There are divergent views on the lump sum approach, to be perfectly honest. Even the provision of what is given now, which is $500 for financial advice, is a good step, but it's whether or not that's sufficient to look at a lump sum of, let's say, $250,000 or $260,000 and determine the best use of that disability award, especially in the financial circumstances we live in.
I suspect that some people who received a disability award in 2006 may have lost a percentage of that disability award. Whoever was making projections on what is sufficient to ensure financial viability for an individual based on a disability award and what the returns will be might have been, and probably was, wrong. The problem is compounded for someone who has mental health challenges or problems and who might not be able to make the right decisions.
We actually think that, first of all, the disability award has to be increased, but there should also be an option for a continuing payment in lieu of. I don't know how you would come to that program determination, but there has to be something that's done there to ensure that somebody who has mental challenges doesn't go and spend that lump sum foolishly, with his family suffering thereafter. Again, I fully realize that you can't legislate against personal choice, but maybe we have to look at all of these facets of how we provide benefits for serving members and veterans.