Melchett, I quite agree. What I was really suggesting was the article was an example of muddled reportage (again).
Now there used to be a time, when we had hospitals, rehab centres, minor conflicts, and a relatively few injured servicemen, that we would strive to get them as fit as possible with discharge only when it was inevitable.
One reason was economic. It was more efficient to get injured aircrew back into productive service, albeit with false limbs and glass eyes, than discharged and paying them buckets of compensation (well small buckets anyway).
Now, with many much more serious injuries and a lower productive service value there are probably insufficient billets in a vastly reduced service to absorb them, it would seem that someone sees it as more efficient to discharge them.