Victims of the “Feres Doctrine”- a New Series: Part 1 – Introduction to the “Feres Doctrine”

Attention!  All Active-Duty Members of the United States Armed Forces and those who are thinking about Joining. 

And be sure to stay tuned for Part 2 which is about a Vietnam Veteran who was sent to War with a broken neck.

WHAT IS THE “FERES DOCTIRNE?

Rudolph Feres was a Member of the U.S. Armed Forces who died in a 1947 barracks fire in Hawaii.  Right after his death in 1947, Feres’s widow tried to sue the Army under the new Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946, but after exhausting all Appeals, in 1950 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that making the military liable would undermine the 1946 Federal Tort Claims Act. 

 So it became that the “Feres Doctrine” and other case law which followed over the years, and which was broadly read so as to bar Active-Duty Members of the Armed Forces from suing the Military  for Negligence, Medical Malpractice, and even Gross Criminal Negligence by any Military Doctor and almost every other Federal Employee or any combat-related injuries. 

 The “Feres Doctrine” also barred surviving Dependents and other family members from suing the military for “combat-related deaths.”  But Dependents and other family members or any civilians who are injured as a result of Military Negligence or Medical Malpractice are not barred from suing the Military under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

WRITER’S NOTE:  Simply put, the “Feres Doctrine” bars Soldier from “having their day in Court” while these same Soldiers are serving and sacrificing in Defense of Our Nation’s Freedoms, especially O\our First Amendment Rights to petition the Government for a redress of grievances to so we can “have our day in Court.

However, the “Feres Doctrine” does not bar discharged Veterans who incurred injury or disease while in Service from filing Service-Connected Disability claims. 

 Then, in 1953, in Dalehite v. United States, the Supreme Court interpreted the “discretionary function” exception in such a way that effectively ruled out most substantive tort actions against the government. In 1950, the justices created another exception to the FTCA when, in Feres v. U.S. (1950), they concluded that one injured while on active duty in the military could not sue the government under the FTCA. Given these and other precedents and little or no reaction to the Court’s statutory interpretations by the Congress, the FTCA has not been a major benefit to persons injured or killed because of negligent actions of federal employees.

 WHAT IS THE FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT?

“The King can do no wrong” was a maxim brought to America from England. It reflected the concept of sovereign immunity. In America, the notion of executive, or governmental, immunity was translated into statutes and incorporated into the jurisprudence of the new nation. One could not sue a state or one of its subdivisions, or the federal government, unless permission was given to so proceed in the courts. Obviously this led to unfairness and inequity for persons who were tortuously injured by agents of government.

The Federal Tort Claims Act, Title VI of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, was passed by the Congress in an effort to reduce the adverse impact of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Additionally, it was designed to eliminate the practice of congresspersons introducing private relief bills for constituents who had been injured owing to government negligence. In it, the government gave its general consent to be sued in civil tort actions in federal court. It required a federal district court judge, sitting without a jury, to render judgment in these cases “under circumstances, where the United States government, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant for such damage loss, injury or death in accordance with the law of the place where the act or the omission took place.” However, it placed the burden of proof on the plaintiff in a tort action; it also contained thirteen exceptions to governmental liability.

Congress has the power and legislative authority to abolish, overrule and annul the “Feres Doctrine” by simply introducing and passing legislation enacting a new law that permits Members of the Armed Forces to sue the Military under the Federal Tort Claims Act ” so they can have “their day in court” just like any Civilian can if they are injured by Military Doctors or other employees of the Military on or off a Military Base.  After reading all the Parts and Chapters of “Victims of the Feres Doctrine,” write your Members of Congress and tell them to enact new legislation to annul the “Feres Doctrine.” 

Click onto link below to go to:  Chapters 1 through 5 of Part 2 -Vietnam Veteran sent to War with a Broken Neck. http://www.veteranstoday.com/?victims+of+the+feres+doctrine

See related stories set forth below.

Veteran Awarded $600,000 for VA’s Failure to Refer him for Medical Treatment. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/06/23/veteran-awarded-600000-for-va%e2%80%99s-failure-to-refer-him-for-medical-treatment/

 Service-Connected Disability and Other Compensation for VA Retaliation by Intimidation

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/05/01/service-connected-disability-other-comepensation-for-va-retaliation-by-intimidation/

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=38503