TRANSFORMATION OF LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES IN THE SPHERE OF U.S. VETERANS REHABILITATION: FROM A COMPENSATORY MODEL TO A COMPREHENSIVE RECOVERY SYSTEM

Abstract

This article analyzes the transformation of legislative priorities in the field of medical and psychological rehabilitation of military personnel and veterans in the United States from the mid-20th century to the present. Unlike traditional chronological reviews of regulatory acts, the study employs a problem-analytical approach aimed at identifying causal relationships between changes in the nature of armed conflicts, societal challenges, and legislative responses.Primary attention is devoted to three key vectors of transformation in American legislation. First, the evolution of priorities from exclusively somatic injuries to the recognition of mental health as an equivalent, and sometimes dominant, rehabilitation concern is analyzed. The study demonstrates how the changing nature of military conflicts – from large-scale interstate wars to protracted counterterrorism operations – determined legislative innovations in the sphere of psychological support for veterans. Second, the transition from unified standardized approaches to personalized rehabilitation strategies is examined, reflecting broader trends in the development of patient-centered medicine. Third, the process of overcoming fragmentation in legal regulation through codification of norms, creation of interagency coordination mechanisms, and development of joint clinical standards is analyzed.The research demonstrates that American legislation developed predominantly reactively, as a series of responses to acute social crises, which has both positive consequences (sensitivity to public sentiment) and negative ones (delayed interventions). Critical analysis reveals significant limitations of legislative interventions: despite massive financial investments and numerous programs, veterans’ mental health problems remain far from fully resolved.The article refutes the widespread perception of the American model as a template for mechanical replication, instead proposing to view it as an example of evolution through constant confrontation with challenges. For other nations, what matters is not direct borrowing of legislative solutions, but adoption of general principles: comprehensiveness of approach, recognition of mental health as a priority, personalization of interventions, and interagency coordination.