"This Is A Tough One"
Byron Pitts is National Correspondent for CBS News.
Carmelo Rodriguez III was a U.S. Marine. He served his country with honor in Iraq. Just like every other "Devil Dog" I've met in Iraq and elsewhere, he was proud to serve – and even prouder to be a member of "The Corps."
He was your typical fit, gung-ho Marine: 5'10 and185 pounds of muscle and moxie. He was 29 years old. When I met Sgt. Rodriguez he weighed about 77 pounds. He was dying of cancer.
That alone is enough to give anyone with a heart pause. But that's not the end and far from the beginning of the Carmelo Rodriquez story.
At first, we weren't sure we had a story. Producer Rodney Comrie received a phone call from the family's attorney who said the he was representing the family of a Marine who said his skin cancer was misdiagnosed while serving in Iraq. The attorney told us that the Sgt. was very weak, but that he'd be willing to talk to you – as would his family.
So, the next day, we headed north, and fortunately our camera crew was ahead of us. They got to the house well before Rodney and I did. Veteran cameraman Henry Bautista (who has covered war and despair around the world) met us at the door.
"This is a tough one," he said.
Henry is as talented and as tough as any network cameraman I've ever worked with. We were taken by his tone. You could tell he was moved by the images his camera captured and the people he met. If Rodriguez's situation could get to Henry, I thought to myself, then it must be bad.
Once inside the house, Rodney and I made our introductions and were ushered to a rear bedroom to meet Sgt. Rodriguez. His uniform was hanging on a wall. His 7-year-old son Carmelo the 4th was sitting at his side.
As we were preparing for the interview, Sgt. Rodriguez died. The house erupted in screams and tears. It was the kind of raw emotion you'd expect when a family loses a loved one. We were prepared to leave: Pack our gear and get lost. But the family insisted we stay. They wanted to honor Carmelo Rodriguez by telling his story.
For the Rodriguez family and hundreds just like them, their fight wasn't against the Marines or their country but against a 50-year-old law called the Feres Doctrine.
So we started working on a story about military malpractice and the Feres Doctrine. In 1950, a Supreme Court ruling now known as the Feres Doctrine, prohibited active duty members of the U.S. military from suing the military for negligence or medical malpractice for injuries unrelated to their service. In other words, unlike any other U.S. citizen, men and women in the military cannot sue the government for negligence or malpractice.
A team of CBS News producers (Comrie as well as Betty Chin) researched this story. What they learned is the military's position has long been the Feres Doctrine is important to "maintaining good order and discipline."
The U.S. Supreme Court last upheld the Feres Doctrine in 1987. In his dissenting opinion, Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia wrote "Feres was wrongly decided and heartily deserves the widespread, almost universal criticism it has received."
Towards the end of his life, Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez made clear he loved the Marine Corps and he loved his country. But with all the energy and passion left in his body, he took dead aim at the Feres Doctrine.
"I just want to save the next Marine," he said.
(CBS)
He was your typical fit, gung-ho Marine: 5'10 and185 pounds of muscle and moxie. He was 29 years old. When I met Sgt. Rodriguez he weighed about 77 pounds. He was dying of cancer.
That alone is enough to give anyone with a heart pause. But that's not the end and far from the beginning of the Carmelo Rodriquez story.
At first, we weren't sure we had a story. Producer Rodney Comrie received a phone call from the family's attorney who said the he was representing the family of a Marine who said his skin cancer was misdiagnosed while serving in Iraq. The attorney told us that the Sgt. was very weak, but that he'd be willing to talk to you – as would his family.
So, the next day, we headed north, and fortunately our camera crew was ahead of us. They got to the house well before Rodney and I did. Veteran cameraman Henry Bautista (who has covered war and despair around the world) met us at the door.
"This is a tough one," he said.
Henry is as talented and as tough as any network cameraman I've ever worked with. We were taken by his tone. You could tell he was moved by the images his camera captured and the people he met. If Rodriguez's situation could get to Henry, I thought to myself, then it must be bad.
Once inside the house, Rodney and I made our introductions and were ushered to a rear bedroom to meet Sgt. Rodriguez. His uniform was hanging on a wall. His 7-year-old son Carmelo the 4th was sitting at his side.
As we were preparing for the interview, Sgt. Rodriguez died. The house erupted in screams and tears. It was the kind of raw emotion you'd expect when a family loses a loved one. We were prepared to leave: Pack our gear and get lost. But the family insisted we stay. They wanted to honor Carmelo Rodriguez by telling his story.
For the Rodriguez family and hundreds just like them, their fight wasn't against the Marines or their country but against a 50-year-old law called the Feres Doctrine.
So we started working on a story about military malpractice and the Feres Doctrine. In 1950, a Supreme Court ruling now known as the Feres Doctrine, prohibited active duty members of the U.S. military from suing the military for negligence or medical malpractice for injuries unrelated to their service. In other words, unlike any other U.S. citizen, men and women in the military cannot sue the government for negligence or malpractice.
A team of CBS News producers (Comrie as well as Betty Chin) researched this story. What they learned is the military's position has long been the Feres Doctrine is important to "maintaining good order and discipline."
The U.S. Supreme Court last upheld the Feres Doctrine in 1987. In his dissenting opinion, Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia wrote "Feres was wrongly decided and heartily deserves the widespread, almost universal criticism it has received."
Towards the end of his life, Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez made clear he loved the Marine Corps and he loved his country. But with all the energy and passion left in his body, he took dead aim at the Feres Doctrine.
"I just want to save the next Marine," he said.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 91 CommentsThe family can not take action because of the Feres doctrine. It is time for congress to act.
http://cbs11tv.com/health/medical.mistake.military.2.1092872.html
http://www.coltonread.com/
Mary Quain maryquain@gmail.com
I was in the military for 10 years. My husband and father both retired from a branch of the armed forces. I am proud to be an American and even more proud to have been a part of our military, however, I can't beleive that BLATANT NEGLECT can be overlooked EVEN with the U.S. MILITARY!! I had no idea that things like that happened. Something needs to change!! I want to continue to be proud of our country and our branches of the Military. Please for the sake of this country do right by these people
Such a waste of human life. A GOOD life. I pray for your family Rodriquez's. You have a devastating loss as does the Military and the rest of America. Your family definately deserves compensation for his suffering and your loss. God bless you and keep up the fight.
Dana
But regards Byron Pitts' story on Sgt. Rodriguez, please make sure you keep eyes wide-open as to the source of the problem. Changing the law to provide more fees to trial-attorneys is not a solution, it's a continuation of the single biggest practice which has made health care prohibitively expensive in this country. (It also feeds one of the most preferred constituencies of the Democratic party.)
My cousin was diagnosed with stage-4 melanoma in 1989, 18 months after the first doctor he went to told him it was probably a "tic bite". He died in 1992. I have a close friend who pointed out an unusual looking mole on her lower back to her doctor in 2004, and he told her "let's watch it..." In 2006, she was diagnosed with a level-3 melanoma. After a grueling year of chemotherapy, she is still alive today (three years after diagnoses) and with no signs of recurrence. In neither case did my cousin, or my friend opt to file a lawsuit, even though the original doctors obviously made a mistake.
Meanwhile, as a single, self-employed person 56 years old, I pay over $600 a month for health insurance, and that number is going up. I am in almost perfect health, with no major risk factors for anything. Just four years ago, my monthly premiums were $350.
If the Rodriguez family believes the military health-care system is unfair, perhaps they should consider how fair the civilian system is to those who simply can't afford insurance at all, and never even get the chance to have a mis-diagnosed skin cancer? Contrary to the Democratic Party's mantra: "health-care is a right, not a privilege...", health care is a profession, and the people who take the time to learn those skills and try to make a career out of it, do so in hopes of rewards, both spiritual and monetary. As it stands now, very few of our smartest and most capable young people are opting into the medical field, and those that are, tend to favor medical research over patient care. Why? Because the biggest single expense doctors have in caring for patients is malpractice insurance.
Doctors make mistakes. Medicine is not a perfect science, and never has been. But the medical malpractice 'industry', as practiced by the personal injury attorneys in this country costs all of us tens of billions of dollars every year. I see two or three ads every day from personal injury lawsuit 'factories' (such as Oasis Legal Finance for example) which offer to pay people "up front" for their legal claims, "with no obligation to repay if you lose your suit". Is it possible that the very existence of firms like this could be considered an indicator that our tort-laws are out of control?
Our health care system in this country will never become affordable until we cut out the malignant lawsuits being filed by attorneys who know that all they need to do is file an action, and the insurance companies will settle rather than face the unpredictable and costly process of fighting it in court. This, like the AIG story, is just one more example of the larger and more important malaise that has afflicted us: Greed. Unless we cure ourselves of that, this country will continue it's headlong rush towards failure.
One week later, while still on active duty I was told that he was going to die within a few hours. His cancer had gone undiagnosed while he was on active duty. He was given too much chemo drugs and I cannot sue the military for medical malpractice. Due to The Feres Doctrine, a 1950 Supreme Court ruling which forbids active-duty military personnel and their families from suing the federal government for injuries incidental to their service
At the time of my husband?s death I was told that my daughter and I would not be eligible to receive any benefits, unless the Army medically retired him. He was placed on the TDRL or Temporary Retired Disabled List. I now know that because he was placed in this retired status we have been eliminated from other benefits and enhancements.
He was on active duty and his injuries and illness had already been determined to be in the line of duty. He had not gone through a MED board and he was not able to communicate with me or the hospital staff. He was placed on life support and remained on life support, the whole time he was in the intensive care unit. As I stated earlier, I was told that he MUST be medically retired immediately, or my daughter and I would not receive any benefits.
It is my understanding that there was a change and now subsequent changes to the policies regarding the Death of Service members who are on active duty. The change, R10-02 to Chapter 52 of the DoD FMR, Volume 7B effective September 10, 2001 and Public Law 107-107, section 642 dated December 28 2001, enhanced and allowed SBP benefits to beneficiaries of members on active duty who died in the line of duty and are not yet retirement eligible
Congress made amendments that changed the rules. I have been told that I am unable to receive these benefits because they decided my husband needed to be retired before he died.
The laws had changed and the Army was still using them. As a result, many service members? families have been cheated out of benefits, money, and services that they should have received.
Unemployable, no workmans comp, no unemployment insurance, no vet benefits.
They left him. Believe me, this is standard SOP for the men and woman who bothered to serve. I know becaue I was one of them. My story is horrible but the story you did on this young man says it exactly the way ot is for all men and woman who bothered to serve. Thank you for doing it...
LS, New York
"fault". He was told by Military doctors on several occassions (even as late as 2005) that this was a wart and nothing more. I was shocked and outraged at this story. In this case this gentleman deserves the same right everyone of us has to be able to bring suit against the government doctors. I am a disabled veteran and just appalled at all the people out there who don''t think is an outrage. If it were you (or your loved one) don''t you think things would be different? Please reach out to your Congressman(men) and Senator''s and ask that something be done about this injustice. This is not the first time and won''t be the last unless we as Americans stand up for those that are fighting for us.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 91 Comments