rejected due to eyesight

Discussion in 'Joining Up - Royal Navy Recruiting' started by treacle, Jul 9, 2006.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I applied for a medical cadetship as a medical student to become a Navy Doctor and have been found 'permanently unfit' and rejected due to poor eyesight. My vision is outside the lowest requirement they accept. I have offered to have laser eye surgery (they types they accept) to correct my vision but my starting point is below their limit so this is not an option. It seems crazy in this day and age to be found permanently unsuitable due to a correctable eyesight problem. I wear contacts so you wouldn't even know I was short sighted and play sports and function normally so am a bit gutted by this as I feel I have a lot to offer and know they are short of doctors. It just seems mad.
  2. wow that does seem harsh my mate has full on bottle bottom glasses ( which of course I in no way take the pee out off) and is even to blind to wear contacts.

    He did want to go for his pilots licence, however they said he was too blind and that laser surgery wasn't acceptable because it effects your night vision.

    I won't pretend I'm an expert on the subject, but couldn't you keep having laser eye surgery until it's above the limit and then try again? I know it says permanently unfit but perhaps there might be an appeals board if you can prove your eye sight is now good enough?

    If all that fails how about another service or reserve service, I remember having a medical for the RNR once, only to be told by a 50 stone RNR lady nurse that I was half a stone over weight, when I questioned her on her own lardyness she informed me that they were so short of nurses that although encouraged to lose weight as long as she was shown to be trying during her annal BFT, she was allowed to continue to serve.

    Most of this is probably no help to you whats so ever, sorry

  3. Cheers WW, thanks for that. I wish I had not been honest about my eyesight now and just had the eye surgery first and said nothing - I didn't want to have to do that though as I think lies/twisting truths always catch up with you, but now I think differently. I didn't realise I would be permanently rejected, am just so gutted. Oh well, its done now. I'm going to have the surgery and then apply to one of the other forces and see what they say.
  4. Best of luck matey , go for it
  5. A mate of mine applied for the South Wales Police a few years ago and went through the same harsh treatment because of his eyesight. He was turned down on a number of occasions so he went up to Harley Street in London and had Laser treatment which corrected his eyesight to such a degree that when he applied again he got in. It might just be worth while to have the treatment and then have another go. If then you don't get in at least it will help for any other career you might wish to follow. Also my neice applied for the RN about 7 years ago but was turned down because of a corrected medical condition. She appealed to a panel within the Admiralty Department and succeeed. She served 4 years in the RN, came out and is now a Police Constable. Don't know if any of this helps you mate, but best of luck.
  6. You'd end up an MO not a feckin sniper, I'd challenge it. What have you got to loose apart from a decent handful of cash to support you while you study

    I rocked up and didn't take my contacts out at the medical....I'm blind as a bat....Didn't cause me any issues at all during my career and that was as a bootneck

    Give it a punt speccy
  7. As I have posted elsewhere, BR1750A suggests that +/-6.00 is acceptable in people already in but +/-3.00 is the limit for joining - how far outside this are you? The reasons for not accepting people with certain eyesight restrictions are sound - and I, for one, have doubts about the long-term implications of laser eye surgery. Additionally, one cannot wear contacts in an NBC environment.

    I understand that exceptions have been made for MO's in the past - however, the RN might not be as short of docs as you would think - especially given how screwed most SHOs are in the NHS at the moment. Dare I suggest the RAF?

  8. Typical of my luck, I screech in at a resounding -6.50. I do appreciate why they need to have limits but am frustrated as at -6.00 you can see very little, and at -6.50 not a lot less!!

    Once I have heard back from the appeal then I will consider the RAf but imagine I will be turned down there too.

    Thanks for your other comments guys, its appreciated.
  9. NBC yadda yadda yadda

    Thats why spectacle wearers get prescription lenses in their resp's

    "The reasons for not accepting people with certain eyesight restrictions are sound"

    What actually are the reasons in the BR...........
  10. I know how it feels mate, I got the bad news a couple of weeks ago. I can't even get laster surgery and blag it cos I'm so short sighted there's a likelyhood it wouldn't be 100% successful.

    A career at a desk now beckons :(
  11. Standards are there for a reason, and laser eye surgery (AFAIK) is still not a terribly exact science. I've heard no recommendations from professionals to have it done (I wear lenses myself), and I have heard the stories of frying your night vision. I wouldn't rush into having someone fire a "fricking laser" in my eye unless there was a near 100% guarantee of a positive outcome!

    I know some forms of laser surgery are being accepted now, but it's not cheap and if it "may not work" you may be better spending your cash on some designer frames!

    Don't you love the way Google has plonked ads for Laser Eye Surgery at the bottom of this page!
  12. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    The themed ads on the bottom of the page are more amusing that the threads.
  13. They can do an op now where they insert a corrective lens into the eye as opposed to frying your cornea.

    Might not be recognised by the mob though.
  14. Yeah that's been recommended to me by two companies but I've decided against it. Invasive surgery to put a foreign body in something as vital as my eye just isn't worth the risk. If it stems the flow of endothelial cells to/from the cornea it's the end of that eye's useful life. I've seen online diaries of people who've had it done and its much more traumatic to the eye than LASIK.

    Plus, you're absolutely right, the mob won't allow it. Only a miracle from the bearded one upstairs can get me in now... :roll:
  15. It seems crazy to me especialy if you wanted to become a doc |||
  16. Hey, just to let you know, im a newbie to the site, but i am at Dartmouth right now after spending this time last year after my AIB fighting my case to the surgeon commadore at the central medical board.
    I managed it by going to different opthomologists etc and having different tests done than the military ones.
    I dont know how bad your eyes are, but mine were just below the standard (bout 2 points off in one, 6 in the other i think).
    Either way i argued and got referred to the royal birmingham eye centre to see a pongo eye doc, and he pronounced me fine. he didnt have a clue what the original problem was, oh well, here i am.
    So all i can say either fight it and try the appeal board or try your luck with another service.

    Good luck mate, Nick
  17. cheers Nick, I appreciate that, hope its all going well for you.
  18. Hi, im a medic in the navy and regularly do eye sight tests for recruits. Lol the rule does seem unfair as i myself have quite bad eye sight. They justfy it by saying that if u for some reason could not wear ur contact wud u be able to mange otherwise with emergency situations such as firefighting ect
  19. FlagWagger

    FlagWagger Book Reviewer

    Simple, if you can't see the fire, direct the water towards the heat source :) :)
  20. haha u know what i meant!! i dont make the rules i just have to follow them lol

Share This Page