Definition claim
Brannan is a force of keeping her family together.
– Claiming that Brannan IS something.
Ethical or Moral Claim
She’s never been diagnosed with anything, and Brannan prefers it that way.
– She doesn’t want her daughter to have a “label” because of a diagnosis.
Moral Claim
“I’m not for taking her somewhere and getting her labeled. I’d rather work on it in softer ways,”
– She doesn’t think it’s right for her young daughter to be “labeled” as something.
Comparative claim
Certainly she seems better than some other PTSD vets’ kids.
– They are comparing the behaviors of Caleb’s child to the children of other PTSD vets.
Categorical Claim
That’s typical parent stuff, but Brannan also keeps Caleb on his regimen of 12 pills—antidepressants, anti-anxiety, sleep aids, pain meds, nerve meds, stomach meds—plus weekly therapy, and sometimes weekly physical therapy for a cartilage-lacking knee and the several disintegrating discs in his spine, products of the degenerative joint disease.
– They list all the meds he is prescribed and also mentions some of the physical issues he is facing.
Causal Claim
She sleeps a maximum of five hours a night, keeps herself going with fast food and energy drinks.
– Because she is the force, she can only spare a little time for rest.
Evaluative claim
Which can pay spouses or other family members of disabled vets who have to take care of them full time, in Brannan’s case $400 a week.
-It mentions that in regards to Brannan’s situation and after evaluation, she would be paid $400 a week.
Evaluative Claim
She used the skills she learned as an assistant.
-They can evaluate if she really used the skills that she had learned.
Causal Claim
She also works for the VA now.
-Because they had filed for bankruptcy, and needed money, Brannon had gotten a job.
Categorical/ Possibly Numerical Claim?
“…are coming back with maybe from enduring all the bomb blasts, and speech therapy for the TBI, and continuing tests for a cyst in his chest and his 48-percent-functional lungs.”
-It lists many things again, but also includes a number that is evaluative.
Evaluative Claim
She hasn’t seen any other therapist, or a therapist trained to deal with PTSD—Brannan knows what a difference that makes.
-She is basing her decision on not taking her daughter to see another therapist on her evaluation on the first therapist she saw.
Categorical Claim
“…since the Vineses aren’t poor enough for subsidized health
-The family is being categorized based on how much income they bring home.
Causal claim
“until we have to. And I’m hoping we won’t have to.”
-They won’t go to therapy unless they “have” to.
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
duck
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
hollyp715
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Ethical or Moral Claim
She’s never been diagnosed with anything, and Brannan prefers it that way.
– She doesn’t want her daughter to have a “label” because of a diagnosis.
Moral Claim
“I’m not for taking her somewhere and getting her labeled. I’d rather work on it in softer ways,”
– She doesn’t think it’s right for her young daughter to be “labeled” as something.
Evaluative claim
Which can pay spouses or other family members of disabled vets who have to take care of them full time, in Brannan’s case $400 a week.
-It mentions that in regards to Brannan’s situation and after evaluation, she would be paid $400 a week.
Evaluative Claim
She used the skills she learned as an assistant.
-They can evaluate if she really used the skills that she had learned.
Causal Claim
She also works for the VA now.
-Because they had filed for bankruptcy, and needed money, Brannon had gotten a job.
I like your approach here, GF, and I very much appreciate that you found claims in the smallest bits of text. You’ve earned a passing-good grade for this round and may be satisfied with it, but I offer you an opportunity to get to the next level with a little bit more initiative:
Put together those little claims above and see if you can tell me whether the author deliberately strings these little pearls into a strand that illustrates the conflict Brannan has to face. She doesn’t want her daughter diagnosed, but she depends on her husband’s diagnosis to earn the money that’s keeping the family going. Did I create that observation in my own head, or was it planted there by insinuation, sequence, selection of details by the author?
I don’t think she deliberately writes these claims in any specific way. I think us observing those details is just something being created in our own head. Obviously I think she will be okay with her husband being “labeled” as it provides income, whereas with her daughter, there is no benefit to her having “labeled.” I think if it was planted there by insinuation she would make it known that she has a problem with her husband having a label as well, explaining that she would just have to live with it because its extra income, but she doesn’t do that. The way she explains it is that its just an extra $400 a week.
I think we create that observation in our head because we feel that as a mother and wife she should feel the same way about her husband being labeled as she does with her daughter.
OK