Pregnancy - a court martial offense?

[MNDNPAO]

I appreciate the discussion about one aspect of a general order I have applied here in the combat zone of Iraq. The true intent of my directive cannot be easily understood from one or two brief articles, so I would like to clarify my rationale for the directive.
In this 22,000 Soldier Task Force, I need every Soldier I've got, especially since we are facing a drawdown of forces during our mission. Anyone who leaves this fight earlier than the expected 12-month deployment creates a burden on their teammates. Anyone who leaves this fight early because they made a personal choice that changed their medical status -- or contributes to doing that to another -- is not in keeping with a key element of our ethos, "I will always place the mission first," or three of our seven core values: loyalty, duty and selfless service. And I believe there should be professional consequences for making that personal choice.
My female Soldiers are absolutely invaluable, many of them holding high-impact jobs that are often few in numbers, and we need them all for the duration of this deployment. With their male counterparts, they fly helicopters, run my satellite communications, repair just about everything, re-fuel and re-arm aircraft in remote locations, are brilliant and creative intelligence analysts, critical members of medical teams, in all areas of logistics and personnel support across this Georgia-sized piece of Iraq north of Baghdad, and much more. Since I am responsible and accountable for the fighting ability of this outfit, I am going to do everything I can to keep my combat power -- and in the Army, combat power is the individual Soldier.
To this end, I made an existing policy stricter. I wanted to encourage my Soldiers to think before they acted, and understand their behavior and actions have consequences -- all of their behavior. I consider the male Soldier as responsible for taking a Soldier out of the fight just as responsible as the female Soldier who must redeploy.
To ensure a consistent and measured approach in applying this policy, I am the only individual who passes judgment on these cases. I decide every case based on the unique facts of each Soldier's situation. Of the very few cases handled thus far, it has been a male Soldier who received the most severe punishment; he committed adultery as well. Though there have not been any cases of sexual assault, any pregnancy that is the product of a sexual assault would most certainly not be considered here; our total focus would be on the health and well-being of the victim and justice for the perpetrator.
I do not expect those who have never served in the military to completely understand what I have tried to explain above. Recently I was asked, "Don’t you think you are treading on an intensely personal topic?" As intensely personal as this topic might be, leaving those who depend on you shorthanded in a combat zone gets to be personal for those left, too. This addition to a standing general order is just a small part of our overall effort to foster thoughtful and responsible behavior among our Soldiers.

Proudly serving you,
Tony Cucolo
Major General, US Army
Commander, Task Force Marne
Tikrit, Iraq

[Steve Blair]

I do not expect those who have never served in the military to completely understand what I have tried to explain above. Recently I was asked, "Don’t you think you are treading on an intensely personal topic?" As intensely personal as this topic might be, leaving those who depend on you shorthanded in a combat zone gets to be personal for those left, too. This addition to a standing general order is just a small part of our overall effort to foster thoughtful and responsible behavior among our Soldiers.

Well....I was never in the military and I understand what you explained. Frankly, I'm with Marc on this. If they choose to get pregnant, send them home but tack the time away on to their ADSC or enlistment. The AF does this with officers if they take advantage of certain advanced education programs, so why not do it for pregnancy?

And Wilf, while your proposition is great in theory, I just can't see it working in the U.S.

[Ken White]

...Wilf, while your proposition is great in theory, I just can't see it working in the U.S.

That's what should happen but it is unlikely here...

I think the General did the Army a service -- and I'm a big supporter and fan of female troopies.

Who are not pregnant.

IMO, the service should offer pregnancy sabbaticals; two years off active (or reserve) duty upon confirmation of pregnancy but you still owe Sam the rest of the time on your contract after that. Period, no exceptions other than for miscarriage or stillbirths on a by case basis.

Yeah, I know -- that won't fly either...

[marct]

IMO, the service should offer pregnancy sabbaticals; two years off active (or reserve) duty upon confirmation of pregnancy but you still owe Sam the rest of the time on your contract after that. Period, no exceptions other than for miscarriage or stillbirths on a by case basis.

Yeah, I know -- that won't fly either...

Probably not - it makes too much sense . Damn, maybe now DoD will start looking into "tubing" technologies !

[marct]

I appreciate the discussion about one aspect of a general order I have applied here in the combat zone of Iraq. The true intent of my directive cannot be easily understood from one or two brief articles, so I would like to clarify my rationale for the directive.

Thank you, sir - 'tis appreciated.

To this end, I made an existing policy stricter. I wanted to encourage my Soldiers to think before they acted, and understand their behavior and actions have consequences -- all of their behavior. I consider the male Soldier as responsible for taking a Soldier out of the fight just as responsible as the female Soldier who must redeploy.

In general, an excellent policy.

To ensure a consistent and measured approach in applying this policy, I am the only individual who passes judgment on these cases. I decide every case based on the unique facts of each Soldier's situation. Of the very few cases handled thus far, it has been a male Soldier who received the most severe punishment; he committed adultery as well. Though there have not been any cases of sexual assault, any pregnancy that is the product of a sexual assault would most certainly not be considered here; our total focus would be on the health and well-being of the victim and justice for the perpetrator.

That is something of a relief. There is a danger that any policy directive will be implemented "even handedly", i.e. without any regard for the context. Just out of interest and as an hypothetical, if a female soldier does get pregnant by her husband (assuming both are serving at the same time) and is in a non-combat role and wishes to stay as long as the pregnancy wouldn't interfere with her work, would you be amenable to that?

I do not expect those who have never served in the military to completely understand what I have tried to explain above. Recently I was asked, "Don’t you think you are treading on an intensely personal topic?" As intensely personal as this topic might be, leaving those who depend on you shorthanded in a combat zone gets to be personal for those left, too. This addition to a standing general order is just a small part of our overall effort to foster thoughtful and responsible behavior among our Soldiers.

Well, I would agree that it may be hard for people who have never served in a military to understand the specifics of your explanation, the general motive behind it shouldn't be that hard at all - don't leave your friends in the lurch. Never having served in the military, I don't have any problems with understanding that one .

As to it being an "intensely personal topic", of course it is, but so what? Obviously, the person who asked you that question either believes that wars can be fought without bloodshed and shouldn't interfere with anyones human rights (probably believes in the Easter Bunny as well....). All personal choices influence your friends, relatives, co-workers, etc.; as the saying goes, the personal is political.

[Levi]

Hang on.

The GUY gets in trouble, too? Having served with women, let me say sex is going to happen. But I knew women who fell head over heels in "love" and intentionally got pregnant, in hopes of being stationed with, or at least permanently tied to the father. I was in the gulf, on a carrier, there were no women forward deployed aboard ship then, thank God. (Although I certainly thought differently at age 19 after months at sea.) The military is an impermanent place, and you are constantly moving, meeting people and then they are gone. It has to be tempting to form a tie that binds, if you believe a pregnancy might do it. I get the idea, if the directive cuts down on personnel loss, great. Any little bit has to help. But the guy? How do you prove he is the father? Her word? He might just be the least bad choice among many. And as far as critical personnel, everyone is irreplaceable, until they are replaced.
I am surprised how much traffic this subject generates. Everyone, male and female, serving in any branch knows it is a bad idea, and probably against regs, to start a pregnancy and that doing so will get you a discharge. Probably an admin sep. I watched a guy jump off the ship, into the water no less, because of family problems back home. If getting pregnant gets you a discharge, and a discharge gets you out of whatever hell you are in at that moment, then court martial or admin sep or whatever, its gonna happen. Lets put women in war zones, and in combat. Huh, seemed like a good idea at the time. This is what a General is forced to deal with? Loss of combat readiness... through unexpected pregnancy?? I don't envy him.

[marct]

Hang on.

The GUY gets in trouble, too?

Yup - "it takes two to tango", so damn straight the guy should get in trouble as well.

How do you prove he is the father? Her word? He might just be the least bad choice among many.

I don't know how MG Cucolo is determining that, however it is a pretty darn simple proceedure using an amniocentisis DNA test.

Will sex happen? Sure - hey it happened in the British navy in the 17th & 18th centuries and there weren't any women serving there! Of course it will happen, this directive is just designed to make people think about the potential effects of it.

I am surprised how much traffic this subject generates. Everyone, male and female, serving in any branch knows it is a bad idea, and probably against regs, to start a pregnancy and that doing so will get you a discharge. Probably an admin sep.

The scary thing is that that really doesn't matter "in the heat" (as it were ). All too many people in North America just don't equate sex with pregnancy (take a look at the surveys of early teens if you don't believe me). Certainly from what the General just posted, this is about consequences of actions and not "morality" per se.

This is what a General is forced to deal with? Loss of combat readiness... through unexpected pregnancy?? I don't envy him.

Neither do I ! It will, unfortunately, get worse.....

[Kiwigrunt]

Will sex happen? Sure - hey it happened in the British navy in the 17th & 18th centuries and there weren't any women serving there!

The more things change, the more they stay the same....