The US boasts the best financed and most equipped armed forces in the world. Given its position and the threats it faces in the 21st century, its military approach is understandable. In the backdrop of this however, there has been some controversy on Tri-care benefits and perks extended to active members of the armed forces, veterans and their immediate families. Besides active military personnel, TRI-CARE extends health benefits to military retirees, and their dependants and in some cases, some members of the reserve component. TRI-CARE has a number of options under it but the most important regarding Tri-care extension for life is TRI-CARE For Life. This discussion will stump for the continued provision of TRI-CARE benefits to the military retirees. In light of the sacrifice members of the armed forces give to their country and the social, psychological and health challenges that retirees face during and after service, it is important to provide continued TRI-CARE coverage for military retirees and their immediate families (Bernstein, 2004, p. 142). While Tri-care is no under real threat of abolition, it is common knowledge that it does not cater comprehensively for the needs of retirees and their families. With looming budget cuts in defense, there is a real possibility that medical benefits schemes including Tri-care include some of the causalities that will face cuts.
There have been suggestions that the entire TRI-CARE system needs an overhaul to improve service delivery especially to military retirees. While there is consensus on the above issue, there is no unified voice on the specific elements of the TRI-CARE system that need reformation. There have been suggestions especially by Vietnam veterans that TRI-CARE premium increases on behalf of today’s retirees is in order. Additionally, it is important that there is reasonable yearly increases in family coverage to cater for growing needs that retirees encounter. However, there is necessity for reformation of TRI-CARE For Life to ensure achievement of continued provision of TRI-CARE coverage for military retirees for life (Devantier & Turkington, 2006, p. 67).
TRI-CARE For Life came into being in May 2001 in response to growing discontent of increasing medicare costs among military retirees. It therefore necessitated the need for a benefit that will pay for these costs in lieu of TRI-CARE, for prescription payment, physician and hospital dispensed drugs as well as cost sharing and deductibles. Initially, retirees lost TRI-CARE coverage upon attaining medicare eligibility. However, TFL changed the above and now retires can access TRI-CARE benefits even if they are Medicare eligible provided they purchase Medicare Part B. TFL is just one of the programs meant to provide continued TRI-CARE coverage for military retirees and their families and to some extent a prototype for an expanded Tri-care for life program..
According to Kapferer (2009, p. 41), a number of military retirees face various difficulties in paying for their medical expenses. In a research carried out by McPherson. & Schwenka (2004, p. 355), a high percentage of military personnel as well as retirees and their families would prefer continued Tri-care coverage for life. McPherson. & Schwenka found out that currently, a good number of active duty military personnel, retirees and their families have access to alternative medical services apart from Tri-care and, they foot the bills for these services out of their pocket. It certainly is not right for people rendering services to their country like military personnel to receive such treatment.
Even with presence of TFL, some still can’t access some medical services due to financial constraints. Kapferer (2009, p. 41) contends that on average, military retirees are likely to experience more medical problems than a retiree, say from the corporate sector. He further adds that their special nature of health issues stems from the fact that they served in the combat hence their exposure to health hazards is higher than a non military retiree.
Traditionally, in many parts of the world, being part of the armed forces attracts admiration from compatriots especially due to the fact that soldiers put their lives in the line for the sake of the country. It is the belief of many Americans that members of armed forces do what they do in defense their country, and rightly so. Given the fact that these people put their lives on the line, in the process affecting their families and friends, it is only fair that they receive continued medical perks like continued TRI-CARE coverage as a sign of gratitude from the state. According to Kongstvedt (2001, p. 126), , extended medical perks is the least the authorities can do for retired military members, considering a good number of them become disabled besides experiencing complicated psychological problems such as post traumatic stress order.
There is no doubt that a good number of soldiers join the military out of their love for their country. Apart from the famous Vietnam draft, the US has always relied on voluntary enlistment in beefing up its armed forces numbers. Therefore, the way their country treats them also matters. In fact, according to Thompson (2003, p. 15), the condition of veterans determines a great deal if young people will join the armed forces or not. Access to the better health services by discharged members of the armed forces therefore encourages potential service members to join the military.
Compared to the rest of the population, some members of the military feel they have been given a raw deal concerning health benefits. There is discontent that undocumented people access better medical care than retired military personnel. While the above issue is subject to debate, it raises the fairness question on the use of resources when providing for medical services. According to Aronovitz et al. (2006, p. 46), it is unfair to lump together military and other retirees when providing medical benefits. He even suggests that if possible, benefits from programs such as Medicare should undergo restructuring in order to give specific services to retired military personnel.
In terms of the economy, it is important to acknowledge that retirement income makes up of a large part of personal incomes of many people in the US, military personnel included. Besides the medical reasons, Hefner (1992, p. 408) asserts that military retirees collectively constitute a growth industry. There is a big impact on state economies by pensions paid by the Pentagon to military retirees. Therefore, continued Tri-care benefits are not only beneficial to the individual but also to the economy of the locality where they belong.
It is important to note that there is in place a system to care for retired members of the military. TRI-CARE is one example of such a system. The above justification roots for the restructuring of TRI-CARE so that retired military members can access benefits commensurate to their years of service for the rest of their life. It is important for policy makers to consider the health of retired members of the armed forces. Already TRI-CARE offers a ready platform for implementation of the above discussed program.
References
Aronovitz, L. G. et al. (2006). TRI-CARE: enrollment of the Department of Defense’s TRI-CARE. New York: McGraw Hill.
Bernstein, A. B. (2004). Guide to your career. London: Sage Publications.
Devantier, A. & Turkington, C. (2006). Extraordinary Jobs in Government. New York: Cengage Learning.
Hefner, L.F. (1992). A Note on the Regional Impact of Military Retirees. Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 18, No. 3, Spring 1992, pp. 407-414.
Kapferer, B. (2009). Crisis of the state: war and social upheaval. New York: John Willey & Sons.
Kongstvedt, R. P. (2001). The managed health care handbook. Washington: McMillanPublishers.
McPherson, F. & Schwenka, A.M. (2004). Use of Complementary and Alternative Therapies among Active Duty Soldiers, Military Retirees, and Family Members at a Military Hospital. Military medicine, Vol. 169. 2004, pp. 354-357.
Thompson, P. (2003). The Real Insider’s Guide to Military Basic Training: A Recruit. New York: Routledge.