UK veterans who did not complete basic training can face discrimination.

In recent years, there have been many criticisms of the UK’s one days service definition of military veterans. As a result many military charities have began to define eligibility for support based on their own interpretation of what should constitute a UK veteran. This interpretation often requires a completion of basic training and formal discharge from service and subsequently those who didn’t make it through basic training may not meet this definition. This technical exclusion can result in a lack of access to services that would otherwise support veterans. There is often a stigma attached to not completing basic training, with the perception that those individuals did not fully serve or contribute to the military. This can create a hierarchy of veterans within military communities and charities, where those who completed service are given more legitimacy, while those who did not are viewed as less deserving of support. Military charities, especially in the UK, may have limited resources and often prioritise those who have been in combat or have completed a minimum service period. This prioritisation can lead to the exclusion of those who didn’t complete basic training, as they are perceived to have fewer or less severe needs compared to combat veterans. Yet, for some individuals, failing to complete basic training can still result in significant psychological distress. The experience of being rejected or discharged can be traumatic, leading to issues like depression, anxiety, or feelings of failure. However, military charities may overlook these mental health challenges because these individuals didn’t serve in active duty, ignoring the psychological impact of even short-term military experiences. These days, thankfully, many military charities require formal documentation or proof of service, such as discharge papers or military IDs, to verify eligibility. Individuals who did not complete basic training might not have kept this documentation, making it difficult at least initially, to access support. This creates a bureaucratic hurdle that unintentionally discriminates against those who served for shorter periods or were discharged during training. Veterans who didn’t complete basic training may also lack representation or advocacy within the military charity sector. Without a strong voice highlighting their specific needs and experiences, their issues can be side-lined. Military charities may not be aware of the unique struggles these individuals face, or they may not view them as a priority group. The exclusion of these individuals from veteran support networks can also lead to social isolation. Without the camaraderie and social bonds that other veterans share, individuals who didn’t complete basic training may feel disconnected from both military and civilian support systems. This sense of exclusion can exacerbate existing mental health or socioeconomic challenges. Discrimination against UK veterans who didn’t complete basic training highlights a gap in the support provided by military charities. While these individuals may not have served in combat or completed their service, they can still face significant challenges and deserve access to the same care and assistance offered to other veterans. Addressing this issue requires broader definitions of veteran status, more inclusive support policies, and greater awareness of the needs of all those who have experienced military life, regardless of service length. It would be worth auditing all service charities to see how many actually do support those that did not complete basic training out of choice. Similarly it would be interesting to quantify how much funding is actually allocated to this particular cohort and discuss if we are ready for a different definition of the term veteran in the UK?

Tony Wright Forward Assist CEO