Pregnancy - a court martial offense?

[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.