• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Retired Soldier Who Died Christmas Day Committed Suicide, Husband Contends

You can argue the legalities and whether it was right or wrong all day long.

None of that matters in this situation.

It's the optics and the public perception that count in this case.

It's up to the media and the Opposition to decide how far they want to ride this.
 
recceguy said:
You can argue the legalities and whether it was right or wrong all day long.

None of that matters in this situation.

It's the optics and the public perception that count in this case.

It's up to the media and the Opposition to decide how far they want to ride this.

It's easy to criticize "legalities" when you're not the one charged with executing them.  I never once said that what happened was morally right.  I was only explaining why it happened.  I stand by my comments on the opposition politicians and their political grandstanding
 
In so far as regulations go, and all that, I'm with Pusser, the bureaucrats did the "right thing" but the execution was poor, to say the least; but I would say that the regulations don't need changing: public money which is paid out when it is not due should be recovered.

I agree with recceguy that the media and opposition politicians can, until they find something new, use this as a club to bash the government for being cruel and niggardly towards veterans.

(Parenthetically: I'm not overly surprised that this entirely preventable bungle occurred. I had periodic, thankfully infrequent, dealings with DVA, as it was then, over many years. My impression was that it was a "low quality" bureaucracy ~ compared with, say, Industry Canada or Treasury Board or the crème de la crème at Finance and PCO; moving most of it from the National Capital to PEI did not improve the quality, nor did, occasional changes of DMs. I know there were some good, even excellent people in DVA ~ but I suspect they mostly spent their days reading the job posters, looking for lateral moves to 'real' departments.)
 
And Gable in the Globe and Mail gets it:

web-thuedcar30co1.jpg

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/a-celebration-of-the-joyous-human-spirit/article16130567/#dashboard/follows/
Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail
 
Pusser said:
It's easy to criticize "legalities" when you're not the one charged with executing them.  I never once said that what happened was morally right.  I was only explaining why it happened.  I stand by my comments on the opposition politicians and their political grandstanding

You missed my point entirely.
 
You may want to actually read the FAA (uses may recover any overpayment vice shall), but here is some TB guidance on the para;

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hr-rh/in-ai/2011/1216-eng.asp

The recovery is discretionary, but normally done off the first pay.  As they have six years to recover the money, they may want to institute a standard delay to recover any overpayment from someones estate.  Also, they may want to write off an amount below a certain threshold where costs more to oversee the recovery overpayment rather then running through the hoops for something to have it actually cost the taxpayers money (ie cost $1k of time to recover $500).

The point is this was poorly handled, and included in a condolence letter a few weeks after the members death, for a fairly trivial amount (maybe a days worth of work?).  Doing the 'right thing' can mean meeting the intent of the law as well as the wording; there is nothing saying they can't delay the sending of letters for a reasonable time, nor would any reasonable person have an issue with a delay (3 months?) before starting the recovery process after a death.
 
I think that I would find it an insult if they waited six or X years before doing a clawback.
 
Navy_Pete said:
You may want to actually read the FAA (uses may recover any overpayment vice shall), but here is some TB guidance on the para;

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hr-rh/in-ai/2011/1216-eng.asp

The recovery is discretionary, but normally done off the first pay.  As they have six years to recover the money, they may want to institute a standard delay to recover any overpayment from someones estate.  Also, they may want to write off an amount below a certain threshold where costs more to oversee the recovery overpayment rather then running through the hoops for something to have it actually cost the taxpayers money (ie cost $1k of time to recover $500).

The point is this was poorly handled, and included in a condolence letter a few weeks after the members death, for a fairly trivial amount (maybe a days worth of work?).  Doing the 'right thing' can mean meeting the intent of the law as well as the wording; there is nothing saying they can't delay the sending of letters for a reasonable time, nor would any reasonable person have an issue with a delay (3 months?) before starting the recovery process after a death.

I have read the FAA.  Many times in fact.  The bulletin you are quoting is not the FAA, but rather guidance on how to apply it.  Nothing in this bulletin contradicts what I have said.  Yes, recovery is discretionary, but only in the sense that Treasury Board has the authority to write off debt (but no one in VAC, including the Minister does).  Note that the bulletin says, "An attempt to recover the overpayment needs to be made in all cases."  I know from direct experience in this area that write off rarely happens and the justification required is considerable.  There really has to be no asset of any sort from which to recover the funds.

Having said that, I agree that this was handled very badly.  They could have waited and I think combining a recovery letter with a condolence letter was in particularly poor taste.
 
Jim Seggie said:
The law needs to be changed then.


I don't agree. It is the SOP for writing condolence versus collection letters that needs to be either revised or, maybe, just followed.

People should not get payments from the government ~ your money, by the way ~ to which they are not entitled. Recovering overpayments is a normal procedure, and it is, also normally, handled briskly, efficiently and with a tiny bit of understanding. This should have been done better, but it should be done.

 
 
recceguy said:
You can argue the legalities and whether it was right or wrong all day long.

None of that matters in this situation.

It's the optics and the public perception that count in this case.

It's up to the media and the Opposition to decide how far they want to ride this.

For those that missed it the first time.
 
Here we go again................I fight with my insurance company every year when I put in my orthotics claim. Now I'm not saying that it isn't a freakin' pain in the ass but I can't see me getting called into Ottawa to testify about how I've been "failed". This follows a trend I'm seeing that seems to be "I served, therefore I'm more special than others".
Yes it's a shame that a Mother would leave her child motherless in such a way but to blame that on Veteran's Affairs is absurd.


..and the highlighted parts confuse me.


http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/widower-of-canadian-soldier-says-it-s-his-duty-to-speak-out-about-wife-s-suicide-1.1758538


CTVNews.ca Staff
Published Wednesday, April 2, 2014 10:24PM EDT 
Last Updated Wednesday, April 2, 2014 11:30PM EDT 


The husband of a Canadian soldier who died of suicide Christmas Day after battling Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder says it’s his “duty” to share his family’s ordeal so he can prevent it from happening to others.

In an interview with CTV News, Tom MacEachern spoke about his wife Cpl. Leona MacEachern’s death on an Alberta highway on Dec. 25, saying the government did little to help his wife before her death.

The grieving widower is scheduled to testify before a Veteran Affairs committee on Parliament Hill on Thursday.
“It’s my duty, I think, to tell them what went wrong,” MacEachern said Wednesday.
His retired 51-year-old wife was instantly killed Dec. 25 after she intentionally drove her car into an oncoming transport truck on the Trans-Canada highway near Calgary.

The crash was initially believed to be an accidental collision, but MacEachern publicly revealed in a letter days later that his wife, suffering from PTSD, had died of suicide. She left behind a nine-year-old daughter.

In the written statement, MacEachern called the collision a “final desperate act” of a soldier who had developed PTSD as a result of “protracted battles” with Veterans Affairs over medical benefits.
Four months after his wife’s death, MacEachern said his daughter knows “mom was sick” but doesn’t know exactly what happened to her.
MacEachern said his wife, who joined the military after high school, was ultimately abandoned by the Canadian government, with no specialized help for her PTSD, and little acknowledgement for her service.

“When she died, her military pension after 23 years of service was $172.05,” MacEachern said.
Adding insult to the tragedy, MacEachern received a letter from Veterans Affairs two days after his wife’s funeral, demanding repayment on a portion of her monthly disability cheque.

The letter expressed condolences to the family, and stated that the “overpayment of $581.67” was due because MacEachern did not live through the full month.

At the time, MacEachern called it a “slap in the face.”
In late January, Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino said the decision to collect the money had been reversed.

“(The government) should really have more compassion when dealing with people,” MacEachern said Wednesday.
Leona MacEachern’s death followed a string of military suicides that has raised concerns about the treatment of troubled soldiers, veterans and families.
Four Canadian soldiers died from apparent suicides in late November and early December.

Last month, an Ontario woman received a one-cent cheque from the federal government for her son, a soldier who died of suicide in 2011.
Defence Minister Rob Nicholson later apologized for the cheque -- labelled as “release pay” – calling it an “insensitive bureaucratic screw-up.”

With a report by CTV News’ Omar Sachedina

 
I'll be honest, I don't like the part where they state "His retired 51-year-old wife was instantly killed Dec. 25 after she intentionally drove her car into an oncoming transport truck on the Trans-Canada highway near Calgary"

They are basing that on this? "The crash was initially believed to be an accidental collision, but MacEachern publicly revealed in a letter days later that his wife, suffering from PTSD, had died of suicide. She left behind a nine-year-old daughter." So, he wasn't there.. how does he know that? I remember being first responder on a fatal motorcycle accident last summer in Calgary, a week or so later there was a memorial and I bumped into the father, he was told by the coroner that he couldn't be sure if his son had suffered or not.. I was there.. death was pretty much instantaneous. How did he get details that quickly?

If there was no one in the vehicle and the only witness was the truck driver she ran into then how does the husband at home know?

Also, I agree.. that's the fastest response from Veterans affairs in regards to a letter/cheque.



 
I'm confused on the amounts he stated she received for a pension and what they should she owed back from 'half' a month.

 
“When she died, her military pension after 23 years of service was $172.05,” MacEachern said.
Adding insult to the tragedy, MacEachern received a letter from Veterans Affairs two days after his wife’s funeral, demanding repayment on a portion of her monthly disability cheque.

The letter expressed condolences to the family, and stated that the “overpayment of $581.67” was due because MacEachern did not live through the full month.

Takes 6 months to a year to prove the CF injured you and get your money, but the claws are out right away if there's an overpayment. What a freaking joke.
 
Bruce Monkhouse said:
I'm confused on the amounts he stated she received for a pension and what they should she owed back from 'half' a month.

I'm thinking a typo and they've missed a "1".  A military pension of $172.05 per month after 23 years of service?  Ummmm, no..... 
 
thinking your right Moe; I retired a sgt medic after +24 in 06 with $1, 170 give or take
 
PuckChaser said:
Takes 6 months to a year to prove the CF injured you and get your money, but the claws are out right away if there's an overpayment. What a freaking joke.

Apples and oranges and any adult would know this.........but oh yea, you're in the CF, where of course you're 'more special' than say a normal person who probably has to sue their employer to get a single red cent.
 
....and thank you for the clarification on the pension.  It doesn't seem like a whole lot but I guess that's not bad from [ I'll assume from most] around your mid-fourties.
 
Bruce Monkhouse said:
Apples and oranges and any adult would know this.........but oh yea, you're in the CF, where of course you're 'more special' than say a normal person who probably has to sue their employer to get a single red cent.

Oh you can sue your employer? Hmm something else a CAF member can't do. I'm sorry but in the civi world your also able to buy your own insurance aside from what your employer offers. In the CAF no insurance company will offer you any additional coverage in a war zone. Not to mention pay outs in the civi world are more than what VAC has been giving and this has been proven. Also I could start pulling news articles of civi people that have been injured and were treated unfairly or screwed over and went to the media and started to fight for something better. IMO this is no different so get over the "I'm more special" stuff.
 
Back
Top