The wound medal

Egad. Apparently the CF is going to go ahead with a medal for wounded Canadian service members, although the design and details aren't yet finalized.

My stand on the issue hasn't changed since I wrote this and, more to the point, this.

The advantages of a medal over a wound stripe all come down to visibility - a medal on the chest is supposedly more recognizable than a stripe on the sleeve. The disadvantages all stem from the level of discretion granted to the wounded member:

• You generally can't choose to not wear a medal, although you can choose not to wear your wound stripe. This is especially important for soldiers who are stricken with PTSD or other wounds they might consider embarrassing: imagine a well-wisher seeing a veteran on Remembrance Day fifteen years from now, noticing his Wound Medal, asking how he received it, and having the veteran grow red in the face until he mutters under his breath "A Taliban sniper blew my left nut off." Please note that I, personally, don't believe any wound should be embarrassing, but my feelings shouldn't drive this discussion - those of the wounded should.


• And speaking of the feelings of those affected, check out this thread at Army.ca where at last count, the votes were more than two to one for the stripe over a medal.

The points I made in that thread still hold true for me:

...we can make the reg's for a new medal say anything we want. But if we're going to make it just like the wound stripe reg's, with all the flexibility that implies, then why the push for a medal? If all the circumstances surrounding its awarding and wear remain the same, you're simply exchanging a piece of braid on the sleeve for a piece of metal on the chest. A worthwhile trade if you value the metal more than the braid, I guess.

You could make the argument that the distinctive braid, in an exclusive position on the cuff of uniform and civilian dress, makes the wound stripe all the more special. It doesn't get lost in a sea of campaign medals, long-service decorations, or stuck behind medals for valour.

...

Perhaps you're correct, and recognition for wounds should only be worn with other distinctions. But that line of argument lumps recognition for a wound in with all the other recognitions you wear on your chest. As it stands, they have their place, and the wound stripe has its own - no greater or lesser, but simply different.

My bottom line is this: I don't know that the soldier, or the CF, or the Canadian people gain anything by telling a wounded service member that they have to wear a symbol of their trauma in uniform, or have to wear it with the rest of their decorations. As I understand it, a wound is a very personal thing, and so I believe it should be left as much as possible to the wounded to determine how they want to recognize their own sacrifice. [my emphasis]

Not that Gen Hillier gives a rodent's hindquarters what I think about a single g'damned thing, but if he's listening: this ain't broke, sir, so stop trying to fix it.