Reasons for Medical Discharge of a TF Recruit

[Timbob1001]

Apologies if this has been asked and answered before...

What grounds would come under Paragraph 382 (ciii) of King's Regulations 1912? A Catch all?

The chap in question was booted out with a Medical Discharge after 43 days in the Territorial Force.

Thanks

Tim

[simon2]

The only thing I can find that would fit is

Para 392 (ciii) Not likely to become an efficient soldier

- Recruit within 3 months of enlistment considered unfit for service.

The list of reasons could be endless.

This covers AO 16. 1914 but I can't see it changing that much from 1912-14.

An expert will be along.

[Timbob1001]

Simon

Thanks - in fact I am typographically challenged today. - 392 it is.

Cheers

tim

[ss002d6252]

The chap in question was booted out with a Medical Discharge after 43 days in the Territorial Force.

Was he one of the men who joined the rush to enlist in the early months of the war ?. So many men joined early on that many T.F. battalions could afford to medically reject men, even after a few months, however this tended to ease off later in the war and men then seem to have been rejected either quite quickly or they served for a decent length of time before being discharged.

Craig

[kenf48]

Simon

Thanks - in fact I am typographically challenged today. - 392 it is.

Cheers

tim

Could it also be (iii) [c]?

i.e. (iii) Not likely to become an efficient soldier and sub clause [c] Recruit within three months of enlistment considered unfit for service

See LLT http://www.1914-1918.net/soldiers/swbrecords.html

(scroll down for KR 392 and full list of sub clauses)

And yes it was a bit of a catch all, there was a thread a while ago that listed some of the reasons found on service records often it was because they were 'intellectually challenged', sometimes it was simply that they did not fit in, it was not necessarily physical fitness although it could include that as well as having two left feet!

Ken

[bill24chev]

Although found medically unfit in 1914, or rejected/discharged for other rerasons, a man could still be conscripted from 1916 onwards. If you are researching a particular man it may be worth while checking enlistments/conscription later inthe war.

Bill

[IRC Kevin]

I believe doctors examining men for the TF were only paid for 'recruits accepted' and not for 'recruits examined', which led to some highly suspect acceptances. Some of the men accepted into and later medically discharged from the 4th King's Own, some 1-3 months after enlistment, should never have passed their original medicals. I've found a man whose hand had been injured so badly some ten years previously, that it was too deformed to reach the trigger of his rifle. Another, walked with a pronounced limp due to severe wasting of a thigh muscle and one was so under-developed that he was found incapable of picking up his pack. One man was totally deaf and another so short-sighted that he couldn't see the target on a 30 yard range. Without listing them all on here, there were dozens of cases of men with obvious long-term physical problems that should have precluded military service. Flat feet, bunions, varicose veins and poor teeth were all very common causes of medical discharge and in what was a fairly small sample size, I was surprised to find four men who developed epilepsy during training. This was with a battalion that was extremely short of men due to hundreds being recalled back to munitions work shortly before deployment to France and not in the fortunate position of being able to reject men for minor reasons at that stage.