Suicide Argument Analysis

The United States Department of Veterans Affairs, otherwise known as the VA, handles health care of thousands of veterans. This includes veterans in an emergency, such as feeling suicidal. Cheryl Pellerin, a reporter and science writer at the American Forces Press Service, argues based on what the undersecretary of health at the VA, Dr. Robert Petzel, reports of the VA’s progress in suicide prevention. However, Pellerin’s argument is incomplete and thus invalid.  In her argument “The Department of Veterans Affairs Is Making Progress in Suicide Prevention”, Pellerin states, as reported by Petzel, that among younger veterans who use their services, 18 to 29 years old, the VA has reduced suicide rates. This statement doesn’t specify what the rates

have been reduced from, or what they have declined to. Furthermore, she names no other groups of veterans and no contrast to suicide rates of veterans who don’t use their services or middle-aged veterans who use their services. The lack of comparison leads one to understand younger veterans are the only group making headway; thus concluding that the VA is making large amounts of progress is a stretch for the opposing sides’ views. Pellerin argues on the side of the VA, based on what Dr.

Petzel says alone. Stating that the VA has “increased the number of programs, people, and resources that [their] devoting to veterans’ mental health services” to satisfy the demand of the 1.5 million veterans the VA cares for. Pellerin fails to include how these efforts are faring in their use. She doesn't include what veterans and their families have to say concerning the efforts of the VA, and not every veteran and family would concur that adding more programs means helping more veterans.In the second part of her argument, subtitled “VA has Developed a New PTSD Therapy”, Pellerin explains the VA’s new therapy for PTSD. The strategy is thought to help veterans with PTSD by exposing them to their triggers so they become comfortable with them, weakening the trigger response, and therefore helping to lessen the PTSD. Here, Pellerin is applying the evidence that the VA has proposed a new treatment to say they are making progress in suicide prevention efforts as PTSD is a contributing factor in why veterans commit suicide. However, Pellerin’s argument lacks any data on how effective the new treatment is, or what users of the treatment have to report regarding its advantages versus its

detriments. This part of Pellerin’s argument would be complete and more relevant had this information been included. If Pellerin included the outcomes of the treatments preliminary analyses, her argument would have fared more actively. A new treatment doesn’t mean an increase in the number of lives saved unless the treatment is effective.If Pellerin included views from several sources, not a singular view from the VA, in her argument for the VA, her argument would be much stronger and more valid. However, with the shortage of multiple views, her argument gives one the sense that Pellerin doesn't surround herself with veterans, especially those with suicidal thoughts, on a day to day basis. Pellerin may write about veterans and deliver news to them in her profession, but she fails to mention their opinions about the VA and their suicide prevention efforts in her argument.