Good evening, the person has the following ""Diagnosis: Anomaly of the urinary system. Aplasia of the right kidney. SKX. Calculus of the left ureter of the only functioning left kidney. Renal colic on the left. Oligoanuria. Chronic calculous pyelonephritis in the latent stage. The head of the wolf interprets this disease according to p.b, art. 67 502 of the order of the Ministry of Health and issues a conclusion about the suitability of the person in the parts of providing tsk and sp, etc., but the head of the police department is a doctor with a university specialty in the field of neurology, and clearly does not understand the essence of the diagnosis, therefore, as p.b, article 67 according to appendix number 2 to the order of Moza 402 says the following ...
Appendix 2
to the Regulation on military medical examination in the Armed Forces of Ukraine (clause 1.2 of chapter 1 of section II)
EXPLANATION
on the application of articles
Schedule of diseases, conditions and
physical defects that determine
degree of suitability to
military service
1) point "a" includes:
diseases accompanied by significant disorders of the excretory function of the kidneys or CKD 2-4 degrees;
urolithiasis with damage to both kidneys with unsatisfactory treatment results that are not amenable to surgical treatment;
bilateral nephroptosis of the III stage with significant functional disorders;
renal pelvic dystonia with significant dysfunction;
the absence of one kidney, removed due to diseases, in the presence of any degree of dysfunction of the second kidney.
That is, from the above and the diagnosis of the person, it can be seen that he has one kidney missing and the other has a functional disorder, which falls under any degree specified in the explanations and the article of point "A" itself.
The head of the VLK, either not familiar with appendix number 2 to 402 of the order of the Ministry of Health, or deliberately ignoring the current order and exceeding his authority for the purpose of an unknown person in respect of whom the recruitment committee is considering, may be biased, or negligently applies paragraph B of this appendix and the provisions of the Article 67, which says...
2) point "b" includes:
urolithiasis with frequent (2 or more times a year) attacks of renal colic, independent passage of stones and significant or moderate renal dysfunction;
a non-functioning kidney or the absence of one kidney, removed for 3 reasons of diseases, without impaired functions of the second kidney;
at the same time, he does not take into account that the person has one kidney with significant dysfunction, that is, aplasia of the right kidney does not mean anything to him, and that the diagnosis itself is based on the only problematic kidney that the person has.
In addition, the person has bronchial asthma of moderate severity, and a number of other chronic diseases
Question: What article should the VLK have applied?
The son is a military man. He received a combat wound. The previous diagnosis during the evacuation was a contusion (ABT), this diagnosis is indicated on the form 100. On the recommendation of the doctors, he was evacuated to a hospital for treatment. After treatment in the hospital, the son received a discharge, in which the diagnosis of ABT is not indicated even as a preliminary one. Due to discrepancies in the diagnoses, he was denied sick pay. Can I, as a mother or a son, personally make a written request with the requirement to provide an explanation with which previous diagnosis my son was admitted to the hospital, on the basis of which medical tests he was removed and why it was not indicated in the discharge? How to send it correctly to guarantee a response from the hospital.
The husband suffered a stroke in 2019. There is heart failure. They were sent to the commission in the military headquarters. In the hospital, a diagnosis of stage 3 hypertension was made. The conclusion of the military examination: to send for additional examination. In Kyiv, the cardiologist said that he does not see 3 stages here and put 1. I quote the doctor: if you want to go abroad, I will fundamentally check carefully, and I do not see 3 stages. What should we do in this case? All official documents that we have from hospitals are not important for this doctor. He said that they write what they want there. thank you
...antidepressants. Diagnosis: bipolar disorder. The condition was serious, depression, they wanted to send him to a psychiatric hospital. They turned to the doctor to get at least some kind of confirmation that he was undergoing treatment. She said that this is confidential information and she can give it only at the request of the police. Is it legal? How to get this information in order to submit documents to the tsk.
... from the subpoena. This is complete nonsense.
In addition, in the protocol, the witnesses indicated that I allegedly did not want to receive subpoenas.
And also, police representatives testify that I refused to sign, but neither surnames, positions, nor the place of the so-called offense were indicated. The office was not indicated where to arrive, nor the address. Only the hour and the local tsk.
There is also no one who will consider the cases, there is no seal of the tsk itself, its head, only the signature of some major of the accounting of sergeants and reserve soldiers.
I am asking for advice on how to act according to the law. I have a diagnosis of cardiofibrosis.