A man served in WWII, contracted a Radioactive Chemical Substance into his body, and it was transmitted to his two sons,
at their births, one boy died, the other currently suffers (physically
and has degree of mental deficiency since birth).
This Radioactive Chemical Disease is now into the 3rd Generation,
and I want to know if the Veterans Administration / Military, should
be Responsible for Payment of Compensation / Medical Bills, for
members of this family?
This sustance has caused two family members to die, one is suffering badly. Three more of the 3rd generations (all minor children)...are now ''beginning to suffer" the symptoms.
In my opinion, all these family members...who are ''at-risk" should
be tested !!
Can or should the Veterans Administration / Military be Responsible
for the Medical Bills / Compensation...for the suffering...the Testing
of these ''remaining victims"...of which there are 4 now, still alive...
and 5 more who have not yet shown symptoms. TF
2007-11-22 15:36:44 · 6 answers · asked by Too Funny 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
If the substance screwed with his genes, then the defects caused to him may have passed to his sons and to future generations as well. They should be tested for genetic disorders. And if that is the case, the VA should be held liable for this suffering.
2007-11-22 15:43:41 · answer #1 · answered by chris 4 · 0⤊ 4⤋
So how did this person not contaminate everybody he came into contact with since he was contaminated 52 years ago?
Cant you even name this radioactive substance, that seems to have affected him and only him??
If he contracted in 52 years ago why did you wait so long to post about it now?
Why should the V.A. pay for anything when you have NOT proved the U.S. Military was at fault??
Call Mulder & Scully to investigate.
2007-11-22 17:56:51 · answer #2 · answered by conranger1 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The first question I would ask is: is what you are describing even possible?
The next question I would ask is: How would an enlisted man in WWII even come into contact with radioactive materials?
Your story sounds really far -fetched.
2007-11-22 17:14:59 · answer #3 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
that is a coincidence things have a "biological half-life" so they only stay in the body for so long before they are excreated or it could have been absorbed into his bones or where ever but new cells would have less and less of it and i dont think there are any radioisotopes that atack sperm so i think the later generation the better
2007-11-23 04:52:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
and your evidence and documentation of all of this is????
2007-11-23 02:39:53 · answer #5 · answered by oscarsix5 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they should, but they arent.
2007-11-22 15:44:20 · answer #6 · answered by lovely_tiffers 2 · 0⤊ 5⤋