Walter Reed Medical Center

Mainstream media has evolved into a chameleon of sorts. For example, Time Warner is the publisher of both "Time" and "People" magazine. Subscriptions for the former are dropping and the latter, are climbing. Although I consider "Time" to be somewhat slanted in how they report, at least they manage to throw in some facts. "People" magazine, is pure opinion. Slowly, we have become a society that lazily accepts opinion, with a pinch of truth. Our intellects are being dumbed down to dangerous levels. We no longer make demands on our regional news organizations to stick with the facts and follow with a short analysis. We do not demand that they allow a solid rebuttal opinion on the front page. Oh sure, a couple of readers' letters follow investigative reporting, such as that done by Washington Post last month. Walter Reed made the page front and center. Most newspapers do allow later news impacting the original stories..... conveniently buried on page fifteen the following week. Things must move along with an appearance of fairness. But in the feeding frenzy that followed in Congress after the story broke surely it would be unwise to stop the presses and adjust the story a bit, right? A bit of truth with a lot of opinion makes for sensationalism. And that, little kiddies, is what sells news print. We must not consider BRAC or the A76 process as potential culprits in the decline of adequate facilities and structure at Walter Reed. Smart readers might begin to think more longitudinally as to the nature of how the oversight neglect of the finger-pointers at the top produced a trickle effect down the blame chain.

Such is the case with Walter Reed. Sure, there is truth to the conditions in Building 18. I found the pictures in the Washington Post appalling. Yep, we need to fix the bureacratic maze and fast-track the process during times of war. But when a media mogul decides to choose paint from the palette for their story, it seems no amount of additional truth, or "paint thinner" is allowed to adjust the opinion on the page. When this story of the neglect of our soldiers first hit the front page of the Washington Post, I followed it with interest. After vets began writing into my e mail as witnesses to the fine care they had themselves received at Walter Reed, I began to realize there was a disparity. Trekking to the library, I pulled the archive and read the original story. A nugget of truth emerged: Walter Reed had an ugly problem with Building 18, a physical facility housing outpatient soldiers. Many soldiers were also walking through a nightmare maze of paperwork which delayed their healthcare options. As a civilian with my own private medical insurance I can feel their pain. The paperwork for my husbands recent hospitalization was formidable also. I imagine theirs might be worse?

But Walter Reed is not some sausage factory for our troops. It has been a bulwark of healthcare for our soldiers with provision by solid healthcare professional for many decades. Having served in ICU and PACU environments in Naval hospitals in Guam, Puerto Rico (Roosevelt Roads, now closed), Camp Pendleton and National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda , it has been a distinct pleasure to witness an excellent standard of care. I have found a level of professionalism and state of the art equipment comparable with my own civilian hospital. Military hospital corpsman function on the level of LVN's at these facilities. When at NNMC, I was involved in patient care research studies linked to the National Institutes of Health. Very fascinating things going on, for the benefit of all our sailors and soldiers. I have never served at Walter Reed. But if the standards observed in Navy hospitals are the norm for which the military strives, surely many soldiers have found themselves in good stead at Walter Reed.

Basically, the point I am trying to get across is the same thing I stated the first month into my new blog. Always read with a filter. Take what is offered in print and weigh it in the scales of fact versus opinion. And can the opinion be substantiated by across-the-board facts? Just as some seemingly great works of art are later found to be frauds, is it possible that some of our best newsbreaking stories of the week, have also been touched up a bit? Maybe the paint needs to be thinned. Maybe we need to see the broader truth. I don't think Walter Reed deserves the heated opinion which has been generated against it. A thick paintbrush has been used which brings a guilty verdict against the hospital system in totality. And sadly, in the Congressional environment of "off with their heads", some of those best-suited to engage the skill sets to rectify the situation have probably lost their jobs. And they have been denied both monies and manpower to upgrade their systems.

Tammy Swofford
tammyswofford@yahoo.com