asked the Minister for Defence whether he is aware than an ex-private (No. V/20944) has been refused a pension, as set out in a letter from his Department (DP. 14401); and if, inasmuch as this man became mentally deranged while in the Army, he will reconsider the decision to refuse any pension to his wife and dependents.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Refusal of Army Pensions.
I am aware that an application for a disability pension on behalf of the soldier in question was refused. The application was refused because the Army Pensions Board reported that the disability from which he suffers is not attributable to his service in the forces, during the emergency period. As the findings of the board in this respect are final and conclusive and binding, I am unable to alter the decision given.
Surely, if a serving soldier is certified, while on service, to be insane and is removed to a mental hospital, no matter what any board finds, is it not manifest that the man has lost the balance of his mind while serving? Is it not common knowledge that, while many persons may be temporarily unstable but may retain the balance of their mind in a civilian organisation, the routine of the Army might be the very thing to make them insane? How can the Minister justify saying to this man's wife and two small children that, whereas he left them sane and able to earn his living and their living, he is returned to them as a patient in the local mental hospital —how can he say that he acknowledges no responsibility for their welfare——
The Deputy is now making a speech. A supplementary question should be brief.
I apologise to you but you would have my feeling if you saw those people on the street.
The Chair is concerned with the question whether the Minister has or has not responsibility in the matter.
I am putting it to him— I am sure he shares my solicitude— that he should have a new regulation made providing for persons who lose their reason while serving in the Army.
That is a completely new question. As the law stands, if disease is not attributable to service, I can do nothing about it. The applicant and his representatives were given every opportunity of proving that the disease was attributable to service and they failed to do so. In the circumstances, the board had no option but to turn the application down.
Surely, the Minister will agree that, if a man becomes insane while serving in the Army, his mental disequilibrium is not due to the birds of the air? Surely, he will recognise, as any employer would, that he has some responsibility for the man's wife and children who are now in the streets.
Is the Minister not aware that it is very difficult for anybody to prove that disability was due to service? It is putting a very unfair obligation upon the applicant and I suggest to the Minister that this regulation should be altered.
The board had before them a specialist report from the resident medical superintendent of the mental hospital in Monaghan and that went a long way in helping them to arrive at a decision.
Is it the Minister's contention that the man is not insane?
The only suggestion I am making is that the claim in the case does not come within the law.
Does the board admit that he was sane when accepted in the Army?
Mr. Corish
Was this man given a clean bill of health, from the physical and mental point of view, on his acceptance as a member of the Army?
I cannot say that. I do not know the past history of the individual. Everybody must be well aware that men in the Army develop diseases, not necessarily arising from their service, but because they happen to be on military service, people will, naturally, endeavour to ascribe their disease to that service, whereas it may have no relation to it whatever.
This man has been in the Army since 1939.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will state the reasons why Private J. Kane, late of the Second Field Company, Supply and Transport, Collins Barracks, Dublin, who has been discharged from the Army, as medically unfit, after 18 years' service, has not been granted a pension.
Private J. Kane was discharged from the forces on "compassionate grounds", on the 27th February, 1946.
Normally, a soldier is eligible for the grant of a pension under Article 26 of the Defence Forces (Pensions) Scheme, 1937, on completion of 21 years' qualifying service in the forces, but a modified pension under Article 27 (1) of the scheme may be granted to a soldier discharged on the ground of disability or of age, if his qualifying service is 15 years or more and less than 21 years.
Private Kane, not having completed 21 years' qualifying service, is not eligible for the grant of a normal pension, and as he was not discharged from the forces on the ground of either disability or age, he is not eligible for the grant of a modified pension.