I‘ve got to learn to read things more carefully (when I saw "PTSD", I mistakenly thought "STD" ... chuckle ...)
Okay - it‘s been ages since I‘ve tried to debate something politely, so forgive me if I‘m rusty at this ...
Once upon a time, I imagine wound stripes were instituted for physical wounds (at that point in history, they didn‘t understand "mental wounds").
First of all, let‘s imagine the wound stripe was issued for the purpose of acknowledging, and signalling to others that the wearer had been wounded (i.e. although we use the expression "battle-scarred veteran", not all scars would be visible since some would be covered by clothing, for example. Furthermore, some wounds might "heal" without leaving too much visible evidence). As such, let‘s pretend the purpose of the wound stripe was to signal that the wearer had received an injury "in battle", and to afford the wearer some degree of respect from others who might not otherwise realise the pain and suffering the wearer had endured. Okay?
Leaping forward to the here and now, and digressing to discuss PTSD, "shell shock", or "combat fatigue" ...
If any soldier or officer is wounded in the service of our country, the ideal situation would be for a thankful nation to ensure the service member would be properly looked after (i.e. proper medical attention, rehabilitation if necessary, and a pension in the "worst case" scenario).
For the sake of discussion, let‘s accept that some service members are going to actually witness tragic/traumatic events - things that no young man or woman should ever have to see - with the possible result of PTSD (ideally, "the system" would ensure their eventual return to health, mental or physical).
Historically, we acknowledged their service by giving them service medals - and, once upon a time, one would understand that a person with numerous ribbons on their uniform "had seen a lot of action". Thus, it used to be sufficient for our society to acknowledge a soldier‘s gruelling/harrowing experiences by respecting their service (by respecting their ribbons, and similarly their wound stripes). I should also point out I am alarmed by the recent trend to lower standards, and award ribbons as if at a county fair ... (but that‘s nothing new - remember the "SPAM" medal?)
Unfortunately/regrettably, in "some people‘s" opinion PTSD still carries some degree of stigma (reminiscent of "lacking moral fibre" ...). Accordingly, there would be the risk of further stigmatizing somebody by pinning a wound stripe on them.
Okay, okay - I can hear you saying "sum up".
Please let me suggest this: It should be understood that some of our comrades in arms have paid a higher price than others whilst earning their ribbons, and not all scars are visible.
Thus endeth the sermon according to me.
Dileas Gu Brath
M.A. Bossi, Esquire