We are having similar arguments now about PTSD being a qualifiying "Wound".
I tend to think the Purple Heart should be limited to physical wounds as it has been traditionally.
I got mine in a somewhat conventional manner....got shot and burned. I also have been diagnosed as having PTSD. I do not think woundings like PTSD amount to the kind of "Wound" we wish to "honor"....despite it having long term effects just as some of the physical wounds do.
Our Purple Heart is not a replacement for a service Ribbon or Campaign Medal....it is simply a way of marking a Service Member who was wounded in direct combat against an armed enemy.
Our time limits for Campaign Medals and the like is simple....one day qualifies....so if you get Wounded the day you arrive on-site in the designated "combat area"....you qualify for the Purple Heart and the Campaign Medal.
I do wonder about all the Medals and Ribbons that are being issued these days....as it demeans the "legitimate" awards that are earned by valorous service in actual combat. When have to add the "V" device for Valor to some awards that are now given for mere service and not heroic acts....it really does demean those that were earned under the "old" system.
My Grandfather, as a Private, was nominated for the Medal of Honor and wound up with a DSC....if he had been an Officer, based upon Medal Citations of the time he would have received the Medal. The "politics" of miltary award systems oft times cause more problems than can be acknowledged by those in charge. If they would keep the rules simple, make the system focus upon rewarding those that do extraordinary things, who are wounded, and make the awards standards uniform, we would all be better served.