Section 8:
“She hasn’t seen any other therapist or a therapist trained to deal with PTSD—Brannan knows what a difference that makes since the volunteer therapist she tried briefly herself spent more time asking her to explain a “bad PTSD day” than how Caleb’s symptoms were affecting the family.”
This can be an example of a comparative claim or Evaluative claim as it shows how the character compares what a good or bad therapist is. In this statement, the author is hinting that a person trained to deal with trauma is more beneficial in treatment than someone who has the therapist title.
“Katie was not covered by the VA under Caleb’s disability; actually, she wasn’t covered by any insurance at all half the time, since the Vineses aren’t poor enough for subsidized health care and the Blue Cross gap insurance maxes out at six months a year.”
This can be an example of a casual claim, the author states how PTSD isn’t considered a disability in close readings. Because of this, she does not have insurance to afford the treatments she needs to help her PTSD. It is casually stated that if you aren’t considered “unfortunate” by insurance companies for health care, you only get protected for a couple months.
“Certainly she seems better than some other PTSD vets’ kids Brannan knows, who scream and sob and rock back and forth at the sound of a single loud noise, or who try to commit suicide even before they’re out of middle school.”
This is an example of a Contrastive claim, the comparison being made is the character exhibiting different traits of PTSD than the stereotypical characteristics of someone who went through trauma.
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
Good, solid work, NatureChild.
I’ll do a quick analysis on the first section to see how our reactions compare. You can revise any or all of your responses in reply for a grade improvement.
“She hasn’t seen any other therapist or a therapist trained to deal with PTSD—
—This appears to be a Factual claim, but we can’t be sure since it’s unclear.
—We can’t tell whether it means she’s seen a therapist or not but suggests that she has, just not a PTSD specialist.
—The author has not independently verified this claim, so it’s Attributive; she’s counting on Brannan’s report.
Brannan knows what a difference that makes since the volunteer therapist she tried briefly herself spent more time asking her to explain a “bad PTSD day” than how Caleb’s symptoms were affecting the family.”
—Brannan’s claims are Evaluative and Comparative.
—She’s comparing non-PTSD therapists to PTSD specialists.
—We can’t tell from the evidence whether she’s every consulted a PTSD specialist, so her comparison might be without value.
—In her “brief” consultation with a volunteer, the therapist wanted her to describe her husband’s worst days, which she interpreted as dismissive of her own reactions. This she disparages as bad therapy.
—The Author displays a large measure of Attribution here, telling readers that Brannan “knows the difference” between good and bad therapy.
We clearly agree that the claims are Comparative and Evaluative. I’m suggesting that attentive readers have to be wary of claims made “by the author” that pass along claims made “by the subjects” without verification. The author is presenting Brannan’s claims without much resistance. That’s Attributive.
Provisionally graded. Revisions are always advised, and regrades are always available following significant improvement.
LikeLike