squirrel Posted 18 September , 2016 Share Posted 18 September , 2016 (edited) Just been thinking about how injuries, as opposed to wounds sustained in action, were classified, reported and recorded. With the potential for slips, trips and falls, particularly in the front line and even on patrols or possibly attacks and the amount of manual work that had to be undertaken, fractures, strains, sprains, hernias, torn muscles, snapped tendons/ligaments etc., must have been very common. Would these have been recorded/reported as sick, injured or wounded? Edited 18 September , 2016 by squirrel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry_Reeves Posted 18 September , 2016 Share Posted 18 September , 2016 The entry for these sort of injuries are often annotated acc. Tr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnboy Posted 18 September , 2016 Share Posted 18 September , 2016 If the man was sent to FA or CCS the injury would be described in full if on a list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 18 September , 2016 Author Share Posted 18 September , 2016 Thanks chaps, what percentage of overall casualties would these represent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnboy Posted 18 September , 2016 Share Posted 18 September , 2016 I thin that is anybodies guess. A lot of minor injuries might not have been recorded as they might have been dealt with by the battalions M.O, Things like toothache, sprains, backache, heavy colds etc could have been dealt with with a couple of days off duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 22 September , 2016 Author Share Posted 22 September , 2016 Managed to get a look at the Official History of the War, Medical Services, Casualties and Medical Statistics. The number of non battle casualties August 1914 - December 1918 as follows: Died of disease or injury France & Flanders Officers 1,257 OR 30,841 Sick or injured (less died) France & Flanders Officers 126,046 OR 3,496,388 73% of sick/injured were returned to duty. Whatever the timescale of treatment and eventual return to duty, this represents an enormous drain on manpower and an immense amount of work for the medical services. And, as johnboy has pointed out, these do not include those treated at unit/battalion level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 22 September , 2016 Share Posted 22 September , 2016 I suspect being treated at MO level accounts for a lot of the times we see reports that a man was injured X number of times yet can't be found on a casualty list Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnboy Posted 22 September , 2016 Share Posted 22 September , 2016 I suppose that in serious cases of illness the MO could refer the men on. Those with minor complaints could be treated by him. Apart from seeing short notes in war diaries re men reporting to MO I have not seen any paperwork. I wonder how long an MO could sign a man off duty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEW Posted 23 September , 2016 Share Posted 23 September , 2016 I think many of those slips, trips, falls would have to be reported as a potential self-inflicted wound. There were orders that any accidental injury had to go through the process of being reported as a potential SIW. MOs were frequently informing their CO that 'under regulations this case should have been reported as a SIW' TEW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now