*Tommy Tobin<\/p>\n
If you envision a soldier on the front-lines of combat, you might picture an arid desert where the slightest lack of focus could mean the difference between life and death. You could picture someone exposed to the grotesque horrors of war, defending their fellow warfighters from ongoing threats. What if this same soldier commuted to the job while balancing shift-work and life at home?<\/p>\n
Such is the reality for America\u2019s\u00a0drone\u00a0operators in bases around the country. Operating crew often live two separate lives: living at home and driving to work flying planes halfway across the world for long periods of time.<\/p>\n
Military decision-makers should take into account the psychological strain facing\u00a0drone personnel when crafting policy. A Pentagon study\u00a0<\/a>found that these\u00a0drone\u00a0crewmembers suffered from depression and PTSD at similar rates as pilots of manned aircraft. This problem will only get worse as America\u2019s use of military\u00a0drones\u00a0is set to increase.<\/p>\n The targeted use of\u00a0drones\u00a0has become increasingly central to the national defense and counter-terrorism policies of the United States. Since 2008, the number of drone\u00a0operators has tripled. In 2011 alone, the Air Force trained more forces to operate\u00a0drones\u00a0than to fly fighter jets or bombers combined<\/a>. According to the Air Force\u2019s internal memoranda, the near insatiable demand for\u00a0drones\u00a0has meant that the current fleet of operators is stretched to its \u201cbreaking point<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n For policymakers,\u00a0drones\u00a0seem cheaper and less risky than manned counterparts in warfare. The political calculus is straightforward. Compared to traditional aircraft pilots,\u00a0drone\u00a0operators are approximately $500,000 less expensive to train, on average, according to a recent GAO report.<\/a><\/p>\n Public officials are understandably loath to send \u201cboots on the ground\u201d into emerging global conflict zones, notably in the fight against ISIL. At little to no physical risk for our airmen, the country can exercise its military muscle.<\/p>\n All too often, advocates of\u00a0drones\u00a0ignore the full costs of this new type of warfare on those that we task to carry it out. Writing in\u00a0Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a>, Daniel Byman argued that drones\u00a0present \u201cno risk\u201d to American troops. No physical risk, sure.<\/p>\n In protecting our country, soldiers\u2019 experiences take many forms. For\u00a0drone operators, the scars from battles waged halfway across the world aren\u2019t physical, they\u2019re psychological. These soldiers operate largely in secrecy, frustrating efforts at obtaining adequate mental health assistance through regular channels.<\/p>\n The psychological strain facing these\u00a0drone\u00a0operators is real. The mental health concerns within the fleet are so pressing that a 2014 study in\u00a0Military Medicine<\/em><\/a> recommended embedding mental health professionals within\u00a0drone\u00a0operation centers.<\/p>\n These soldiers are not playing video games; their situation is more nuanced. Unlike traditional bombers,\u00a0drone\u00a0personnel have often watched their targets for days if not months. After the engagement,\u00a0drone\u00a0crews are also tasked with observing the destruction and watch as loved ones and associates care to the wounded and the dead. The high-stress environment of the work, the low morale, and long hours amplify the mental strain for these shift-work warriors.<\/p>\n The concerns about emotional and psychological scars of battle for our veterans remain a much-needed topic of concern for our country.\u00a0Drone\u00a0crewmembers are military professionals burdened with substantial psychological strain, yet they are stigmatized even within their ranks. While some\u00a0drone\u00a0operators have gone public with their PTSD diagnoses, others fear being grounded or ostracized if they seek assistance for their mental health.<\/p>\n