What were the original circumstances and timing of Trump’s bone spurs diagnosis during the Vietnam draft era?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Donald J. Trump received five draft deferments during the Vietnam era — four for college and a fifth in 1968 recorded as a medical deferment for heel bone spurs that made him ineligible for service [1] [2]. Reporting conflicts about who diagnosed the condition, whether it was legitimate, and the timing — with the key podiatrist claim emerging from the late Larry Braunstein’s daughters — leave the original circumstances disputed in available sources [3] [4] [5].
1. The timing: fall of 1968 and a fifth deferment
Contemporary accounts and later reporting place Trump’s fifth and final change in draft status in 1968: after four student deferments he became eligible upon graduating and within months a medical deferment for bone spurs in his heels was recorded, effectively removing him from Vietnam service [1] [2]. Sources note Trump became eligible for the draft after leaving college in mid‑1968 and that the “timely” bone‑spur diagnosis occurred that same year [5] [2].
2. Who provided the diagnosis: family lore versus documentation
The New York Times reporting cited by several outlets recounts that Larry Braunstein, a Queens podiatrist who rented space from Fred Trump, was said by his daughters to have diagnosed Trump as a favor to the family — an account Braunstein’s daughters described as “family lore” [3]. The Times did not find contemporaneous documentation to fully corroborate the daughters’ recollection, and reporting emphasizes the absence of definitive paper trail in public records [3] [5].
3. Conflicting personal testimony and missing medical records
Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, testified in 2019 that when asked for medical records he was given none and was told no surgery had occurred, leading him to assert Trump “made up” the issue [6]. A Trump biographer said Trump once showed him his feet but the biographer “didn’t see” bone spurs, adding another skeptical personal recollection to the record [2] [4]. Available sources do not include primary medical records made public that definitively confirm the condition [3] [6].
4. How the deferments fit the wider Vietnam‑era context
Analysts and reporters note that educational and medical deferments were common and often advantaged men with college access or influential families; commentators including John McCain criticized the system for drafting poorer Americans while wealthier men found deferments [1]. The bone‑spur episode has been cited in political attacks and campaign materials to underscore that wider inequality in draft outcomes [7] [1].
5. The most contested claims: favor, fabrication, or legitimate diagnosis?
Sources present three competing interpretations. One is the Braunstein‑family claim that the podiatrist issued the diagnosis as a favor to Fred Trump [3]. A second, voiced by critics and by Cohen’s testimony, treats the bone‑spurs explanation as fabricated or at least unproven [6] [8]. The third — that the diagnosis was legitimate but poorly documented or temporary — is the stance Trump has given in interviews, saying a doctor “gave me a letter — a very strong letter — on the heels” and that the problem was “temporary” [9] [2]. The Times’ reporting and subsequent commentary show no single account is fully proven by the public record [3] [5].
6. What the public record actually shows and its limits
Available sources agree on the basic administrative fact: Trump had four student deferments and a later medical deferment for bone spurs in 1968 that removed him from the draft pool [1] [2]. Beyond that, the record is thin: the podiatrist‑favor story rests on family testimony; no contemporaneous, independently verified medical documentation has been produced in public reporting cited here; and former associates have offered contradictory recollections [3] [6] [4].
7. Why the dispute matters politically
The bone‑spurs story matters because it speaks both to individual accountability for wartime service and to broader narratives of privilege and fairness during the draft era. Campaign actors, journalists and politicians have weaponized the ambiguity to argue either that Trump exploited privilege to avoid service or that critics are manufacturing doubt — each side relying on different elements of the available reporting [7] [5] [1].
Limitations: reporting cited here relies on newspaper interviews, family recollections and testimony; public medical records confirming the diagnosis are not in the sources provided [3] [6]. Available sources do not mention any contemporaneous draft‑board minutes or medical files made public that definitively verify the clinical details.