WAR DISABILITIES.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLV, Issue 140, 18 May 1925, Page 5

WAR DISABILITIES.

DISCUSSED BY R.S.A. CONFERENCE.

The matter of war disabilities in relation to pensions und insurance was discussed at tho annual district conference of tho Returned Soldiers’ Association on Saturday afternoon on the reading of a remit from the Wellington branch: “That whereas an applicant has been refused a pension by the ooard and again by the Board of Appeal on their medical advisors’ report as being free or not now suffering from a war disability, he shall be entitled to a certificate signed by tho medical men concerned to that effect, such certificate to bo accepted, if so desired by the holder, by the Government Life Insurance Department when application is made for a policy.” In moving that the remit bo sent on to tho Dominion conference, Mr W. J. Pascoe the Wellington delegate, said that, to his own knowledge, there were many men who were not able to work through war disabilities who were not allowed a pension by tho board, which considered that they were not suffering from any war d:is : ability. Frequently these men, when making application for life insurance with the Government, were turned down because of their disability. Tho association had a duty to these men. If a returned soldier was not allowed a pension because of his being said to be free from war disability, lie should bo given a certificate to that effect, which should bo accepted by the life insurance department. The chairman (Mr B. J„ Jacobs) pointed out that it was quite possible that the man might be refused a policy bccauso of a disability resulting from other than war causes. He thought that tho remit should be altered to read that the life insurance department should accept the certificate as proof only of tho man’s freedom from war disability. It was quite on the cards that a man might be refused a policy because of post-war disability. Mr Pascoe concurred with this view. Colonel A. H. Herbert' (Eketahuna) stated that the remit opened up a big question. “How are you going to say seven years after what is a war disability or a war disease?” Big possibilities of expenditure were in sight. Some men had the obsession that they were suffering from war disability when, in fact, they were not. Then again, it was sometimes extremely difficult to say whether men who had contracted neurasthenia had it as the result of war service or not. Mr Pascoe stated that when returning to Now Zealand in tho transports, some of the men, on being asked if anything was wrong with them, had replied in the negative when they were really suffering from some illness or disability, because of the fact that they wished to immediately go to their homes and not to sanatoria. Now that answer counted against them receiving pensions. If the life insurance department said that a man was suffering from a war disability, he should be entitled to go back to the Appeal Board. It was the duty of the association to get medical advice with regard to men who said that they were suffering from war disability and had been turned down by the Pensions Board. After further discussion, it was decided to forward the remit on, with the insertion of tho words “to that extent” after “such certificate to be accepted.”