The belief that applicants with depression should be granted admission solely because some actively serving members could bear the same ailment is purely erroneous. Requirements are a paradigm, thus they're not subject to flexibility unless there are extenuating circumstances. Yeah it sucks to have an affliction, because of past traumatic events, or heredity, but life has never been rosy. Active members of the military who display depression do so after entering the forces, not prior. Therefore, it's not entirely respectful or fair to question the competency of active members, based on personal qualms.
With that said, I think the policies regarding past sufferers of depression could be a bit clearer. From what I've gleaned, the decision to permit a previously diagnosed applicant is conducted by Ottawa on a case by case basis. In order to verify that an individual is qualified, s/he needs to provide supplementary documentation certifying their competency and health, but even if an applicant is given a glowing report by their encumbent physician, it doesn't guarantee a green flag from Ottawa. I think the policies and stipulations concerning the inadmissibility of an applicant need to be addressed with a lot more clarity. For example, why is it that applicants can still be rejected even after being given a clean bill of health by the physician responsible for their diagnosis. Is there a minimum period of time that needs to be spent free of therapy, medications and symptoms in order to qualify? (The number seems to fluctuate between 6 to 12 months, but there's no concrete information available on this, apart from anecdotes.) Also, is the physician required to provide a letter, or actually fill out forms provided by the CFRC? (Again, the stories seem to differ on this). And finally, does one rejection due to a history of depression invalidate an applicant permanently, or are they eligible for another chance after a year? There are answers to these questions available on the board, but they lack consistency and clarity.
Though I understand the indignation and disappointment underlying the complaints that are being made against these disqualifications, some of the criticisms being made against CF members, and recruiting policies are not constructive, and childish at worst.
On the other hand, the policies regarding depression based disqualification could be a lot clearer. Anecdotes and inconsistent accounts don't generate much confidence in the system. The impression that mentally fit applicants are being denied a privilege, due to a stigma from the past belies their potential worth in the future. Applicants who are fit, and provide documents which certify their competency, but still end up being denied need to know why, and how they can come back with a viable chance. In addition, applicants who do have past depression need to know what the requirements are, and what kind of timeline they need to fulfil so they don't inundate the system with applications that are ultimately going to be rejected.
