Section 14

Kateri’s full-time job—as a VA nurse, actually—she could no longer manage his emotional plus physical problems: rheumatism consults, neuro consults for TBI, plus a burning rash on both feet he got in Fallujah in 2004. 

• This is a categorical claim because it names the several examples of physical problems that James Peterson has after coming back from Iraq. Its also an evaluative claim because this is arguable, others could manage and it’s quite odd how a nurse can’t deal with what she takes care of on a daily at work.

Chemical exposure, stress reaction, no one knows, but the skin cracks and opens up raw with lesions sometimes.

• This is a factual claim because Kateri isn’t sure what exactly is causing her husbands skin to react the way it is. There is also a casual claim because the cause isn’t known, these are just guesses of what it might be.
• Evaluative claim because there are judgements made that the cause of the skin problem may be from stress or chemical exposure…all based on the guys pass but what if its just some type of allergy he picked up over the years or something passed down by genetics.
• Categorical claim because there are several beliefs of what could be causing the skin to be reacting the way it is.
• Ethical claim because his pass, when he was on the battlefield… is blamed for the reason his skin is cracking.

Kateri writes me that just moments after the injection, he “went from balls-to-the-wall PTSD to BOOM chill.”

• This sentence is a credibility claim or attributive claim because it states who is responsible for the following claim.

“When you’ve become hypervigilant, the place you are most functional is on the battlefield,” McGill’s Brunet explains.

• This statement is a factual claim because McGill’s Brunet is saying the place you are most functional is on the battlefield, when your’e alert but that depends on who the person is. Some may not agree with this. This is an opinion.

Kateri, despite wishing her system hadn’t learned to run at a heightened state, at this point is like a drug addict, needing stimulation to maintain it.

• The above sentence is an analogy claim because it compares Kateri’s needing of stimulation to a drug addict. She’s used to how her husband usually acts so it’s not normal for her not to be in a heightened state, it’s something she’s grown to do all the time.