Facing a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation?
If your command has ordered you to undergo a mental health or behavioral health evaluation, you may have questions about why it was ordered, what information will be shared with your command, and what the evaluation could mean for your military career. A Command-Directed Evaluation (CDE)—also commonly called a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation (CDMHE) or Command-Directed Behavioral Health Evaluation (CDBHE)—can have consequences extending beyond the evaluation itself, including potential effects on duty status, fitness for service, administrative separation, and other personnel decisions.
The rules governing these evaluations recently changed. Effective July 27, 2026, DoD Instruction 6490.04, Mental Health Evaluations of Service Members, replaced the prior DoD Instruction governing military mental health evaluations. If you are facing a command-directed evaluation—particularly one involving suspected retaliation, an ongoing personnel dispute, or potential career consequences—National Security Law Firm can help you understand the process and evaluate your legal options.
What Is a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation?
A Command-Directed Evaluation, or CDE, is a mental health evaluation ordered by an authorized commander or supervisor. Depending on the branch and context, servicemembers may also encounter terms such as Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation (CDMHE) or Command-Directed Behavioral Health Evaluation (CDBHE).
A CDE can be used to evaluate concerns involving a servicemember’s mental health as it relates to matters such as fitness for duty, occupational requirements, safety, performance, or behavior. The current DoD Instruction establishes the governing framework for command-directed evaluations, self-initiated referrals, and independently requested mental health evaluations.
That distinction matters. A CDE is initiated by command; it is not the same as a servicemember voluntarily seeking mental health treatment or initiating a referral for care. The military maintains separate procedures for servicemember-initiated mental health referrals, including the process associated with the Brandon Act.
Most importantly, a properly issued Command-Directed Evaluation has the same status as any other military order. A servicemember who believes an evaluation is improper, retaliatory, or procedurally defective should therefore be cautious about simply refusing to comply. The better course may be to obtain legal advice about the referral, preserve any relevant evidence, and determine what remedies are available without creating an additional disciplinary issue.
When Can the Military Order a Mental Health Evaluation?
A commander does not need to wait for a mental health emergency before directing a servicemember to undergo an evaluation. Under DoD Instruction 6490.04, Mental Health Evaluations of Service Members, a Command-Directed Evaluation may be appropriate when there are concerns involving a servicemember’s fitness for duty, ability to satisfy occupational requirements, risk of harm to self or others, significant changes in performance, or behavioral changes that may be associated with a change in mental status.
The current rules distinguish between non-emergency and emergency Command-Directed Evaluations. An emergency referral may be appropriate when a servicemember’s words or actions indicate a likelihood of serious harm to the member or another person because of a suspected mental disorder. Other concerns about performance, behavior, fitness, or occupational requirements may support a non-emergency evaluation.
Not everyone in a servicemember’s chain of command has authority to independently order a CDE. Under the July 2026 version of DoDI 6490.04, the decision to make a referral generally must be made by the servicemember’s commander who is a commissioned officer, a commissioned-officer supervisor in the chain of supervision who is O-4 or above, or a civilian supervisor in the chain who is GS-12 or equivalent or above. The Instruction contains an additional provision allowing certain senior enlisted personnel to be designated in writing to order an emergency CDE involving an enlisted servicemember.
The circumstances surrounding the referral can matter just as much as the stated reason for it. A servicemember may have legitimate concerns when an evaluation closely follows an IG complaint, report of misconduct, protected communication, disagreement with command, adverse evaluation, or other contested personnel action. Federal military whistleblower law and the current DoDI 6490.04 prohibit using a mental health evaluation as reprisal for making or preparing a protected communication.
That does not mean a servicemember should simply refuse to attend an evaluation believed to be improper. Because a properly ordered CDE carries the status of a military order, refusing to comply can create a separate problem. A servicemember who questions the basis, authority, or motivation for an evaluation should consider obtaining legal advice promptly so the underlying concerns can be evaluated without unnecessarily creating additional adverse consequences.
What Rights Do You Have During a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation?
Being ordered to undergo a mental health evaluation does not eliminate a servicemember’s legal or privacy protections. At the same time, a Command-Directed Evaluation is different from voluntarily seeking confidential mental health treatment, and servicemembers should understand those differences before assuming that everything discussed during the evaluation will remain between them and the provider.
Will Your Commander Be Told What Happens During the Evaluation?
Potentially, yes. DoDI 6490.08 specifically identifies a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation as a circumstance in which a mental health provider may notify command.
That does not mean a commander is automatically entitled to a servicemember’s complete mental health record. DoDI 6490.08 generally requires providers to disclose only the minimum information necessary for the authorized purpose. Depending on the circumstances, that may include information concerning diagnosis, planned treatment, impact on duty or mission, recommended duty restrictions, prognosis, applicable duty limitations, and implications for the safety of the servicemember or others.
This distinction is important. A servicemember should not assume either that the evaluation is completely confidential or that command has unrestricted access to everything discussed with a mental health provider.
What If You Believe the Evaluation Is Improper or Retaliatory?
A servicemember may have legitimate concerns about why an evaluation was ordered, particularly when it closely follows an IG complaint, report of misconduct, protected communication, or other dispute with command.
The current DoDI governing military mental health evaluations prohibits using a Command-Directed Evaluation as reprisal for making or preparing a protected communication under 10 U.S.C. § 1034.
A servicemember who believes an evaluation was ordered for an improper or retaliatory reason should consider obtaining legal advice promptly and preserving relevant evidence, including emails, text messages, counseling statements, evaluations, complaints, orders, and the chronology of events leading to the referral.
Importantly, questioning the legality or motivation behind a CDE is different from simply refusing to comply with it. Because a properly issued CDE is a military order, a servicemember should obtain advice about the appropriate way to challenge suspected retaliation or procedural irregularities without unnecessarily creating a separate disciplinary issue.
The circumstances surrounding the evaluation can also matter later. If a CDE leads to an adverse evaluation, removal from duties, promotion or retention consequences, administrative separation, or other personnel action, the original referral and the reasons behind it may become relevant to an IG reprisal complaint, military whistleblower claim, or BCMR/BCNR records-correction proceeding.
Can a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation Be Retaliation?
Yes. A Command-Directed Evaluation can potentially form part of a military whistleblower reprisal claim if it is ordered because a servicemember made, prepared to make, or was perceived as making a protected communication.
10 U.S.C. § 1034, commonly known as the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, prohibits taking or threatening an unfavorable personnel action—or withholding or threatening to withhold a favorable personnel action—in reprisal for certain protected communications. Protected communications can include qualifying reports to an Inspector General, Member of Congress, chain of command, DoD law-enforcement or investigative organization, and certain other authorized recipients.
The fact that a CDE follows a complaint does not automatically establish retaliation. DoD Inspector General guidance evaluates military reprisal claims by examining issues such as whether the servicemember made a protected communication, whether the responsible officials knew or believed the servicemember had made one, and whether an unfavorable personnel action followed. Timing, statements by command, departures from normal procedures, and the stated reasons for the evaluation may all become important evidence.
For example, a servicemember might report misconduct through an IG complaint and shortly afterward be ordered to undergo a CDE, removed from duties, given an adverse evaluation, or subjected to other career action. In that situation, counsel should evaluate the entire sequence of events rather than viewing the mental health referral in isolation.
The current DoD rules governing mental health evaluations specifically prohibit referring a servicemember for a mental health evaluation as reprisal for making or preparing a protected communication under 10 U.S.C. § 1034. A servicemember who believes that occurred may have options through the Inspector General process and, depending on the resulting career consequences, through other military administrative or records-correction proceedings.
Can a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation Affect Your Military Career?
A Command-Directed Evaluation does not automatically end a servicemember’s career or result in separation. However, the findings of an evaluation can become relevant to important medical and personnel decisions.
Depending on the circumstances, a CDE may lead to recommendations or actions involving:
- Duty restrictions or limitations
- Fitness or suitability for continued military service
- Removal from particular duties or qualifications
- Assignment, deployment, or stabilization issues
- Referral into the Military Disability Evaluation System, including MEB/PEB proceedings
- Administrative separation based on an applicable mental health condition or other basis
- Retention or reenlistment consequences
- Promotion or command consequences
- Other adverse personnel actions
The consequences can sometimes be more significant than the evaluation itself. For example, a servicemember may initially be referred for a CDE because of concerns about behavior or performance, but later face a fitness determination, administrative separation, or another personnel action based in part on the resulting medical assessment.
Mental health findings also do not automatically establish that a servicemember is unfit for military service. The military maintains separate standards and procedures for disability evaluation and administrative separation, and the appropriate process can depend on the diagnosis, severity of the condition, effect on the member’s ability to perform military duties, and other circumstances.
This is why it can be important to look beyond the CDE itself. If an evaluation results in an adverse personnel action, the servicemember may need representation in the subsequent proceeding—and, in some cases, may later need to pursue BCMR or BCNR correction of military records arising from the evaluation or its consequences.
Command-Directed Evaluation vs. a Brandon Act Referral
A Command-Directed Evaluation should not be confused with a servicemember’s right to request a mental health evaluation under the Brandon Act. Although both can result in a mental health evaluation, they begin very differently.
In a Command-Directed Evaluation, the command determines that an evaluation is required and orders the servicemember to undergo it. By contrast, under the Brandon Act and the military’s self-initiated referral process, the servicemember initiates the request for a mental health evaluation through a commander or qualifying supervisor. A servicemember requesting a self-initiated referral does not have to provide a reason for seeking the evaluation.
Servicemembers also retain the ability to independently seek mental health care directly from a provider without involving their command. Current military policy therefore distinguishes among command-directed evaluations, self-initiated referrals through command, and independently requested mental health evaluations.
The distinction can matter because the procedures and information communicated back to command are not necessarily the same. If a servicemember has already been ordered to undergo a CDE but also wants to seek care voluntarily, the circumstances should be evaluated under the current military mental health evaluation rules and Brandon Act referral procedures.
What Happens If You Are Involuntarily Hospitalized?
A Command-Directed Evaluation does not automatically result in hospitalization. If, however, a qualified mental health provider determines that inpatient psychiatric care is necessary and the servicemember does not voluntarily consent to admission, additional protections apply.
Under the military’s rules governing mental health evaluations, an involuntarily admitted servicemember must receive an independent medical review within 72 hours of admission. The purpose of that review is to determine whether continued involuntary hospitalization is clinically appropriate.
The servicemember must be informed of the nature and purpose of the review and has the right to legal representation during the review by a judge advocate or by a civilian attorney of the servicemember’s choosing, at the member’s own expense, if that attorney is reasonably available within the required timeframe.
Continued involuntary hospitalization is not automatic. The independent medical reviewer must determine, based on clear and convincing evidence, that continued involuntary hospitalization is clinically appropriate. If continued hospitalization is approved, the reviewer must document the clinical basis for that decision and the circumstances necessary for discharge, with additional review required if hospitalization continues.
Because these proceedings occur quickly, a servicemember or family member seeking private legal representation for an involuntary military psychiatric hospitalization should contact counsel as soon as possible.
How Can a Military Lawyer Help With a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation?
The appropriate role for an attorney depends on where the servicemember is in the process. Some servicemembers seek advice as soon as they are told that a Command-Directed Evaluation has been ordered. Others contact counsel only after the evaluation has resulted in duty restrictions, an adverse personnel action, an administrative separation proceeding, or allegations of retaliation.
Depending on the circumstances, a military attorney can help by:
- Reviewing the order and the circumstances leading to the CDE
- Determining whether the evaluation was ordered by an authorized official and whether applicable procedures were followed
- Advising the servicemember before the evaluation
- Identifying and preserving evidence when retaliation or an improper purpose is suspected
- Evaluating whether the CDE may be connected to a protected communication or military whistleblower reprisal under 10 U.S.C. § 1034
- Advising on an Inspector General complaint involving an improper or retaliatory mental health evaluation
- Addressing resulting duty, qualification, promotion, retention, or other personnel consequences
- Representing the servicemember in a subsequent administrative separation, MEB/PEB, or other military administrative proceeding
- Seeking BCMR or BCNR correction when an improper evaluation or resulting personnel action has become part of the servicemember’s military record
- Providing representation when an involuntary psychiatric hospitalization results in a proceeding at which private civilian counsel is permitted
The goal is not necessarily to “stop” a CDE. In many cases, the servicemember remains obligated to comply with the order. The more important legal questions may be whether the process is being used properly, whether the member’s rights are being protected, and how to prevent or challenge improper career consequences that follow.
Because these cases can cross several areas of military law, early legal advice can also help identify the correct strategy before an evaluation develops into a larger personnel or administrative matter.
Frequently Asked Questions About Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluations
Can I Refuse a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation?
Generally, simply refusing to attend is risky. Under the current DoD rules, a properly ordered Command-Directed Evaluation has the status of a military order. If you believe the evaluation was improperly ordered or is retaliatory, consider speaking with a military attorney before deciding how to respond.
Will My Commander See My Mental Health Records?
Not necessarily. A CDE does not give your commander unrestricted access to your entire mental health record. However, DoDI 6490.08 permits command notification in specified circumstances and generally requires providers to limit disclosures to the minimum information necessary to address the reason for notification.
Because a Command-Directed Evaluation is one of the circumstances in which information may be communicated to command, servicemembers should not assume that everything about the evaluation will remain confidential.
Can My Commander Order a CDE Because I Filed an IG or Other Complaint?
A commander may have legitimate reasons for ordering a CDE even after a servicemember has made a complaint. The timing alone does not establish retaliation.
However, 10 U.S.C. § 1034 and military whistleblower regulations protect qualifying communications and prohibit reprisal for protected communications. The current rules governing military mental health evaluations also prohibit using a mental health referral as whistleblower reprisal. When a CDE closely follows protected activity, the surrounding facts should be evaluated carefully.
Can a Command-Directed Evaluation Cause Me to Be Separated From the Military?
A CDE does not itself automatically separate a servicemember. Depending on the findings and circumstances, however, an evaluation may lead to further action involving fitness for duty, MEB/PEB proceedings, medical retention, or administrative separation.
If separation proceedings are initiated, the servicemember’s rights and available defenses will depend on the specific basis and procedure being used.
Can a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation Affect My Security Clearance?
A mental health evaluation does not automatically result in the denial or revocation of a security clearance. Clearance consequences depend on the circumstances, including the underlying conduct or condition, its effect on judgment, reliability, or ability to safeguard classified information, and other relevant facts.
Servicemembers with clearance concerns should obtain advice based on both the military personnel consequences of the CDE and the applicable security clearance adjudicative standards, rather than assuming that seeking or receiving mental health care will automatically jeopardize their clearance.
Should I Speak With a Military Lawyer Before the Evaluation?
If the CDE appears routine and there are no significant personnel issues surrounding it, legal representation may not always be necessary.
Speaking with counsel becomes more important when the evaluation follows a protected complaint or conflict with command, appears retaliatory, was ordered under questionable circumstances, or is already connected to adverse evaluations, removal from duties, promotion or retention problems, administrative separation, or other career consequences.
Early advice can help identify the issues that actually matter, preserve relevant evidence, and avoid decisions that create additional problems.
👉 Military Law / UCMJ Lawyer — National Security Law Firm
Speak With a Military Lawyer About a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation
A Command-Directed Evaluation can begin as a mental health referral but develop into a broader military personnel matter. When questions arise about retaliation, fitness for duty, administrative separation, promotion or retention, military records, or security clearance consequences, it is important to consider the entire situation rather than the evaluation in isolation.
National Security Law Firm represents servicemembers nationwide in military investigations, administrative actions, medical and fitness-for-duty matters, and other proceedings that can affect a military career. Our attorneys can evaluate the circumstances surrounding a CDE, identify potential legal or procedural issues, and advise you about the actions that may follow.
If you have been ordered to undergo a Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation—or are already dealing with adverse consequences following one—contact National Security Law Firm to discuss your situation.
Here is a standalone official sources resource section:
Official Sources and Resources
The following official government sources provide additional information on Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluations, military mental health policy, and related servicemember rights.
DoD Policy and Instructions
DoD Instruction 6490.04 — Mental Health Evaluations of Service Members
The governing DoD Instruction establishing the framework for Command-Directed Evaluations, self-initiated referrals, and independently requested mental health evaluations. Effective July 27, 2026.
DoDI 6490.08 — Command Notification Requirements to Dispel Stigma in Providing Mental Health Care to Service Members
Addresses the circumstances under which mental health providers may notify command and the limitations on those disclosures.
Federal Law
10 U.S.C. § 1034 — Protected Communications; Prohibition of Retaliatory Personnel Actions
The Military Whistleblower Protection Act, prohibiting reprisal against servicemembers for making protected communications.
DoD Inspector General
DoD Inspector General — Military Whistleblower Protection Under 10 U.S.C. § 1034
Inspector General guidance on military reprisal claims and the whistleblower protection process for servicemembers.
Servicemember Mental Health Resources
Military Health System — Brandon Act
Information on the Brandon Act and the servicemember self-initiated mental health referral process.
MyNavyHR — Mental Health Playbook
Navy mental health leadership guidance addressing mental health support and command responsibilities.
Army-Specific Resources
U.S. Army Reserve — Behavioral Health / Command-Directed Behavioral Health Evaluations
Army Reserve guidance on Command-Directed Behavioral Health Evaluations for commanders.
Army HRC — Stabilization of Soldiers Requiring a Command Directed Behavioral Health Evaluation or Follow-On Treatment
Army Human Resources Command guidance on stabilization policies for soldiers undergoing CDBHEs.
U.S. Army Reserve Medical Management Center — Behavioral Health / CDBHE FAQs
Frequently asked questions on Command-Directed Behavioral Health Evaluations from the Army Reserve Medical Management Center.
Brooke Army Medical Center — Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluations
BAMC information on the Command-Directed Mental Health Evaluation process.
Legal Reference
2026 Army JAG General Administrative Law Deskbook
The current Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps reference covering administrative law topics including military mental health evaluation procedures.