Ready to call it quits...

...I think I have the capacity to make myself understood using simple forms of our native English language, and I would like to think that, likewise,  I can understand what others are trying to communicate to me.  I spent many years teaching English and its  communication skills, and quite successfully saw correction and growth in those I worked with.  Everybody seemed to get the picture.  And I certainly never anticipated having any  problems understanding anything I would be reading in the English language.
   But that was before I was involved with Government Forms.  I will adamantly state that the wording is NOT  "complicated" or "confusing" or "difficult to understand."  That would imply that the person reading the forms lacks some insight or knowledge or ability necessary to understand the sophisticated wording.  No, the fault is not with the reader.  Some of the forms appear to have been written by a committee, with each committee member unaware of what the other members have written.  It is not that the questions asked are hard to answer:  rather the questions are independent of the preceding and following questions.  So as an entity, the questions make no sense.
     In explanation, the service rep will read a statement prepared in defense of the contradictory and nonsensical questions on the Form.  The answer given totally defies reason, but since they know what information  is needed, submitting what they tell you works, most of the time and for those who ask in the first place.
    I am citing an example, which will mean nothing to those unfamiliar with :
Form 21-00845 Authorization to Disclose Personal Information to a Third Party.
Section 1 ---asks for the Veteran's Name
Section 11--asks for the Beneficiary/ Claimant's name, specifying it can NOT be the veteran. (Sometimes the Beneficiary refers to the Veteran,so this could make sense.)
Section 111---asks for the name of the person (or organization) to whom the information may be released.  BUT IT SPECIFIES THE NAME CANNOT  be the same as in Section 11.
   So the name in section 2 can't be the same as in Section 3, nor can it be the Veteran's name, in Section 1,  so whose can it be?  No other instruction is given; believe me, I have read every word of all the  instructions.
   So I call.  The first  rep will give me NO information.  Because this Form has not been properly filled out.  Catch 22 is government-ese.  I try again, another day, get another rep, more helpful.  I know how to determine who will help.  She tells me to ignore Section 2.  Leave it blank, she says.  She says the only time Section 2 should be filled in is if the Veteran is deceased.  I say thank you.  I don't ask, because she is being as helpful as she's allowed to be, this question:
   How can it be?  The question in Section 2 asks for the "Name of the Beneficiary / Claimant Who Is Not the Veteran. "  Does it make sense for this to be filled in if the Veteran is Deceased? I mean this is a government form, used by many thousands of veterans.  It follows in the view of the government that a deceased veteran is NOT the veteran. Not any more.  I guess that's true.