My understanding is that Veterans Affairs takes an approach that basically says, “Is there a diagnosable condition? Is it attributable to military service? To what degree is their impairment arising from that?”
I think what I gather, reading between the lines of Dr. Nevin's research, is that the issue may be somewhat different in the United States, where they might put more emphasis on it having to be PTSD. If it's a generalized anxiety disorder, they're not going to cover that. I don't think Veterans Affairs is so fine-tuned about it. They just want to know that there's a link to military service. In that regard, I think you're correct. With respect to treatment, it's quite a different matter. From there, I think we really have to train the practitioners and ensure there is some kind of a knowledge of how to diagnose this.
There may also be the issue of people who have never served in a traumatic situation, and they are very harshly judged by their peers: “Nothing ever happened to that guy. How come he's seeking out a disability pension?” Such people may be shamed into silence and may not be seeking disability pensions.
I think it's very important that we be able to acknowledge that it's not just a general disability. We also have to be reaching out to these people and letting them know about the benefits. They may be suffering from something that is service related even in the absence of having been exposed to a specific trauma.