Should medically retired get the same certificate as those that did 20+?

A retirement is a retirement, shouldn't matter the number of years served. Should there be a different certificate for someone that serves MORE than the "required" 20 years?

I think "most" should, people who have dedicated their life to the Army but are unable to continue should definately get the same recognition. Barring their injury they may have continued their military service. There are a few who abuse the system but we can't punish those that are really unable to continue for those that had a good plan to abuse the system. Besides the Certificate doesn't say anything other than they retired after serving faithfully and honorably

I understand what you are saying, you were not demeaning anyone, just showing a difference. Great thought. Thanks .

I don't think it's that easy to get medically retired...I've only known a handful of people to do so and they had pretty severe issues. Some of those issues may have been genetic but more likely then not it was because of their sacrifices in the service. Yes they deserve the same retirement recognition.

You don't get medically retired for a broken arm, there are medical and physical evaluation boards that determine whether one can return fit for duty, medical discharge with a severance pay or medically retired (which begins VA disability). I can say, for my PEB, it was approved by an Admiral somewhere and the board convened with a handful of medical officers that review the records, etc.

Most of the time it's a permanent injury or chronic problem that one is medically retired for.

Myself, I was medically retired for Epilepsy with 80% disability. I'm fortunate that I have all of my limbs entact and no physical ailments like many of my brothers who were in combat situations, however SFC you can suck it.

If i could, I would still be out in 7th fleet, on the ship, where I belong, working on CIWS.

I understand that someone who spent 20+ years might not want to be lumped in with someone who spent less than 20 years and was medically retired.

However, does it really matter? You get your benefits. They get theirs. It really isn't like these people who are getting medically retired are seeking this kind of separation on purpose.

None

No

Sergeant, my response is this question: Did they Honorably Serve and Retire? If Yes, then YES. If No, well.... maybe a discussion is needed.

The effective date of my stating medically retired put me at 19yrs, 7 Mons 29 days! They stated I wasn't world wide deplorable anymore. My Unit was next on list to deploy and have several, many, many times since. I joined at 18 yrs old with a plan to do my 20 at least & hopefully more. I don't believe just because you we're allowed to or able to finish your 20 yrs that you are better or your service is better than someone who was injured in combat, effected by chemical weapons, injured in training. They gave MORE than just those that got their 20. They will have life long problems. Some got thru during no time of war. Some weren't in comat positions. To think you're better than those because you got your 20 yr letter is just narcissistic. Allot of those Medically Retired can never work again. If you joined young like 18 yrs old, after 20 then you would 38 you can still work. Draw your retirement and a pay check. Those of us who are 100% DAV only have disability pay and what ever amount social security we have built up. What about the Gold Star Families? I'm sure they don't think just because you got your 20 in makes your better than the one they lost! Heck no! Everyone's service matters. If you think you're better due to a 20 year letter you need to fall off that pedestal you've put yourself on and learn some humility. To ALL that served thank you for your service, your commitment and your sacrifices. Don't let others on this site make you feel like less, you are not! God bless you all.