We're in agreement on that. I think early diagnosis is extremely important.
I also believe, though, that there has been a fairly significant shift in giving the benefit of the doubt to a claimant. I'd like to see that expanded even further, so you don't have to go through this confrontation that you referred to and so there's recognition that there's something wrong with you.
We had a witness who was asked about people faking it. I'm sure there are always going to be people who try to do that. For the most part, I think people who are coming in for help are coming in because they have witnessed or participated in something that is psychologically very difficult for them.
In terms of the kinds of people we send to war zones or the kinds of people we have in the police force or the fire department, I hope I misunderstood a little of what you said. I wouldn't want to see everyone with sensitivities to human tragedy eliminated from serving in any of those capacities because they may be in danger of suffering from PTSD. I think those three services I just named require a lot of humanity to be able to execute the job properly. I wouldn't want people eliminated. I thought I heard you say something about screening them in advance and, if they have a soft heart, not putting them in there. I want to see people with soft hearts there.
What I want to do is to find a solution to support the person coming back from a mission, or the RCMP officer or the fireman. I want to see a support system to get them through this really rough part. I do not want to desensitize people who go into the service. I want them to be completely human. I want them to have a heart. I want them to care. But I want to support them when they come back.
Is there a balance we could come up with, or is there something that Veterans Affairs Canada could do to intervene and protect these people when they do suffer these kinds of traumas?