ex- Pvt, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20230208
Characterization of Service Received:   
Narrative Reason for Discharge:   MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE)
Authority for Discharge:   MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6 [COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE] 

Applicant’s Request:  Characterization change to:  HONORABLE
Narrative Reason change to:  REQUESTED, BUT NOT SPECIFIED
Reentry Code change to:  REQUESTED, BUT NOT SPECIFIED

Summary of Service

Prior Creditable Service:
Inactive:  	             	Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20220613	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20221221	Highest Rank/Rate:  Pvt
Length of Service:  00  Year(s)  06  Month(s)  09  Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  44
Deployment/Operation:  

Evaluation Marks (# of occasions):  Performance/Proficiency:  NONE   Behavior/Conduct:  NONE
Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  Rifle  NDSM

Periods of UA:  NONE
Periods of CONF:  NONE
Other Time Lost per DD214:  NONE

SCM:    SPCM:    CIVIL ARREST:    CC:   

NJP:  1

- 20221018:	Article 83 (Malingering)
	Awarded:   
	Suspended:  NONE

Retention Warning Counseling:  1

- 20221019:	For violation of Article 83. 

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	
	Employment:		Finances:		Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Rehabilitation/Treatment:		Criminal Records:	
	Personal Documentation:		Community Service:		References:	
	Department of VA letter:		Other Documentation:	

Additional Statements

	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	
 
Types of Witnesses Who Testified

	Expert:  			Character:    

	Witness E-1:			Witness C-1:	
	Witness E-2:			Witness C-2:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Paragraph 6210.6, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 26 November 2013 until present.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Manual 5420.1 of 29 September 2020 (Standards for the execution of the Naval Discharge Review Board).

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 83.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1.	The Applicant requests a Disability Retirement.
2.	The Applicant contends his mental health condition and military sexual trauma (MST) were mitigating factor in his misconduct and separation.

Discussion

Date:  20230508		Location:  WASHINGTON D.C.	Representation:  

The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met.

As a result of the Applicant’s claim PTSD/TBI was based in whole or in part on sexual trauma, intimate partner violence, or spousal abuse, the NDRB obtained a review by a psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker with training on mental health issues associated with PTSD/TBI or other trauma.  Additionally, and pursuant to § 1553, the NDRB reviewed the case with liberal consideration that a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, or Military Sexual Trauma potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in the discharge of a lesser characterization.  A review of the record revealed that the Applicant did not deploy in support of a contingency operation, and so this case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with § 1553.

The Applicant's record of service included:

  for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):
Article 83 (Malingering) 

:  The Applicant requests a Disability Retirement.

The NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.  Furthermore, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of facilitating access to VA benefits.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge.  As such, this issue does not serve as a basis upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

:  The Applicant contends his mental health condition and MST were mitigating factor in his misconduct and separation.

The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis.  If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order.  Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service.

Because the Applicant claimed mental health was a factor in their discharge, the Board reviewed the Applicant’s case in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1553, and pursuant to the Kurta Memo and other applicable regulations and guidance, including the Wilkie Memo.  Under the Kurta Memo, “[m]ental health conditions, including PTSD; sexual assault; and sexual harassment inherently affect one’s behaviors and choices causing veterans to think and behave differently than might otherwise be expected.”  Although, “[l]iberal consideration does not mandate an upgrade, [r]elief may be appropriate … for minor misconduct commonly associated with mental health conditions … and some significant misconduct sufficiently justified or outweighed by the facts and circumstances.”  Additionally, “substance seeking behavior and efforts to self-medicate symptoms of a mental health condition may warrant consideration.”  However, “[p]remeditated misconduct is not generally excused by mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; or by a sexual assault or sexual harassment experience.”  Therefore, “Review Boards will exercise caution in assessing the causal relationship between asserted conditions or experiences and premeditated misconduct.” See USD (P&R) Memo, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment” 25 August 2017 (“Kurta Memo”).

The review of discharges pursuant to the Kurta Memo and its other applicable regulations/guidance generally involves four questions: a) Did the veteran have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge; b) Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service; c) Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge; and d) Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge?  

In this case, the Board found that: a) the Applicant did have a condition/experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge; b) the condition existed during military service; c) the condition/experience mitigated the underlying basis/misconduct for the discharge; and d) the condition/experience did outweigh the Applicant’s assigned Discharge Characterization.

MEDICAL BOARD MEMBER OPINION
1.	Does the available record reasonably support a DSM mental/ behavioral health condition, PTSD, TBI, or Sexual Trauma/Abuse/IPV existed at the time of the Applicant’s military service?	Yes – undiagnosed but likely underlying Adjustment Disorder (of Adolescence) with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct resulting in decision to enlist; and claimed MST	
2.	A.	Were these conditions present at time of misconduct?	Yes (undiagnosed but likely underlying Adjustment Disorder (of Adolescence) with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct) resulting in decision to enlist; Uncertain (claimed MST)	
	B.	Were these conditions mitigating for the misconduct?	Yes (undiagnosed but likely underlying Adjustment Disorder (of Adolescence) with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct resulting in decision to enlist); Uncertain (claimed MST)	
3.	Were all required mental health and/or medical evaluations conducted in accordance with regulations, prior to the administrative separation of the applicant?	Yes – regarding the known offense; and Uncertain regarding the alleged MST due to uncertainty as to whether cognizant authority had been made aware of the alleged MST.	
4.	Medical Board Member comments:	ISSUES per ‘READ AHEAD:’
Applicant Wants: Characterization:  HON

PRIOR TO ENLISTMENT:

Education Level:  12

MEPS:  AFQT:  44

ENLISTMENT: Age at Enlistment:  17 PC
Date of Enlistment:  Jun – Dec 2022 for 06  Month(s)  09  Day(s)

1.  26 Sep 2022—Eval by  52 ABMC’s Licensed Clinical Psychologist for evaluation noted in two documents:

“reported to 52 ABMC for a mental health evaluation. Dr. ______
(52 ABMC's Licensed Clinical Psychologist) evaluated him in order to determine fitness for retention in the USMC.  In order to complete the evaluation he was administered a psychological screening, a clinical interview and records review were also conducted.

During his first clinical interview on 22 SEPTEMBER 2022, PVT  [Applicant]  requested to speak to a mental health provider to ask questions about how to ‘SI’ as he would like to [be] separated from the military.  During the first evaluation, it was determined that he was not actively suicidal nor did he have suicidal ideation and was returned to training.  At that time, he attempted to Refuse to Train which his combat instructors did not allow so he made statements the following day that he was experiencing suicidal ideation.  He was taken to NHCP ED where he was evaluated and discharged with a follow up at the 52 Area Clinic.  [Applicant] was re-assessed on 26 SEPTEMBER 2022.  He stated that he had had suicidal ideation since June, stated that he "wasn't actually having them [suicidal ideation] but I wanted to get out of the military.  He stated that he joined the military as a way to escape from his mother as he was having problems with her but after receiving several encouraging letters in boot camp, he realized he made the wrong decision and wanted to return home.  When he could not [be allowed by regulation to] Refuse to Train, he made.  Statements of wanting to end his life in an attempt to be separated so that he could return-home.  Since joining the USMC PVT  [Applicant]  reported experiencing increased depressed mood.  Although his score on the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was elevated, he later denied that he was currently suicidal.  He stated that he wanted to be separated from the military and verbalized suicidal statements as a way to be discharged.  This was an aim at manipulating the interview for secondary gain of getting relieved of military duty.  Furthermore, in his attempt of exaggerating mental health symptoms, it is only fitting he be ADSEP'd for malingering. PVT  [Applicant]  attempt to =, his mental health symptoms, specifically of suicidal ideation, as grounds for a malingering ADSEP.  He denies any type of exposure to Potentially Traumatizing Events during his 4 months of active duty service.

2.  CONCLUSIONS:  The results of the medical record review, mental status exam and clinical interview suggest that PVT  [Applicant]  is unsuitable for military service due to Malingering, a psychiatric condition.  His symptoms make him inherently unstable and erratic.  He is not amenable to treatment in the military medical system, as his conditions are chronic in nature; thus he represents a serious ongoing threat to himself and others, if retained on active duty.  However, he is not considered to be mentally ill, (not ratable by a Physical
Evaluation Board) but rather manifests a long-standing disorder of character and behavior which.is of such severity as to render him unsuitable for continued military service in the USMC.

3.  DSM V DIAGNOSES: Z76.5 Malingering✓…”

03 Oct 2022—FAST TRACK DISPOSITION OF UCMJ VIOLATION(S):

19 Oct 2022—Retention Warning Counseling:  1 For violation of Article 83.

01 Nov 2022—Notification of ADSEP Proceedings & Reason:  1 Nov 2022 / COSO.  Rights:  Waived counsel, board, and statement

Unknown Date prior to discharge:  Alleged MST

21 Dec 2022—DISCHARGE:
Applicant Got:
Received:  [UNCHARACTERIZED
Narrative:  MISCONDUCT – SERIOUS OFFENSE
Sep Code:  HKQ1 (board waived)
RE Code:  4
Discharged From:  SOI
Highest Rate:  E1

POST SEPARATION:

See character witness’s detailed review and commentary.

COMMENT:

The applicant’s adjustment problems began prior to enlistment, ostensibly, related to conflict with, minimally, his maternal authority resulting in the immature decision to enlist in the USMC at the age of 17, which required Parental Consent.  As such it appears reasonable to presume a major conflict had erupted prior to enlistment best characterized as an underlying Adjustment Disorder (of Adolescence) with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct resulting in decision to enlist and continuing after enlistment until his resulting (now considered mitigating per this evaluation) naïveté ran afoul of USMC regulation.  Regarding MST the evidence is less certain, but the character witnesses account, cf., below, has a compelling, touching quality worthy of further investigation and consideration as, at least, a matter of clemency.	

The Applicant’s Administrative separation (ADSEP) documentation in the Applicant’s service record indicated he wrongfully feigned a mental derangement for the purpose of avoiding military service on 26 September 2022 while attending School of Infantry aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, CA and received NJP on 18 October 2022 for malingering.  Medical documentation also noted he first reported to medical on 22 September 2022 with questions on how to “SI” so he could be separated from the service.  During this evaluation it was determined he was not actively suicidal nor did he have suicidal ideations, and he was returned to training.  He subsequently attempted to refuse training, which his combat instructors denied, so he made statements the following day indicating he was experiencing suicidal ideations and was taken to the emergency department for evaluation.  He was released and given a follow up on 26 September 2022.  During his appointment on the 26th the Applicant made statements that contradicted his statements on the 22nd.  He also noted he no longer wanted to be in the service after receiving several encouraging letters from his mother.  A Fast Track Disposition dated 3 October 2022 demonstrated the Applicant’s command was going to refer his malingering charge to SPCM unless he accepted NJP and waived his right to an ADSEP board.  He agreed and was notified of ADSEP proceedings on 1 November 2022.  His commanding officer recommended separated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service, however, his separation authority disagreed with this notion and separated the Applicant with an Uncharacterized discharged for misconduct – serious offense.

While a character reference submitted a statement suggesting the Applicant was sexually harassed and inappropriately touched by a Marine corporal while he was in a holding platoon awaiting ADSEP, the Board was unable to determine the extent of this assertion, as the Applicant’s service record lacked any detail regarding this incident.  Furthermore, the Applicant was already awaiting ADSEP for malingering when this incident was purported to have occurred so the Board could not find a nexus between his aforementioned behavior and this alleged event.

However, based on the Applicant’s condition at the time of separation and the opinion of the NDRB’s Psychiatrist, the Board determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation for a Condition, not a Disability (CND).  Here, medical documentation points to the fact that the Applicant suffered from a physical condition that was apparently beyond his control and indicated the condition was not a disability.  The characterization for this reason is Honorable unless an Uncharacterized or General (Under Honorable Conditions) is warranted.  The Applicant had no misconduct that would rate a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge and there was insufficient evidence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance that would merit an Honorable characterization.  An Uncharacterized discharge is warranted when separation is initiated while a member is within the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  Since the Applicant was notified of ADSEP on 1 November 2022, 142 days into his active duty service contract, the Board found an Uncharacterized discharged appropriate and an Honorable characterization of service unwarranted.  However, by unanimous decision, the Board did find a change to his narrative reason for separation from misconduct – serious offense to CND appropriate given medical documentation.  Partial relief granted.

Decision

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the Board found .  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall  UNCHARACTERIZED, the narrative reason for separation shall  CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY with a corresponding separation code of JFV1, and the reentry code shall  RE-4.  The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of the discharge.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Additional NDRB Reviews: After receiving a NDRB Document Review, an Applicant remains eligible for a Personal Appearance/Telephonic Hearing if the application is received by the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claim(s) related to their discharge as well as evidence of post-service accomplishments.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing by an Attorney (or Advocate) is recommended but not required.  There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.  However, if you have been discharged for more than 15 years, already had a personal appearance hearing, or otherwise exhausted your opportunity to be heard by the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx for further review.

Appeal Procedures on NDRB Decision: If you contest the NDRB’s decision in your case AND you already contested the NDRB’s previous decision at a Personal Appearance Hearing or otherwise exhausted your opportunity before the NDRB (or it has been more than 15 years since your discharge), the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx for further review.  The BCNR is the highest level of administrative review within the Department of the Navy/Marine Corps to correct errors or injustices to member’s records.

Complaint Procedures on Format: If you believe the decision in your case is ambiguous, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity (JSRA), OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the DoD Instruction 1332.28 before submitting such a complaint.  This complaint procedure does not permit a challenge on the merits of the NDRB’s decision; the JSRA is designed solely to ensure that the NDRB decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness.  Therefore, if you are contesting the merits of the NDRB’s decision and already had a NDRB personal appearance hearing or otherwise exhausted your opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may appeal/petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx for further review.

Service [VA] Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of facilitating access to VA benefits.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety, equity, and clemency of a discharge.  Consequently, the Applicant should petition the VA, which determines eligibility for post-service benefits.  The VA conducts its own determination of eligibility based on service records and input from an Applicant upon their request.  (See www.va.gov/discharge-upgrade-instructions).  Therefore, if the NDRB grants a change to a discharge, the NDRB will notify the Commander, Navy Personnel Command or Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate; however, it is the Applicant’s responsibility to ensure these changes are incorporated into the record by the respective Service Headquarters.  Further, it is the Applicant’s sole responsibility to submit these changes to the VA for a determination of eligibility for VA Benefits.  Finally, the Applicant should refer to the Veterans Administration website (https://www.va.gov/) for information regarding VA benefits and healthcare.  Additionally, Veterans in acute suicidal crisis can go to any VA or non-VA health care facility for emergency health care at no cost – including inpatient or crisis residential care for up to 30 days and outpatient care for up to 90 days.  Veterans do not need to be enrolled in the VA system to use this benefit.  In order to find the nearest VA office to receive assistance with determining VA eligibility/access, the Applicant should refer to https://www.va.gov/find-locations. 

Employment/Educational Opportunities: The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  An unfavorable “RE-CODE” is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct: DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or 

for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record.  Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades: There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and/or Traumatic Brain Injury: For all claims involving PTSD and/or TBI, the NDRB’s review implemented the guidance set forth in the SECDEF Memorandum of 3 September 2014 (Supplemental guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).  In accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1) & (d)(2), the NDRB included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution and a final decision.  If the Applicant’s claim of PTSD/TBI was based in whole or in part on sexual trauma, intimate partner violence, or spousal abuse, the NDRB obtained a review by a psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker with training on mental health issues associated with PTSD/TBI or other trauma.  

Post-Service Conduct: The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate that in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to: Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards, Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board, 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309, Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023.

Military Sexual Trauma: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) uses the term "military sexual trauma" (MST) to refer to experiences of sexual assault or repeated, threatening sexual harassment experienced while on federal active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty training.  To get confidential one-on-one help please contact the MST Coordinator at your nearest VA Medical Center or Call Safe Helpline at 1-877-995-5247 or visit www.mentalhealth.va.gov/msthome.asp.

Reporting Military Sexual Trauma: To report a military sexual trauma, you can make an anonymous report to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) by Text or Online.  The NCIS Tip Line provides service members, veterans and civilians a safe, discreet and ANONYMOUS option to report criminal and force protection threats within the USN and USMC without concerns of retaliation.  To report a crime by Text: Text 274637 (CRIMES); Type “NCIS” at the top of the message; and include as much detail as possible to ensure your tip can effectively be investigated.  To send your ANONYMOUS Tip via the online, go to https://www.tipsubmit.com/webtipsNAV.aspx?AgencyID=840.

Suicide Prevention: Veterans in emotional crisis or their loved ones can call the free and confidential Veterans Crisis Line at 1-800-273-8255 (then press 1); or chat online at http://www.veteranscrisisline.net, or send a text message to 838255 to connect with a caring, qualified Veteran Affairs Responder who can deal with any immediate crisis.  Additionally, Veterans in acute suicidal crisis can go to any VA or non-VA health care facility for emergency health care at no cost; you can use this benefit regardless of your discharge status, or enrollment in VA health care.  In order to find the nearest VA office to receive assistance, see Find your nearest VA medical center.