1

Running Head: SHOULD INVISIBLE WOUNDS BE AWARDED?

Should Invisible Wounds Be Awarded?

Adrian Gonzalez

University of Texas at El Paso

 2
Running Head: SHOULD INVISIBLE WOUNDS BE AWARDED?

Should Invisible Wounds Be Awarded?

Post-traumatic stress disorder can be defined as a severe anxiety disorder that may be

triggered by an extremely stressful event or situation; victims may experience recurrent dreams,

disturbance in their sleep, withdrawal, and some have even committed suicide. In his online

article Troubled Minds and Purple Hearts (2009), Tyler Boudreau discusses the controversy of

whether or not soldiers diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder should be awarded the

Purple Heart. Even though the Pentagon has recently decided not to award PSTD victims with

the Purple Heart, it is evident that Boudreau (2009) is in favor of awarding soldiers with

“invisible wounds” as he insists that these traumatized soldiers deserve some kind of merit. His

immediate audience would be General Eric Shinseki, the head of Veterans Affairs, and the

Defense Department as he directly addresses them at the end of his article. His article is fairly

effective as he has strong ethos, pathos, as well as logos. He is indeed a creditable source in this

issue, he uses some emotion to grasp his audience, and he definitely uses logic to support his

argument.

It is apparent that Boudreau (2009) has strong ethos in his article as he constantly

reminds the audience how he is connected to the topic of post-traumatic stress disorder and the

awarding of Purple Hearts. In the introduction of his article he immediately states, “As a former

marine infantry officer and Iraq war veteran, I would urge the Pentagon to consider a different

solution altogether” (Boudreau, 2009). Therefore his first source of credibility is that he is indeed

a war veteran therefore he has specific knowledge over those soldiers injured on the battlefield.

He explains how he would often see soldiers injured physically and then awarded for their

service; however he goes on to explain how he never once saw soldiers with psychological
 3
Running Head: SHOULD INVISIBLE WOUNDS BE AWARDED?

wounds be awarded. From that point on he makes it clear that he is in favor of awarding these

deserving soldiers and uses his ethos to support his argument.

Therefore it is clear that Boudreau (2009) is a creditable as he is in fact a service member

and had first-hand experience with dealing with injured soldier and military affairs. However, his

credibility does not stop there; he is also the author of Packing Inferno: The Unmaking of a

Marine (2007). So his credibility does end with him being a former Marine captain, he is also an

author as he writes about the experiences that soldiers face. That plus experience on the actual

battlefield enables him to be able to write about his views on whether soldiers with PSTD should

be awarded for their invisible injuries.

Another important device that Boudreau (2009) uses would be pathos; he uses it to get

his audience to sympathize in his favor. His direct audience would be the Head of Veteran

Affairs and the Defense department but the broader audience would be the American public as

this was an article in the New York Times. It is evident that he manipulates pathos to try and get

his audience to feel sorry for soldiers with PSTD and to support his own personal opinion. He

states things such as, “Certainly the hearts of these soldiers are black, with the terrible things

they saw and did on the battlefield. Certainly the country should see these Black Hearts pinned

on their chests” (Boudreau, 2009). One can notice that he is trying to get his audience to feel

sorry for these victimized soldiers and to support his cause to get them to be able to receive

awards. He continues on by stating, “Sadly, as long as our military culture bears at least a quiet

contempt for the psychological wounds of war, it is unlikely those veterans will ever see a Purple

Heart” (Boudreau, 2009). He chooses his words intentionally in order for the audience, both the

Pentagon and the American public, to feel sympathy for these soldiers. He realizes that sympathy

can motivate people to action and in this case motivate them to support his argument.
 4
Running Head: SHOULD INVISIBLE WOUNDS BE AWARDED?

The final and possibly strongest rhetorical appeal that Boudreau (2009) uses in this

newspaper article is logos. His simple combination of reason and logic make it easier for the

audience to understand his view on this topic. He asks, “Why, for instance, if a veteran has been

given a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress and awarded benefits, should he not also be awarded

the Purple Heart? (Boudreau, 2009). Here he explains with logic that all injured soldiers should

be awarded equally in order for the audience to understand his reasoning. He goes on to explain,

“The reality of psychological wounds is becoming harder and harder to deny. That post-

traumatic stress can lead to suicide is no longer a question. That far too many of those returning

from combat experience deep and long-lasting devastation is irrefutable” (Boudreau, 2009). He

attacks the audience with harsh reasoning in order to get them to support his view, and he is very

affective in doing this. His ultimate reasoning is that something must be done to award these

troubled soldiers as they are suffering tremendously, and with the examples above he explains

this reason to his audience exceptionally well.

In conclusion, Tyler Boudreau uses the three rhetorical appeals effectively to get his

audience to sympathize in his effort to get soldiers with PSTD to be awarded. His overall

audience consists of the Head of Veteran Affairs, the Defense Department and lastly the

American public. His ethos is his personal, former military experiences as well as him being an

author of a book related to PSTD. His pathos is how he describes the painful lives soldiers with

PSTD live in order to get the audience to feel sorry and support his cause. Lastly he uses logos

by explaining how it is only reasonable for soldiers with invisible wounds to be treated like

everyone else. With the use of these three devices he has the ability to grasp the audience as this

was a well-planned and well-written article.

 5
Running Head: SHOULD INVISIBLE WOUNDS BE AWARDED?

References

Boudreau T. E., (2009, January, 25). Troubled minds and purple hearts. The New York Times.

Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com