Unfortunately, that portion of the site has not been constructed yet. If I remember correctly a wound stripe is a red "stripe" that is worn on your left sleeve (the dress manual will have this info). I would hazard to guess the prerequisite is wounds suffered in action against a belligerant force. I don't believe traffic accidents, PTSD etc would give you a wound stripe.

Okay - it's been ages since I've tried to debate something politely, so forgive me if I'm rusty at this ...

Once upon a time, I imagine wound stripes were instituted for physical wounds (at that point in history, they didn't understand "mental wounds").

First of all, let's imagine the wound stripe was issued for the purpose of acknowledging, and signalling to others that the wearer had been wounded (i.e. although we use the expression "battle-scarred veteran", not all scars would be visible since some would be covered by clothing, for example. Furthermore, some wounds might "heal" without leaving too much visible evidence). As such, let's pretend the purpose of the wound stripe was to signal that the wearer had received an injury "in battle", and to afford the wearer some degree of respect from others who might not otherwise realise the pain and suffering the wearer had endured. Okay?

Leaping forward to the here and now, and digressing to discuss PTSD, "shell shock", or "combat fatigue" ...

If any soldier or officer is wounded in the service of our country, the ideal situation would be for a thankful nation to ensure the service member would be properly looked after (i.e. proper medical attention, rehabilitation if necessary, and a pension in the "worst case" scenario).

For the sake of discussion, let's accept that some service members are going to actually witness tragic/traumatic events - things that no young man or woman should ever have to see - with the possible result of PTSD (ideally, "the system" would ensure their eventual return to health, mental or physical).

Historically, we acknowledged their service by giving them service medals - and, once upon a time, one would understand that a person with numerous ribbons on their uniform "had seen a lot of action". Thus, it used to be sufficient for our society to acknowledge a soldier's gruelling/harrowing experiences by respecting their service (by respecting their ribbons, and similarly their wound stripes). I should also point out I am alarmed by the recent trend to lower standards, and award ribbons as if at a county fair ... (but that's nothing new - remember the "SPAM" medal?)

Unfortunately/regrettably, in "some people's" opinion PTSD still carries some degree of stigma (reminiscent of "lacking moral fibre" ...). Accordingly, there would be the risk of further stigmatizing somebody by pinning a wound stripe on them.

Okay, okay - I can hear you saying "sum up".

Please let me suggest this: It should be understood that some of our comrades in arms have paid a higher price than others whilst earning their ribbons, and not all scars are visible.

Thus endeth the sermon according to me.

I am pretty sure that all of, say, our World War Two vets have suffered stress of some kind since the war; it would go against the original intent of the award to hand out the stripes as if they were candy. And I am sure many of them would be too embarrassed to wear them -

"Gee grampa, where were you shot?"

"Well, Bobby, I was never shot, but I cry myself to sleep at night because I was never properly counselled to deal with my emotions after discharge in 1946."

I don't mean that to belittle the very real problems our vets faced after WW II, and our Peacekeeping vets are facing today, but you can see that as a society we are a long way from accepting mental illnesses with an open mind; many soldiers suffering from them would be the first to dismiss the idea that they exist.

Giving wound stripes to those that suffer is a well-intentioned idea, but there must be a better way.

Incidentally, wound stripes have been worn since the First World War, they were brought back by personal order of HM King George VI for WW II.

First World War veterans serving in the Active Army in WW II were prevented from wearing their 1914-1918 wound stipes, with the exception of members of the Veterans Guard, in 1941. Orders in 1942, as well as the War Dress Regulations in 1943, abolished the wearing of wound stripes by members of the Veterans Guard also.

In 1944, orders advised that "His Majesty the King has been graciously pleased to approve the institution of Wound Stripes". The stripes were not to be considered a reward, and posthumous issues would not be made. Each occasion in which a soldier was wounded or injured, subject to certain conditions, entitled the soldier to a gold stripe or russia braid 1-1/2 inches long. Personnel wounded in prevrious Wars, regardless of how many times, were entitled to wear a single red rayon stripe. All stripes were worn vertically on the left forearm, the lower end of the first stripe 4 inches from the bottom of the sleeve or immediately above the cuff, midway between the seams on the outer side of the sleeve. Additional gold stripes were worn at half inch intervals in front of the first gold stripe. The red stripe, if worn, was to be placed behind the first gold stripe. The stripes were not to be worn on greatcoats or raincoats.

I think the idea of issuing a stripe to someone suffering from PTSD is interesting although it leads to the question of proof. Do we then have to rely on a shrink's opinion? In my opinion the stripe should only be issued to someone physically injured by enemy action. While some here may doubt the reality of PTSD one only has to speak to someone who has born witness to some of what has been seen by our troops to see whether it is real or not. The question as to whether someone so suffering should be equated to someone who has been shot in the face is questionable.

The Canadian Service Corps driver who "delivered beer" in World War Two likely came home with the CVSM and clasp, War Medal, Defence Medal, France-Germany Star (possibly also the Italy Star) and 1939-45 Star - the same as the infantrymen, tankers and sappers.