his induction examination, he said that he never had frequent trouble sleeping.

His request was approved and he was given an Undesirable Discharge Certificate on 12 February 1970.  He had 6 months and 27 days of creditable service.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.

The Manual for Courts-Martial, R.C.M. 916, provides that it is an affirmative defense to any offense that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the accused, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his or her acts.  Mental disease or defect does not otherwise constitute a defense.  The accused is presumed to have been mentally responsible at the time of the alleged offense.  This presumption continues until the accused establishes, by clear and convincing evidence, that he or she was not mentally responsible at the time of the alleged offense.

Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention or Separation) paragraph 4-3, provides that an enlisted soldier who is the subject of elimination action that might result in a discharge under other than honorable conditions may not be processed for medical retirement or discharge.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant and his mother’s primary contentions appear to be that the applicant should have been given a psychiatric evaluation prior to his induction; that if he had been given a psychiatric evaluation prior to his induction he would have been medically disqualified due to mental illness; and that his undiagnosed schizophrenia caused his periods of AWOL, so he should not be punished for his absences.  The Board believes these issues should be addressed individually, as follows:

	a.  The applicant should have been given a psychiatric evaluation prior to his induction.  Since the applicant only listed having problems sleeping and no other symptoms which would indicate the possibility of mental illness, there would be no reason for the physicians at the Armed Forces Entrance and Examination Station (AFEES) to refer the applicant to a psychiatrist.  As such, this contention is not accepted by the Board.

	b.  If the applicant had been given a psychiatric evaluation prior to his induction he would have been medically disqualified due to mental illness.  The applicant was diagnosed as suffering from schizoaffective disorder and depression in 1989, 22 years after his induction.  In the psychiatrist’s statement submitted in support of the applicant’s request he opines that the applicant suffered from mental illness prior to his induction.  However, the social worker stated that the applicant first sought mental health treatment in 1989.  As such, the psychiatrist must be basing his assessment on the statements made by the applicant.  The Board cannot accept a retroactive medical diagnosis made 22 years after the fact based solely on statements made by the patient.

	c.  The applicant’s undiagnosed schizophrenia caused his periods of AWOL, so he should not be punished for his absences.  The Board does not accept this contention for three reasons.  First, there is no evidence which would convince the Board that the applicant suffered from schizophrenia when he was inducted.  The second is the applicant’s pending less than honorable discharge would have precluded his being considered for a medical separation.  The third is that there is no indication that the applicant was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts.

2.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____jhk__  ____clg  _  ___rtd  __  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047953	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010301	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.05	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.