Sorry for the late reply. If the statements below seem confusing, send me another message or post.
I've dealt with a similar situation, trying to find the legal jurisdiction who would take responsibility and represent me. It was quite a daunting process at first, but I then had eight national and state Senators and Representatives from two states helping me out. I'm telling you, there is no greater feeling than having eight politicians crossing party lines and agreeing with you.
Here is how I would proceed if the V.A. psychiatrist or psychologist refuses to submit a simple letter in compliance with Indiana law, and the Patient Advocate refuses to help I would:
Find what state your psychiatric medical provider is licensed to practice. It's my understanding that the V.A. only requires an active license within the United States, and not within the state the provider practices.
Get the Senators and Representatives contact information of the state and national level where your provider is licensed.
Contact your local state Senator and Representative's office and inform them of the situation. Inform them you will be contacting your national Senator and Representative of your state, and where the provider is licensed. Inform the office of the situation, give them their information and they will probably be getting a phone call to coordinate the efforts.
Call your national Senator and Representative and explain the situation to them, and give them the appropriate information. Explain your national Senator and Representative that you are facing nonsensical bureaucratic red tape and need their help. Explain to them that you and your state needs the letter to be typed, but the Veterans Affairs psychiatric provider refuses to - thus leaving you in jurisdictional conundrum. Explain to them where the provider is licensed, and their Senators and Representatives.
I would then call the provider's licensed state's Senators and Representatives on the state and national level. I would repeat the above.
Depending on how the Senator's and Representative's offices handle it, it may run very quick or slow. Most likely, there will be a letter issue from the office to your provider informing them they need to comply with state law.
In the Concealed Carry Forum is a thread "Concealed Carry, IMPORTANT" by cougaram who relates his experience with a VA hospital. He stated a nurse asked him three questions, (1) Did he feel stressed?, (2) Did he feel threatened?, and (3) Did he feel like doing harm to anyone?" He said the nurse told him that if he had answered "Yes" to either of those questions he would have been reported to Homeland Security and his CCW license would have been cancelled. As we all know, veterans have been classified as potential terrorists by Homeland Security so I guess we have to be extra cautious in answering questions from any government entity. It is a shame that, after serving our country, the politicians are now afraid of us!
Under the Privacy Act of 1974 agencies cannot disclose this information to Homeland Security because they feel like it, unless it's to stop a crime. If the Veterans Affairs discloses this information, it must be in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974 which includes disclosing how it's disclosed, revealing the person's own records to whom they were disclosed, and only disclosing them under certain limited situations.
The only times I know when it's legally required is if a threat on the President, Vice President, Senator or Representative is made - and that get's reported to Secret Service (now a part of Homeland Security) or the Federal Bureau of Investigation - this is federal law and I believe it's required by all citizens. The other times when data can be disclosed are when a warrant is retrieved, census gathering, or it's to immediately prevent a crime.
If you don't believe me, look up the information:
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Notices -
Link Removed
Dept. of Veterans Affairs Records Control
Schedule 10-1 -
http://www.va.gov/vhapublications/rcs10/rcs10-1.pdf
The nurse was seriously misinformed. People in various positions tend to get their information secondhand and from rumors and spread them as fact. Kind of like what's happening here.
