The letter is available at the Red Flag site via the first link.
If the Government follows the same policy for people receiving Social Security or other recipients of Federal benefits, and there is the option of an administrative or judicial hearing to contest the findings with the patient represented by an advocate, then I am not unduly alarmed by this. I do see that the primary point of the letter is to determine if someone is incompetent to handle their financial affairs. I do think it is interesting that the agency makes the determination of incompetency, and again, I would be curious to see if this is consistent with the approach used by other agencies. I would also want to know what are the clinical grounds for assuming that the recipient is financially incompetent. Is it someone who has sustained a profound traumatic brain injury, or what? Finally, I would have to read the Brady Law to see if the finding of incompetency as a firearms disability applies to an administrative finding by a government agency versus a judicial finding.
The notion that veterans should get a pass on this just for being veterans is not valid, in my book. If this is the law, it should be applied equally across all recipients of Federal benefits, with the codicils mentioned above. I bet this will discourage veterans from seeking treatment at VA facilities, though.
