As states across the US started to issue stay-at-home orders, the main topic has been when our country would reopen. Now, states face tough choices over reopening: how fast, how much, how soon.

Nation, States Face Tough Choices Over Reopening

The subject of reopening and resuming normal life has been batted around by politicians, medical experts and media pundits for weeks. There has been lots of information released on every side of this issue.

We’ve found stats and facts, backed by reliable experts in the field and from a variety of media sources, to help explain what’s a stake.

Differing Realities Across All 50 States

The reality is that infection rates and death tolls look different in every state right now. There are clear hotbeds, like New York City, and places where COVID-19 seems to have barely arrived, like Montana.

On that same note, each state has implemented a variety of different techniques to reduce spread and treat those who are ill.

With so much difference in spread and response, each state and, in some cases, individual counties or cities, will likely need to “reopen” on a variety of timelines.

There is no one hard or fast answer here. What works for one city, county or state might nor work universally.

States Should Remain Closed – For Now

There are many who believe that states should remain closed until infection and death toll reductions benchmarks have been reached in order to prevent further spread of the virus.

Right now, the CDC projections show a national increase in total COVID-19 deaths by early August. This increase currently predicts 137,000 COVID-19 related deaths, as of May 4, in a model by the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

The latest model reflects a doubling of the projected death toll as compared to the IHME’s April 17 predictions. That early prediction estimated approximately 60,000 deaths by August. The US has surpassed that estimate, with almost 80,000 dead in mid-May.

Per a May 7 report, the daily death toll was predicted to reach and hover around 3,000 per day by June 1. This prediction is based on data compiled by FEMA and many believe that returning to business as usual too soon could lead to an increase in this already high projected death toll.

In fact, scientific models seem to support that there will be an increase in infections and deaths, should states reopen partially or fully prior to meeting White House and CDC guidelines. The IHME modified their projections based on the expectation of relaxed social distancing and increased travel.

“(R)ising mobility in most U.S. states as well as the easing of social distancing measures expected in 31 states by May 11, indicating that growing contacts among people will promote transmission of the coronavirus,” the IHME report noted.

We Need to Return to Business as Usual ASAP

There is no doubt that the US has been hard hit economically as a result of the pandemic.

In April, the unemployment rate rose to 14.7% and over 25 million people are now unemployed, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

4.4 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits in the week of April 18. While this is down from 5.2 million the previous week, according to reporting by Fortune.com, but also marks the fifth straight week of new unemployment filings over 3 million.

Many are worried about further economic collapse should the economy and businesses remain shutdown in the longer term. There have been protests in many states and cities pushing for immediate, full reopening of their states.

White House and CDC Reopening Guidelines

The White House and CDC have issued a multi-phase plan to help guide states as they consider reopening.

Each phase has infection and death toll benchmarks that indicate initiation and progression to the next phase.

• Initial Data Requirement Suggestions: in order to consider reopening, the White House recommends that states have a 14-day downward trajectory in flu-like symptoms and COVID-19 like symptoms. It is also recommended that states observe a downward trend of documented or tested COVID-19 cases in the 2 week period. Hospitals should also be operating outside of crisis mode, with the ability to treat all patients. There should also be a robust testing program

Cautious Reopening Under White House Guidelines

While these phases of reopening provide a blueprint for the nation, states are not required to adhere to them. They are merely suggestions from the White House and CDC.

Phase 1: the initial data should indicate a general downward trend in infections over a 2 week period with a return to non-crisis healthcare with robust COVID-19 testing.

• Individuals: all vulnerable individuals should remain sheltering in place. Everyone should be respecting maximizing social distance protocols and avoiding all gatherings of over 10 people. When in situations when where social distance cannot be maintained, protections, like face masks and increased hand washing, should be practiced. Non-essential travel should be limited and all travel should be followed by a period of self-isolation.
• Businesses: all businesses should encourage telework as much as possible. If employees must remain at work, closing common areas to prevent the spread of possible infection is recommended. Non-essential business travel should be avoided.
• Schools: all schools that are currently closed should remain closed
• Gyms: should only reopen if strict physical distancing is possible
• Senior Citizens: visits to nursing homes and assisted care facilities should be avoided
• Large Venues: sports stadiums, places of worship and concert venues should remain closed
• Bars: stay closed

Phase 2: there should not be a rebound to pre-Phase 1 infection rates with a continued downward trend in order to proceed.

• Individuals: vulnerable individuals should stay at home, but gatherings of up to 50 people can resume with appropriate physical distancing maintained
• Travel: non-essential travel can resume
• Businesses: continue to support telework as much as possible
• Schools: can reopen
• Gyms: can remain open with strict physical distancing and sanitation
• Senior Citizens: avoid visiting nursing homes
• Large Venues: can reopen with moderate physical distancing protocols
• Restaurants/Bars: bars may operate as standing room only with a limited capacity; restaurants can operate with moderate physical distancing and limited capacity

Phase 3: there should be no rebound to pre-Phase 1 infection rates with a continued downward trend in order to proceed

• Individuals: vulnerable individuals can break self-isolation, but maintain physical distancing. Everyone else should minimize the time spent in close proximity to others.
• Travel: non-essential travel can continue
• Businesses: no restrictions on staffing in any sector
• Schools: remain open
• Gyms: can remain open, with proper sanitation protocols
• Senior Citizens: visitors are welcome, with strict hygiene practices being followed
• Large Venues: can resume with limited physical distancing practice
• Restaurants/Bars: bars may operate with increased occupancy, but remain standing room only. Restaurants can resume operations with limited physical distancing protocols

What do you think of the White House’s reopening guidelines? Sound off in the comments!

Troops are reliant on the military medical machine. But there isn’t much, if any, recourse when something goes awry. For years, the Feres Doctrine has prevented military personnel from doing anything.

With a late 2019 legal decision, the Feres Doctrine loosened up and finally gave troops options to seek justice when their medical care isn’t up to par.

What You Need to Know Now About the Feres Doctrine

Just what exactly these changes mean for you, your family and your medical is an important issue. One that we all need to be tracking as things shift.

What Is the Feres Doctrine?

In 1950, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that greatly expanded immunity for the US government.

It’s connected to the 1946 Federal Tort Claims Act. As part of this law, the federal government gained immunity to claims that arise from wartime combat. In 1950, the Supreme Court added non-combat or incident of service injuries. Meaning that sexual assault, toxic poisoning, medical negligence and other non-combat related injuries cannot be the basis of legal action against the US government or military.

Justice Antonin Scalia acknowledged that Feres was wrongly decided in 1987.

And then the Supreme Court left it up to Congress to fix.

Over the years, Congress has attempted to correct Feres, but major changes haven’t been made.

Until now.

How Feres Changed in 2019

As part of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, military troops would be able to seek just compensation for medical malpractice by military doctors. In order to initiate the process, there is a new claims procedure being put into place.

This bill, however, stops short of allowing military troops to sue, a right that civilians have in the case of medical malpractice.

Additionally, there are limits to compensation and imposes financial burdens on troops making medical malpractice claims. The Department of Defense will be liable for only a portion of compensation due to a victim of medical malpractice by a DoD doctor.

The government will also not be liable to pay attorneys’ fees. Fees recovered by attorneys are limited to 20% of the paid claim.

Military Docs Missed Major Health Problem

The most recent changes were moved forward by Congresswoman Jackie Spier (D – CA). Earlier in 2019, Congresswoman Spier introduced the Sgt. First Class Richard Stayskal Military Medical Accountability Act.

Sgt. 1st Class Stayskal, an Army and USMC veteran, had seen military medical personnel repeatedly due to breathing problems and growing concerns over his health. Each time, he was told it was just asthma or pneumonia.

It was only when he sought another opinion from a civilian pulmonologist that Sgt. Stayskal learned that he had Stage 4 lung cancer. Military doctors and specialists had apparently missed a 3cm mass in one of his lungs.

This gross negligence spurred Congresswoman Spier and other political allies to create a movement for legal change, introducing the Stayskal Military Medical Accountability Act and pushing to allow troops to seek justice against medical malpractice.

This incident follows upon decades of troops being injured or dying, in military service, in non-combat situations.

Army Capt. Katie Blanchard was attacked with gasoline and lit on fire by a civilian colleague. The civilian employee had been brought to the attention of supervisors. He was seen as a threat to others, ultimately completely disfiguring Capt. Blanchard.

She was not allowed to seek damages from the military.

Navy Lt. Rebekah Daniel died during childbirth at a military medical facility. Her surviving spouse, Walter Daniel, sued and the case rose to the Supreme Court in May 2019. Ultimately, Walter Daniel v. United States was denied Supreme Court consideration. However, Justices Ruth Bader Gindberg and Clarence Thomas called for a review of the case.

Lt. Daniel’s case will not benefit from the most recent changes to Feres.

The Feres Doctrine’s roots are in another Supreme Court case from post-World War II. Lt. Rudolph Feres had served his country in Europe, and survived. Only to be killed in a barracks fire after the war.

Lt. Feres’ widow attempted to sue the US military for negligence in the death of her husband. The fight took them to the Supreme Court, which handed down the decision preventing troops from suing in all cases of illness, injury or death related to any military service.

This law has been allowed to stand, with limited changes, since then.

How New Feres Will Impact You

If you’ve been the victim of medical malpractice by a military doctor, you have up to two years after the incident to submit your claim to the DoD. The process for actually submitting a claim remained undefined at the time of publication.

After review, approved cases up to $100,000 can be directly paid out by the DoD. Cases approved for settlements in excess of $100,000 will be referred to the US Treasury for additional review.

In order to be considered, your medical malpractice must not have occurred in a combat zone.

Medical malpractice cases that predate 2017 have no options for recourse. However, cases occurring in 2017 will be able to file claims through the end of 2020. Following that, cases must have occurred within a two-year window, prior to the date the claim is being submitted.

Were you the victim of military medical malpractice? How do you feel about the changes to Feres? Does it go far enough? Sound off in the comments!

January 2020 started out as normal as possible. By the middle of April, the entire world had changed entirely.

How the World Has Changed Since January 2020

Back in January, Americans hadn’t really heard of coronavirus or COVID-19. If it had crossed our radar, it was as a distant threat – not something that would pause life as we know it.

2020: A Very Interesting Beginning

In January, Americans were caught up in the daily drama of President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial. There were daily updates and new developments as Congress determined whether his alleged actions should result in his removal from office.

Generally, our worries were inward facing: impeachment, the wild winter weather, Kobe Bryant.

We were shocked as Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, announced that they would become financially independent and move to North America immediately.

The attack on the US Embassy in Baghdad rattled us deeply. It felt too close to the other recent embassy attacks in 2013. Many celebrated when US forces killed Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani. And we all worried when Iranian forces retaliated by shooting missiles at US bases. The rising toll of troops suffering from varying degrees of TBIs kept us glued to our seats.

Australia suffered a devastating bushfire season, with an estimated one million animals dying in the weeks-long blaze. We cried when images of scorched koalas or kangaroos flashed across our newsfeed.

Everything felt a little too fast, a little too much. It was the longest year ever – and it was only February.

Many Feel It’s the Longest Year on Record

By early February, the first coronavirus death outside of China was recorded in the Philippines. Nations across the globe began to tighten their borders, with many restricting or preventing travel from Chinese nationals. However, this looming international health crisis still didn’t seem real to Americans.

President Trump was acquitted on February 5, effectively ending his impeachment trial.

The Democratic presidential primaries continued their months-long slog toward the summer convention. Candidates launched barbed one-liners at each other in debates and attempted to appeal to the diverse liberal audience for support.

Still, coronavirus was lurking in the background as we marched toward March. The world watched as several cruise ships were quarantined in Japan, confirmed cases of COVID-19 aboard. Funny TikTok videos and grim daily Twitter updates competed for our attention on social media.

Still, the problem mostly seemed contained to Asia.

We saw a severe winter storm slam New England while Antarctica recorded the hottest ever temperature of approximately 65ºF.

Commenting on the possibly retaliatory firings of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, his brother Army JAG officer Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman and EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland was more pressing news than discussing coronavirus.

But by the end of February, coronavirus had spread from China, South Korea and Japan to Europe, Africa and North America. Major world sporting events, like the Tokyo Marathon, are impacted. The Marathon reduced its size to just 200 elite runners instead of the planned field of 38,000.

And the US recorded it’s first coronavirus death on February 29, 2020.

Swift Slide to Pandemic & Global Lockdown

From that very first death on the last day of February, many parts of the US swiftly moved from total ignorance to complete lockdown.

By mid-March K-12 schools were closed. Businesses and even the federal government moved toward teleworking options to prevent the spread of coronavirus. Suddenly, parents were attempting to both work-from-home while also supervising and facilitating distance learning.

President Trump also began giving daily briefing from the White House press room, supported by Dr. Anthony Fauci. Reports and recommendations from the White House often conflicted each other as well as the recommendations of the CDC and WHO.

States attempted a piecemeal approach to contain the spread of COVID-19. Some states quickly moved to cancel schools and limit public gatherings. Others are still not responding with any preventative measures.

The US death toll, as of April 6, has topped 10,000. In just one month, we have gone from complete denial to pandemic, from one death to tens of thousands.

A Nation of Hand Washers

Except in those places where the state or local governments haven’t acted, Americans are staying inside. We wear face masks when we leave the house and we stay 6 or more feet from everyone.

Every cough and sneeze in public is met with glares of suspicion, followed by people nearby swiftly scuttling far away.

Now, coronavirus dominates our news and conversations. The 2020 election and all the contention over President Trumps controversial presidency seem to have largely faded into the background. We’re all just focused on our daily survival.

Juggling working, educating kids and sanitizing our homes has taken firm priority in our lives.

Vacations are effectively canceled through at least June. Schools are closed for the year. Professional and college sports pulled the plug on whole seasons.

Suddenly, our world has shrunk. We have the four walls of our homes and any additional land. We have walks in the neighborhood or on unpopulated trails, staying far from all others.

Hands are washed ad nauseam. Never have counters and doorknobs been so very clean. Even groceries and mailed packages are being sanitized in an effort to keep COVID-19 far from our own doors.

The world has changed since the heady beginning of 2020. We’ve become more careful and also more community focused. Many of us are realizing the joys of interacting with people in real life instead of from a screen. Everything has become a little bit cleaner, more sanitary. Everyone has become a whole lot more worried, more aware of our own mortality.

And more grateful for the blessings we currently have: a roof over our heads, food on the table, the promise of tomorrow.

How has your world changed with the pandemic? Sound off in the comments.

Abuse. You think it means bruises and physical violence. Maybe aggressive name-calling and emotional torture. But putting conditions on and tying love to money is financial abuse – and it’s a real problem in the military community.

However, financial abuse is hard to spot. It’s so often hidden as budgeting or “being smart with spending.” Exerting so much control over finances, in such a way that one partner is subservient to the other, is abuse.

And we need to start talking about it ASAP.

We Need to Talk About Military Spouse Financial Abuse

What is financial abuse?

Simply put, it’s tightly controlling the spending, earning and maintaining financial resources. This can include:

• connecting use of joint accounts to “good behavior”
• denying access to debit or credit cards
• preventing a partner from working or controlling earnings
• down to the penny accounting for spending

That’s just the tip of the iceberg in terms of how finances and money can be used by one spouse to control the other.

It’s Happening Right Next Door

Your neighbor. The couple you know from the squadron or unit. You.

Spousal financial abuse is literally happening all around you – and you might never know it. It’s sneaky and easy to hide.

I’ll never forget the moment when a friend told me that she had “lost” her debit card. My immediate reaction was to call her bank and request a new one.

“No,” she explained. She’d simply lost the privilege of using the debit card connected to the joint account she shares with her husband. He felt justified in removing her access to money because…

Honestly, it doesn’t really matter why he took away her debit card. Not cleaning the house to his preference was one reason supplied. Another was not seasoning dinner to his liking. Her fitness level, style of dress, socializing with others.

There were endless reasons supplied over three or so years. Each one blamed her for something he didn’t “prefer.”

It’s About Control – Not Love

For my friend and everyone trapped in an abusive relationship, it’s all about control.

Abuse, no matter what form it takes, is always about control and power. It is never about love.

What financial abuse does particularly well is to remove the abused partner’s means of escape.

Leaving often requires some money to get started. Money for a bus, plane or train ticket. Cash for a hotel room or short-term lease. Even just a way to pay for a cab.

Without access to money, the abused spouse is effectively trapped.

Military Life Seems to Make This Easier

As Lizann Lightfoot noted in an article on Military.com, military budgets are often stretched to the very limit. With payday arriving every two weeks, military families – especially those who are young or have additional debts – might structure their spending around when money arrives in their account.

Creating a budget to account for spending, debt and frequency of income – that’s normal. It makes sense, especially for families who walk a financial tightrope.

But a lot of “common” money practices aren’t normal:

• hiding “his” money to pay for basics between payday
• losing access to accounts, credit cards or debit cards
• receiving a strict “allowance” to pay for all household basics
• giving over control of your paycheck entirely
• refusing you or your children the resources to pay for food, clothing, hygiene supplies or shelter
• refusing you access to participate in the financial planning aspect of the family

These six reasons are, again, just the tip of the iceberg of financial abuse. Whatever methods the abuser takes, the intent is always about power, control and limiting their partner’s access to resources.

Military life makes it uniquely easier, in a sense, for one person to gain that level of control over the other.

Moving every three years limits many spouses’ career or job options. Without a steady salary or income, it’s not uncommon to think about “they earn it all, so they can spend it as they see fit.” It’s a justification for limiting one partner’s access to finances.

When one partner controls all the income and expenses, without input from the other, that could be financial abuse.

What Can You Do?

In our community, we’re used to relying on others for support and resources. Financial abuse is no different.

If you suspect a friend or acquaintance is a victim of financial abuse:

• offer support: I’m here for you…
• help them process: How does it feel when…
• validate their feelings: Thanks for sharing…
• offer resources: Can I help you find…
• give them a way out: Could we make a plan, just in case…

Military spouses in abusive relationships of any type have resources built-in to help support their survival.

If you are in an abusive relationship, you can make a report. Your report will either be restricted or unrestricted.

Restricted reports:

• report to Family Advocacy Program clinicians or advocates, or to your PCM
• law enforcement is not involved
• chain of command is not involved
• access to counseling and an advocate to help formulate your next steps

Unrestricted reports:

• law enforcement conducts an investigation
• chain of command is involved
• support available from CoC includes no-contact order or protective order
• access to all Family Advocacy Program resources
• rights to access legal services
• assistance applying for transitional compensation

By reporting to command, financial allotments can also be set up to help the abused spouse stay financially stable during this period of transition.

How do you and your spouse or partner handle the finances? Sound off in the comment!