Shades or Eye Patch???

[tiger_rifles]

Hello to all,
I have an "Opinion" question more than a "is it correct" question.

In 1986 my right,(Military Shooters), eye was damaged. I can see light, (at about 20/250), but not focus. The front part of my eye was replaced with plastic, so if I am out in the sun I must have a UV filter. Years ago i found a pair of original sun shades that have a high level of UV filter. But i am getting tiered of all the looks and comments from those that do not know my story, ref. my bad choices of Ladie Friends, so on and so on.

My main impression is CS Infantry, but my mess will often go US and I drill with the local US Unit.

Would a Soldier that required a patch over his right eye be drummed out of service?

I have never seen a living historian with a patched right eye and only can remember one with a patched left eye.

Thanks to all for your input,
Paul Bennett

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

Two pards of mine down here in Florida have just the same problem, and both use different remedies from each other. One man uses a black eye patch, and just stays in first person when asked about it by saying he took a fragment in the eye at (fill in the appropriate battle). The other goes without anything and is blind as a bat and just hides it. He, I'm sure, just doesn't want to draw attention and he's managed to hide it from all except his closest friends. I would think it would be easier to go with the eye patch as opposed to the glasses, just because of the ignorant out there and the myths of colored lenses, but perhaps if glasses were your choice you would have a prime opportunity to educate the public and fellow reenactors on the period remedy for your issue. Best of luck to you.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

Hallo!

IMHo, historically, an easier asked than answered question as so much of the "examination" and "disqualification" was a subjective assessment on the part of the surgeon performing the initial "recruit" medical examination AS WELL AS the surgeons doing exams to determine fitness for service or discharge after illnesses and wounds.

Period Surgeons' Manuals are often real skimpy or brief, containing minii bits and pieces of general "advice." This snippet, if I can cut and paste from Dr. S. D. Gross' 1861 manual is interesting, IMHO:

CHAPTER XI.
DISQUALIFYING DISEASES.
Troops, whether regulars or volunteers,
should include no men that are not perfectly
qualified, both physically and mentally, for
the hardships of the public service. They
should, in a word, be perfectly sound, or,
what is the same thing, free from all defects,
congenital or acquired. Itis for this reason
that they are always subjected to a most
thorough examination by the recruiting or
regimental surgeon. This examination is,
as a general rule, a great deal more rigid in
the regular than in the volunteer service. In
the former, the regulations are such that, if
the recruit is not found to be sound after he
has been inspected by the regular army surgeon,
the expense incident to his enlistment
and transportation falls upon the medical
officer who committed the oversight.
An examination of the kind here mentioned
demands both time, patience, and
skill. In order to make it thorough, the
candidate must be completely stripped, so
that if any disease or defect in the exterior
of the body exist itmay be at once rendered
apparent. The examination, however, must
not be limited to the exterior; it must embrace
also the interior. The disqualifying
affections may be arranged according to the
organs and regions in which they are seated,
under separate heads :—
1. The eye and ear. 2. The brain, as the
seat of intellect. 3. The lungs and heart.
4. The stomach, bowels, anus, liver, and
spleen. 5. The kidneys, bladder, and urethra.
6. The testicles. 7. The exterior
of the abdomen. 8. The limbs, including
the joints.
The diseases which unfit a man for military
service are defects of sight, of hearing,
and of speech ;weakness of intellect ;paralysis
;epilepsy ;hernia ;hydrocele ;varicocele ;
imperfect development or absence of the
testes; hemorrhoids, anal fistule, and fissure
of the anus; unusual protuberance of the
abdomen; organic lesion of the internal
organs; large tumors; aneurism; varix of
the extremities ;ulcers, or large scars indicative
of their former existence; bad corns;
bunnions ; overlapping toes ; flatfootedness;
deformity of the hands and fingers;
contractions from burns or other causes;
badly united fractures ; unreduced dislocations;
diseased joints; loss of the incisor and
canine teeth; serious disfigurement of the
features; spinal curvature; ill-formed shoul-
ders; habits of intemperance; diminutive
stature or excessive overgrowth.
In the regular army no man is enlisted
under the age of eighteen or over that of
forty-five. In the volunteer service, similar
regulations obtain, although they are not so
rigidly enforced.
Recruiting surgeons, after having examined
a candidate for enlistment, are obliged to certify,
on honor, that they consider him, in
their opinion, to be free from all bodily defects,
and mental infirmity, which would, in
any way, disqualify him for performing the
duties of a soldier.
When men become disqualified for service,
in consequence of disease or accident, a surgeon's
certificate is also required, in order to
aid them afterward in procuring a pension
and exemption from ordinary military duties.
The affections which may justify a soldier in
applying for a release from further service
are organic visceral lesions, deafness, blindness,
mental imbecility, lameness, large herniae,
and such mutilations as interfere with
the proper handling of the sword and musket.

But as I shared, howe subjective the examiner was in admitting a recruit, at what time in man-power shortages caused a relaxing of stiffer requirements, and then later what subjective versus objective determination later sent a veteran back to the War or back home... (or whether the man pushed to return to quit...).

IMHO, I would go with a patch...

Curt

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

BLACK, David A. Co G, 21st GA Infantry, CSA Private. Wounded in eye 9-17-62 at Sharpsburg, MD. Promoted to 3rd Corporal in 1864. Killed in 1864.

This would suggest that Pvt Black was not drummed out of service after an eye injury, to answer one of your questions.

[Poor Private]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

Don't forget the other option--VRC Veteran reserve corps

[ephraim_zook]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

"But i am getting tiered of all the looks and comments from those that do not know my story, ref. my bad choices of Ladie Friends, so on and so on."

At my age I'd be delighted that they'd think... :D

Ron Myzie

[Sharpshooter1]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

Eye patch... arrrrrrrrrrr... I had to do it, Sorry....

[Arthur Stone]

Re: Shades or Eye Patch???

Paul,
I am also blind in my right eye, 20/200. I can see light, but thats about it. The suns rays make it sensetive and is actually painful at times. With the glasses I think you can have a good story, but with the patch, you can have a great story! When I went into the US Army in 1973 They asked me if my left eye work OK. I said yes, They said your in! I'm thinking of making a patch for the old eye this winter. It will give some people something to talk about plus it makes you look like a bad ass. You can always put something carved or burnt into the leather of your patch. Gibson took a image of me once and I kept blinking the right eye during the exposer. The pix looks like I have just a skin covered socket!
Your not alone, Make the best of it! Let us know how you make out