What a Community Can Do

This is the final article in the series, and the one with the least authority behind it. It is written with an awareness that the person best placed to answer is not the author.

What the evidence on recovery suggests Analogical only

Dr Gülşah Kurt of UNSW Sydney describes recovery as depending on the same force that often causes the harm: the actions of people. Her work concerns shared, large-scale events — not adjacency to a single household. It is useful here by analogy, not by direct finding.

The local constraint Documented

Mexico allocates roughly 2.2% of its health budget to mental health, with roughly 1.1 public psychiatrists per 100,000 people, most in hospitals.

Up to 80% of people with mental health or substance-use disorders in Mexico do not receive adequate care.

An absence worth naming Not found

No organisation was identified that provides structured support to civilian communities affected by veteran-related harm. A community in this position sits outside every existing support structure — not excluded from them, simply never contemplated by them.

What this article does not do

It does not recommend a course of action. Recommending a response requires knowing a problem exists at a scale the response could address — that has not been established.

Both moving on and not being able to are documented responses. Neither is a failure.

What can be offered instead

Information — now available to anyone who wants it. A record — the gap is described specifically enough for someone with the right methods to study it properly. The question, returned — to the people who hold the information no literature contains.

What remains is modest and, I think, defensible. Injuries of this kind are documented. Their effects on households are documented. Whether they reach further has not been formally studied. The people best placed to know are not researchers, and never were.