Maximizing the Division Psychiatrist's Garrison Prevention Role to Meet the U.S. Army's 21st Century Readiness Expectations.

INTRODUCTION: The division psychiatrist has been a bedrock U.S. Army institution for nearly 100 years. The role of the position in combat is well established, but its role in garrison has historically been less well defined. Prevention of behavioral health casualties has long been a governing objective of the division psychiatrist and forms the cornerstone of the behavioral health (BH) readiness concept. Accordingly, the Army's increased emphasis on readiness mandates that the division psychiatrist maximize BH force readiness through applied prevention methods. This process begins in garrison, and the crucible of recent protracted conflict has yielded effective BH screening principles applied in that environment. Despite this achievement, an evolving operational environment threatens the blanket effectiveness of BH screening and prevention in garrison. This article examines the historical evolution of the division psychiatrist's role in garrison, elucidates division psychiatry BH readiness principles in garrison, and expands on previously documented division psychiatry led efforts to maximize BH readiness levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A historical review of the division psychiatrist was conducted in order to analyze the role of the position in BH prevention operations. Identified division psychiatry preventive lessons are leveraged against current BH readiness challenges resulting in proposed solutions from a division psychiatry perspective.

RESULTS: The historical trajectory of the division psychiatrist's role in garrison prevention operations has advanced significantly in the last 17 years. With the advent of evidence-based BH readiness findings, the division psychiatrist's garrison readiness duties have expanded to include analysis of unit BH readiness levels. By applying pre-deployment screening principles in new ways to existing BH readiness platforms, the division psychiatrist can analyze BH readiness levels much earlier than immediately prior to deployment. The resultant BH readiness feedback allows for individualized readiness improvements for the BH systems that serve Army units. The division psychiatrist is the natural proponent of such readiness efforts, and will require staff officer, consultant, liaison, and trainer skill sets in order to be successful.

CONCLUSIONS: The division psychiatrist's role must adapt to a changing operational environment in order to preserve and build on historical successes. The recommended end state would see the division psychiatrist maintaining a robust pre/post-deployment BH screening process and organizing the regular analysis of BH readiness levels to optimize existing BH clinical platforms. Systematically pursued, this would not only maximize BH readiness, but dramatically enhance safety and the provision of resources towards soldier health and welfare across the Army. The division psychiatrist should lead this effort.