# Soldier Skips Deployment



## MJS (Nov 17, 2009)

Thought this was pretty interesting.  Link



> SAVANNAH, Ga.  An Army cook and single mom may face criminal charges after she skipped her deployment flight to Afghanistan because, she said, no one was available to care for her infant son while she was overseas.
> Spc. Alexis Hutchinson, 21, claims she had no choice but to refuse deployment orders because the only family she had to care for her 10-month-old son  her mother  was overwhelmed by the task, already caring for three other relatives with health problems.
> Her civilian attorney, Rai Sue Sussman, said Monday that one of Hutchinson's superiors told her she would have to deploy anyway and place the child in foster care.
> "For her it was like, 'I couldn't abandon my child,'" Sussman said. "She was really afraid of what would happen, that if she showed up they would send her to Afghanistan anyway and put her son with child protective services."


 
I'm split on this.  Part of me feels sorry for the girl.  I mean, its a parents natural instinct to care for their child.  Seems like the girls mom is pretty busy caring for other family members, as well as running a daycare.  Of course, I do have to wonder if there're any other family members in the area, that would be willing to offer some assistance.

The other part of me is wondering why this girl, who is in the service, who knows, or should know, that during these times, deployment over seas is a very real thing that could happen, would have a child.  Did she have the child before she enlisted?  If so, then that tells me that she didn't do her homework and assumed that she'd be able to stay in one spot, come/go as she wanted, etc.  If she had it while she was already enlisted, then again, the above applies.  

Now, I dont want to sound cold or make it seem like I'm trying to tell people when they can/can't have kids, but its really a matter of common sense here.  Kinda like someone who had a childhood dream of becoming a fire fighter, takes the test, gets the job, but never wants to go into a burning building.  You join the Military because you want to serve and protect your country, and for that I will always tip my hat to those very brave people.  But, I find it hard to believe that this girl is the only one, out of every service man and woman in the world, that has a family or family issues.  I'm sure there're men out there, overseas, who left a pregnant wife or girlfriend, who never saw the birth of their child.


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 17, 2009)

Last time I checked no birth control was 100% except abstinence. Are you suggesting that no single woman in the service have sex? What about single men who might end up in the same situation?  There are lots of single dad's out there too, some I know in the military. 

The way I understood this situation, she thought she had a plan in place, at the last minute it fell through. You can't always plan for that. Seemed like mostly she was not looking to completely avoid her deployment, but rather needed a little extra time to find a child-care solution as her first plan fell through.


----------



## MJS (Nov 17, 2009)

Ping898 said:


> Last time I checked no birth control was 100% except abstinence. Are you suggesting that no single woman in the service have sex? What about single men who might end up in the same situation? There are lots of single dad's out there too, some I know in the military.


 
No I'm not suggesting that. Are you twisting what I said to suit your needs?  If so, please stop.  And I beg to differ on the birth control.  All comes down to how its used.  Never said people couldn't have sex if they were in the service...thats how YOU translated that.  Have sex, doesnt bother me at all.  Men, women...God, I hope they are.  If you read what I was saying, instead of twisted it around, you'd have read that I said this:

"But, I find it hard to believe that this girl is the only one, out of every service man and woman in the world, that has a family or family issues. I'm sure there're men out there, overseas, who left a pregnant wife or girlfriend, who never saw the birth of their child."

I'm saying that if you enlist and have it in your head that you'll never deploy, you're living in fantasy land, just like those that think they'll never have to enter a burning building as a firefighter or risk getting shot at as a LEO.  



> The way I understood this situation, she thought she had a plan in place, at the last minute it fell through. You can't always plan for that. Seemed like mostly she was not looking to completely avoid her deployment, but rather needed a little extra time to find a child-care solution as her first plan fell through.


 
She had someone, her mom, but as I pointed out, the mom was overwhlemed with sick family and a daycare.  I also stated in my post that I was curious as to whether or not other family members were willing to step up and help.


----------



## Nolerama (Nov 17, 2009)

This is a sticky situation. I wonder if there has been a history of noncompliance on the subject of properly housing her child.

On another note, people join the military for a variety of reasons; not just out of patriotism, and certainly not the culmination of a childhood dream to serve their country. To expect that is to expect the ideal in everything.

Many people join the military to better their lives, and the lives of their families.

From my perspective, this soldier seems to have failed in planning and was stuck between a rock and a hard place. However, I believe she should be reprimanded for her actions; just not criminal charges.


----------



## MJS (Nov 17, 2009)

Nolerama said:


> This is a sticky situation. I wonder if there has been a history of noncompliance on the subject of properly housing her child.


 
Good point.  IMO, if someone wants to have a child, thats fine.  But I also believe that the person should be ready to care for it and if they're not capable, then dont have it.  Now, some will say, "Well, how can you ever be ready?"  and thats a good question.  Especially in todays economy, you have a job one minute and its gone the next, and your wife is pregnant.  Another mouth to feed, no ins. no extra cash, etc.  My point is, assess your situation.  Why bring a child into the world if you can't properly care for it? If my wife and I each lost our jobs, the LAST thing I'd do is get her pregnant.  



> On another note, people join the military for a variety of reasons; not just out of patriotism, and certainly not the culmination of a childhood dream to serve their country. To expect that is to expect the ideal in everything.


 
Agreed and again, I tip my hat to those that do.  A good friend of mine, who I used to work with (he moved on to another job) served in Iraq.  He brought some pics. in, that he took while he was over there.  He shared some story with me, and I was greatful for that.  I give him credit as he told me things that I never imagined.  





> Many people join the military to better their lives, and the lives of their families.


 
Agreed.  However, while those people are bettering themselves, they should not be deluded to the reality of it.  



> From my perspective, this soldier seems to have failed in planning and was stuck between a rock and a hard place. However, I believe she should be reprimanded for her actions; just not criminal charges.


 
Yes, it'll be interesting to see what happens.


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 17, 2009)

MJS said:


> No I'm not suggesting that. Are you twisting what I said to suit your needs?  If so, please stop.  And I beg to differ on the birth control.  All comes down to how its used.  Never said people couldn't have sex if they were in the service...thats how YOU translated that.  Have sex, doesnt bother me at all.  Men, women...God, I hope they are.  If you read what I was saying, instead of twisted it around, you'd have read that I said this:
> 
> She had someone, her mom, but as I pointed out, the mom was overwhlemed with sick family and a daycare.  I also stated in my post that I was curious as to whether or not other family members were willing to step up and help.



What I responded to was this comment of yours:


> The other part of me is wondering why this girl, who is in the service, who knows, or should know, that during these times, deployment over seas is a very real thing that could happen, would have a child.



You made it sound like she made a decision that she was def having a child, going to have a child during her enlistment.  My point was that, the child could very well have been unplanned and a surprise despite possible precautions to avoid pregnancy....


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 17, 2009)

MJS said:


> No I'm not suggesting that. Are you twisting what I said to suit your needs?  If so, please stop.  And I beg to differ on the birth control.  All comes down to how its used.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods#Effectiveness_of_various_methods

Birth control failure rates contained here...even with perfect use...




MJS said:


> I'm saying that if you enlist and have it in your head that you'll never deploy, you're living in fantasy land, just like those that think they'll never have to enter a burning building as a firefighter or risk getting shot at as a LEO.



Where did she say she never expected to be deployed?  I must have missed that....


----------



## MJS (Nov 17, 2009)

Ping898 said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods#Effectiveness_of_various_methods
> 
> Birth control failure rates contained here...even with perfect use...


 
Hmm...interesting.  My wife and I have been together for quite some time now and we have no kids.  Neither does my sister and her husband.  Luck?  





> Where did she say she never expected to be deployed? I must have missed that....


 
She didn't, I did.   Simple hypothetical example.  Kinda like those people who want to train in the martial arts, but get grossed out at the thought of kicking someone in the groin or poking them in the eyes.  My point was...she is using the 'nobody is available to watch my kid' line as a reason for not deploying.  Goes right back to what I said in Noleramas post....if you're not in a good position, then dont have a kid.


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 17, 2009)

MJS said:


> Hmm...interesting.  My wife and I have been together for quite some time now and we have no kids.  Neither does my sister and her husband.  Luck?


Yup or someone in the mix is sterile....


----------



## MJS (Nov 17, 2009)

Ping898 said:


> Yup or someone in the mix is sterile....


 
I doubt it.  So, you're saying that everyone in the world who just uses the pill or a condom is sterile?  LMAO!  Thanks for the laugh today.  God knows I could use one.  There are millions of people who have sex just using the pill as the sole source of BC and are not pregnant.  Are they all sterile too? LOL!


----------



## jks9199 (Nov 17, 2009)

It's not a simple question or case.  We don't have all the details.

We don't know what she's tried, or what other options there were.  The whole "go with your unit and throw the kid in foster care" sounds cold -- and I suspect it's not a faithful representation of what was offered to her.  The military has become much more cognizant and much more concerned with taking care of families dealing with problems around deployments.  I have to wonder if she sprung this on her command when they asked why she wasn't effectively at the airport...

I feel for her -- and I do think that something should have been worked out for her IF she gave them enough time to do it.


----------



## Carol (Nov 17, 2009)

My cousin is serving in the Marines, and has five children.  I don't think I have ever heard anyone micromanage his sex life.  

The Army Spc. had to put a childcare plan in place before deployment.  She did, indicating her mom was going to care for the child.  Mom backed down after the plan was in place.

There are processes in place for an emergency like this.  In Spc. Hutchinson's case, something broke.  Why did it break?  Misjudgement (or worse) on her part?  On someone else's part?  A little of both?  

We don't know...and right now, neither does the Army.  The investigation will reveal more.
.


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 17, 2009)

MJS said:


> I doubt it.  So, you're saying that everyone in the world who just uses the pill or a condom is sterile?  LMAO!  Thanks for the laugh today.  God knows I could use one.  There are millions of people who have sex just using the pill as the sole source of BC and are not pregnant.  Are they all sterile too? LOL!



Look my response there was facetious, obviously lost in translation

I've got no clue what your whole point on this thread was, so I tried to respond as I saw fit initally.  You seemed to suggest that if she enlisted and then had a kid alone it was irresponsible of her.  I disagree.  My biggest point is that I disagree seeing as how there is no way to 100% prevent pregnancy besides not having sex.  If you look at the statistics there are many choices for which there is over a 99% chance that if you use BC 100% perfectly you won't get pregnant, but there is still always that small fraction that you will get pregnant and she could have been in that small fraction.  If there is only a 1/2 of 1% chance of pregnancy it still means for every million who use it, 5000 will get pregnant.  Even if you use no protection it doesn't mean you will definitely get pregnant.  Lord knows pregnancy can be hit or miss, and depends a lot on the participants, if it wasn't, we wouldn't need in vitro or all those other methods to help people who want kids to have them, heck it wouldn't have taken my folks 5 years of trying to have me.  Obviously for you, BC works great, I'm real happy for you.  From what we know, for her it didn't, or for all we know she was 1 step away from the altar when the guy bailed, she never planned to be a single mom, **** just happened.

We obviously don't have all the details in this case as jks9199 and honestly I wouldn't be surprised if someone did say "so put your kid in foster care you are deploying" as a way of trying to force her to find a solution in the time left.  The military as a whole does try to help families, especially in recent years, but my experience working with members of the various branches has shown me that, at the officer lower levels especially, there are at times....miscommunications of policy....in an effort to make everyone and everything conform.  She could also completely be at fault in this, lying or never having told her command of the problem, wouldn't be the first time the media twisted a story to try and make someone a sympathetic victim to suit their needs. 

But I still go back to this comment of yours 


> The other part of me is wondering why this girl, who is in the service, who knows, or should know, that during these times, deployment over seas is a very real thing that could happen, would have a child.



and take umbrage at what I feel is the suggestion that she was irresponsible just cause she had a kid as a single woman knowing that she might be deployed as part of her job.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 17, 2009)

Bet there are a few male's who wish they had a "pregnancy clause" in their recruitment contracts.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 17, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> Mom backed down after the plan was in place



Or they cooked up a way to keep daughter dear from getting deployed.

..I know what I would bet on.


----------



## grydth (Nov 17, 2009)

Cannot say I feel a lot of sympathy here.... 

I've personally seen all too many people willing to enjoy the status of soldier, and take the bucks & benefits..... then when its time to deploy they have all sorts of great excuses why they can't go. While I have no doubt that some happen and are genuine, the other 95% are simply chicken ****.

This does not appear to have been a sudden order, where some elite unit has to go a world away on extremely short notice. There is a lot of time and process built into most deployments, and its hard to see that there weren't many chances to address this.

What the service member(I don't consider her a soldier) doesn't seem to care about is the others in the unit..... soldiers train as a team and when one pulls a stunt like this, it can affect the performance - and even endanger the lives - of the others.

This individual will be given a speedy admin discharge and dumped at the front gate.


----------



## Carol (Nov 17, 2009)

grydth said:


> Cannot say I feel a lot of sympathy here....
> 
> I've personally seen all too many people willing to enjoy the status of soldier, and take the bucks & benefits..... then when its time to deploy they have all sorts of great excuses why they can't go. While I have no doubt that some happen and are genuine, the other 95% are simply chicken ****.
> 
> ...



Sure seems like a reasonable possibility.  I know the notice for deployments varies by unit, but my field guys that are in have given us tons of notice when they've been activated.  One of our guys gave us 4 months notice, another was more like 8 months notice.  That's a lot of time to put your affairs in order, and seek out help if you need it.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 17, 2009)

Wow, this one hits home.  My wife and I are both military.  We are both eligible for deployment - under normal circumstances.  She is pregnant right now, child due in March.  We want children, but we don't want to leave them.  We chose the best time and got pregnant and will be having a child.  I will be deployed for at least the first 3-12 months of my kid's life.  There is no doubt there.  What about my wife though?

We are on 1:1 ratio of deployments now, plus 1-2 months of training up front.  SO, we have two options.  We can be on the SAME rotation and be forced to send our kid to one of our parents' houses for 6-8 months.  OR, we can be on different rotations and send our kid to our parents' house for 1-2 months when our deployments overlap, but never see each other.  It is basically a bad situation and a worse situation.

We have a family care plan, just like this SOLDIER did.  Hers fell through, ours may very well fall through.  My wife can't get out of her commitment and neither can I and neither can this soldier.  Stuff happens and the Army has plenty of people to send in her place and it is NOT hard to work a replacement.  In fact, it is commonplace.  We're sending out a team and work replacements and swaps pretty regularly.  Things happen.  

This is not the old world of "you deploy with your unit."  for the most part, people are deploying with portions of their unit, but for the most part, piecemealed units, because we are WAY too heavily deployed.  Even if you do deploy with your whole unit, your shortfalls are filled from other units.

There is a procedure in place for shortfalls, for some reason it wasn't used here.  The investigation will reveal it.  I can tell you that there is A LOT more that we don't know.  Trust me, in 7 years of working with deployments, taskings, and getting people out the door (with 8 months of that working rotations from Iraq and filling those spots), I can tell you that there is more to this story and there is a reason that she is being prosecuted.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 17, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> Sure seems like a reasonable possibility.  I know the notice for deployments varies by unit, but my field guys that are in have given us tons of notice when they've been activated.  One of our guys gave us 4 months notice, another was more like 8 months notice.  That's a lot of time to put your affairs in order, and seek out help if you need it.



Not always.  We frequently deploy people with less than 2 weeks notice.  Army is a little better about that, but short notice taskings still exist.

The big thing is....when one soldier or airmen can't go, it gets filled with someone else.  If that person drops out a week before the deployment, someone at another base gets tagged a week before they leave.

I guess what I'm saying is that things are so unpredictable that there are no givens any more.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 17, 2009)

The short notice/partial unit deployments are pretty much an Air Force thing.

I agree with grydth, when I deployed ALL kinds of excuses started to pop up. Color me cynical, but this story leaves me...well..cynical.


----------



## jks9199 (Nov 17, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> The short notice/partial unit deployments are pretty much an Air Force thing.
> 
> I agree with grydth, when I deployed ALL kinds of excuses started to pop up. Color me cynical, but this story leaves me...well..cynical.


I've got my suspicions, as well.  Especially with a very sympathetic article which didn't seem to have any input from the command structure, not even a "no comment" comment.

But she's serving.  Absent more information, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt, and assume that she had everything in place, intended to deploy, but the plans fell through.  However -- everything I know about today's military suggests to me that she then failed to follow the proper protocol about dealing with it.  Like I said -- I have a suspicion that her explanation was delivered when someone tried to find out why she wasn't at the airport.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 17, 2009)

Exactly. Going AWOL is FAR from the propper protocol for dealing with this issue.


----------



## MJS (Nov 18, 2009)

Ping898 said:


> Look my response there was facetious, obviously lost in translation


 
Gee, thats funny, I almost took that as a personal shot at me, my wife, sister and brother in law, but I just let that one slide. 



> I've got no clue what your whole point on this thread was, so I tried to respond as I saw fit initally. You seemed to suggest that if she enlisted and then had a kid alone it was irresponsible of her. I disagree. My biggest point is that I disagree seeing as how there is no way to 100% prevent pregnancy besides not having sex. If you look at the statistics there are many choices for which there is over a 99% chance that if you use BC 100% perfectly you won't get pregnant, but there is still always that small fraction that you will get pregnant and she could have been in that small fraction. If there is only a 1/2 of 1% chance of pregnancy it still means for every million who use it, 5000 will get pregnant. Even if you use no protection it doesn't mean you will definitely get pregnant. Lord knows pregnancy can be hit or miss, and depends a lot on the participants, if it wasn't, we wouldn't need in vitro or all those other methods to help people who want kids to have them, heck it wouldn't have taken my folks 5 years of trying to have me. Obviously for you, BC works great, I'm real happy for you. From what we know, for her it didn't, or for all we know she was 1 step away from the altar when the guy bailed, she never planned to be a single mom, **** just happened.


 
Point of the thread was to talk about the incident.  Was she fairly treated by the service?  Did she have a legal leg to stand on by doing what she did?  Come on now, there're 2 examples.  Its not that hard to figure out.  If you're not sure of what I'm saying, ask.  Better to get clarification than turn the thread into a piss fest, dont ya think?  

My point is this, which I feel was covered in my OP, but for your sake, I'll state it again.  Let me use this as an example.  When I got married, I was just starting a new job with the Dept. Of Corrections.  I had to write a letter to the warden of the facility, explaining the situation to her, and asking if she would grant me the time, fully knowing that I was new, still on probation, and didn't have alot of time built up.  I asked for at least the wedding, and would be more than willing to put the honeymoon off.  Much to my surprise, she sent a very nice letter back to me, telling me that she was granting me the time for both.  I was greatful.  Moral of the story....dont expect to always get your wish.  She could have said no, and then what?  

How does this apply to this story?  Was her plan failsafe?  Obviously not.  Did she have a backup plan?  Dont know, but it doesnt look like it.  So, knowing this, knowing that she could deploy at any time, why have a kid?  Planned, unplanned, I'm not saying not to have sex, but while you throw out stat after stat, I'm saying that there are millions of people out there, who have sex every day, that use 1 method of BC and are not pregnant.  For as long as I've known my wife, she hasnt become pregnant, and neither has anyone else that I know.  You're saying nothing is 100%.  I'm saying your stats are flawed because of the real life examples.  You shoot back that 1 or both people are sterile.  I'm saying that is BS, because its physically impossible for everyone in the world to be.  



> We obviously don't have all the details in this case as jks9199 and honestly I wouldn't be surprised if someone did say "so put your kid in foster care you are deploying" as a way of trying to force her to find a solution in the time left. The military as a whole does try to help families, especially in recent years, but my experience working with members of the various branches has shown me that, at the officer lower levels especially, there are at times....miscommunications of policy....in an effort to make everyone and everything conform. She could also completely be at fault in this, lying or never having told her command of the problem, wouldn't be the first time the media twisted a story to try and make someone a sympathetic victim to suit their needs.


 
Yup, you're right and just like every other article that gets posted in this area, we dont know the full story all the time either, but that doesnt mean we can talk about what we do know.  



> But I still go back to this comment of yours
> 
> 
> and take umbrage at what I feel is the suggestion that she was irresponsible just cause she had a kid as a single woman knowing that she might be deployed as part of her job.


 
I addressed this above.  As I've said, if youre not in the position to have a kid, then dont bring one into the world.  Due to her circumstances, she, IMO,is not in the best shape to be caring and having one.


----------



## MJS (Nov 18, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Or they cooked up a way to keep daughter dear from getting deployed.
> 
> ..I know what I would bet on.


 
Thank you!  And this goes right back to what I said earlier and people who have firefighter dreams and LEO dreams.....but never, ever wanna go into a burning building or pull a car over cuz they may get shot.  See, its all fun and games, you get education, money, etc.  But then reality sets in, and you do have to enter a real fire to save a life, you do get some guy who isn't going back to jail, or you face the risk of deployment....and suddenly you change your mind....but realize that its waayyy too late for that.  

To the girl in this case:  Sorry, Dorothy, but youre not in Kansas anymore.


----------



## MJS (Nov 18, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> Sure seems like a reasonable possibility. I know the notice for deployments varies by unit, but my field guys that are in have given us tons of notice when they've been activated. One of our guys gave us 4 months notice, another was more like 8 months notice. That's a lot of time to put your affairs in order, and seek out help if you need it.


 
Case by case basis.  I used to work with a guy, who would come in all the time, telling our boss that he was going to need the weekend off, or a month or more off.  Sometimes it was a day or two notice.  This was not always the case, as there were also times when he would provide that week or month notice.  

In this case though, and I'll say it again...it does not seem that she had any backup plans.  She relied on one person, but of course, it could have all been cooked up.


----------



## shesulsa (Nov 18, 2009)

> Kevin Larson, a spokesman for Hunter Army Airfield, said he didn't know what Hutchinson was told by her commanders, but he said the Army would not deploy a single parent who had nobody to care for his or her child.
> 
> "I don't know what transpired and the investigation will get to the bottom of it," Larson said. "If she would have come to the deployment terminal with her child, there's no question she would not have been deployed."


With all due respect to all in uniform, it is hardly a distant reach to assuming the left hand didn't know the right hand was saluting.

There's all kinds of possibilities here. I wonder if the ill family members her mother are taking care of (with the exception of the special needs sister) are permanently disabled? Is it a long-term and unexpected situation? What is the "illness?" Diabetes? Were they in some sort of accident and need time to heal?  How long was she given notice to deploy?  Sounds like most of the woman's family lives with or are being taken care of by her mom.  Who else is available?  This would be impossible in my situation if I were single because most of my family is *dead.*    

I tire of pointing fingers at people when I don't have all the facts.

I think the bigger question is this:  Are military families just not supposed to reproduce?  And if we're going to prohibit women from getting pregnant in the service, then the military needs to pay for their ongoing birth control via implant.

I don't like the flavor of a soldier getting pregnant during wartime ... and the smell of this case isn't appealing ... but I'm just not going to judge anyone here ... yet.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Nov 18, 2009)

From what I've read/heard she failed to notify anyone of her situation. 

If she had, she would have been excused from deployment.

Once again, it boils down to personal responsibility. She screwed up, didn't follow procedure, and now has to pay the piper.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 18, 2009)

shesulsa said:


> With all due respect to all in uniform, it is hardly a distant reach to assuming the left hand didn't know the right hand was saluting.
> 
> There's all kinds of possibilities here. I wonder if the ill family members her mother are taking care of (with the exception of the special needs sister) are permanently disabled? Is it a long-term and unexpected situation? What is the "illness?" Diabetes? Were they in some sort of accident and need time to heal? How long was she given notice to deploy? Sounds like most of the woman's family lives with or are being taken care of by her mom. Who else is available? This would be impossible in my situation if I were single because most of my family is *dead.*
> 
> ...


 
Not a stretch at all.  She may have even followed procedures, I mean, it isn't like her unit didn't know the situation.  Although, if they didn't, THEN it was her fault.

The military is generally pretty good at dealing with stuff like this, especially with the new emphasis on families.  

Bottom line is that if a soldier were to not get pregnant during war time, then no one in the military could have kids for the last 9 years and probably for the next 20.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 18, 2009)

celtic_crippler said:


> From what I've read/heard she failed to notify anyone of her situation.
> 
> If she had, she would have been excused from deployment.
> 
> Once again, it boils down to personal responsibility. She screwed up, didn't follow procedure, and now has to pay the piper.


 
I'm torn on this issue.  It hits me, because of the situation my wife is in and I understand that this women needed to take care of her family.

I just really feel that something else is going on here.  We wouldn't deploy someone in this situation and where the hell was her first sergeant or commander??  didn't they know about the situation?  They should be working this for her - not saying "Shut up and color."  

Our job as military leaders is to take care of our troops and there are times when we say shut up and get on the plane and time when we need to make realistic decisions regarding the health and welbeing of our troops.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Nov 18, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> I'm torn on this issue. It hits me, because of the situation my wife is in and I understand that this women needed to take care of her family.
> 
> I just really feel that something else is going on here. We wouldn't deploy someone in this situation and where the hell was her first sergeant or commander?? didn't they know about the situation? They should be working this for her - not saying "Shut up and color."
> 
> Our job as military leaders is to take care of our troops and there are times when we say shut up and get on the plane and time when we need to make realistic decisions regarding the health and welbeing of our troops.


 
I was just an elisted man; a grunt, but I don't recall there being a _Mind Reading 101_ class when I went to NCO school so I doubt there's one for officers.

Again, it's about personal responsibility. It's her *duty* to report anything that could impede her ability to perfrom her job. 

Again, from the latest I've heard she failed to notify anyone of the situation. If she had, it wouldn't be an issue and we'd never have heard about it because it wouldn't be in the news. 

I'm not saying the military doesn't make mistakes, like I said... I served so I know better lol... but they're not heartless and do make allowences for things like this. 

Unless something new breaks, I think she's put herself in this position.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 18, 2009)

celtic_crippler said:


> I was just an elisted man; a grunt, but I don't recall there being a _Mind Reading 101_ class when I went to NCO school so I doubt there's one for officers.
> 
> Again, it's about personal responsibility. It's her *duty* to report anything that could impede her ability to perfrom her job.
> 
> ...



In that case, I'm sorry that you had a bad experience with your leaders.  I know that the Army does things differently, but believe it or not, it is the job of the unit leadership to know their troops and take care of them.  I can tell you the names of each of my troops' kids and I know what each of their family care plans say.  I do that for my flight and the first sergeant knows that for the entire squadron.  There are also personnelists whose job is to know the situations of the people in the unit.  

Plus, a 21 year old specialist can't do it herself.  She would need the involvement of your chain of command, which in this case, failed her.  

now I'm not saying that she did everything right or that the responsibility isn't hers - because it most certainly is.  She should keep her unit apprised of her personal situations, the same with me...if my troops don't tell me and don't talk to me, I can't help them.  

So, if it comes out that she never told anyone anything and they were legitimately clueless, then I would be ready to put it all on her shoulders, but until then, I would place at least part of the blame on her leaders.  I know that a lot of enlisted troops, particularly in the army and marines don't have a whole lot of faith in their leaders and don't have very good relationships with them, but that is more the fault of the leaders who fail to properly monitor their troops' well being.  Again, I'll wait for more info here.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 18, 2009)

It's the DUTY of a soldier to be deployable. She knew WAY in advance that she needed a care plan if she was going to have a child and stay in the Army. She should have had a care plan from the day she knew she was pregnant. Waiting till the last moment to decide "gee..my mom can't watch my kid" and not showing up at the airfield is a NO GO.

Shes in the ARMY for crissakes. It's time for a discharge.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 18, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> It's the DUTY of a soldier to be deployable. She knew WAY in advance that she needed a care plan if she was going to have a child and stay in the Army. She should have had a care plan from the day she knew she was pregnant. Waiting till the last moment to decide "gee..my mom can't watch my kid" and not showing up at the airfield is a NO GO.
> 
> Shes in the ARMY for crissakes. It's time for a discharge.



And it is very possible that a discharge is exactly what she wanted....Around deployment time, a lot of profiles and reasons to not deploy start popping up.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 18, 2009)

My thought exactly.

  You cannot allow people to find ways to get out of deployments. This is the military. Punishment for being AWOL have been around for EONS, and with good reason.

I could never understand the "YOU WANT ME TO GO WHERE??" crap when deployments came down. What exactly did they thing the service was about?


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 18, 2009)

The other thing that is coloring my opinion is my extensive work with deployments.  There are also a lot of GOOD reasons that people get out of deployments - and it is the responsibility of the leader to take all of that into account.  For example, if I had a troop whose wife was going to deliver a baby during the deployment and it was within my power to substitute them with someone else or to delay their reporting, I would do it.  If someone had a family member who was terminally ill and would die during the deployment, I would do the same (particularly because if there is a red cross notification, they are going home anyway).  

SOMETIMES...it is just a lot more complex than "You're in the Army you're going."  Has anyone asked how many deployments she has been on already?  I would certainly take that into account when deciding.  As a 21 year old specialist, she could have been on 1 or two...even as cook.

Now, with all of that said, I have also told a hell of a lot of troops to shut and get on the plane.  A lot are just whiners and want to get out of deployments when they knew full well that deploying was part of their mission when they signed up.


----------



## MJS (Nov 18, 2009)

Again, this is why I keep saying that it seems to me that she wanted to reap the benefits of the service, but when it came down to the 'dirty work' she had second thoughts.  IMO, this is not what being in the service or any job where there're high risks, is all about.  You want to do something, you damn well better know what you're getting yourself into BEFORE you join up.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 18, 2009)

I think "repeated deployments" come with the job description as well. Hell..possible DEATH comes with the job description.


----------



## MJS (Nov 18, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> I think "repeated deployments" come with the job description as well.


 
True.  This is why I'm wondering if she had a backup plan.  If it is true, that her mother is too 'stressed' with other things, and if this girl did get out of this deployment, whats going to happen the next time, and the next time  and the time after that?  I think using your child as an excuse will only go for so long.




> Hell..possible DEATH comes with the job description.


 
Yet another example of why I think this may have been a pre-cooked scheme.  "Oh, I'll join the Military, where I can reap all the benefits.  But wait....holy ****...I never thought about the possibility of me dying.  Never thought that I'd have to go to sandland and have snipers try to pick me and my platoon off as we invade their country."


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 19, 2009)

Everyone underestimates the possiblities of totally crossed wires when it comes to organisations such as the armed forces, everyone imagines with all that discipline things must run smoothly which always makes me laugh as the expression 'left hand not knowing what the right is doing' was made for the military and it's organistation.
But then again I love that so many people can read so much into a newspaper report without knowing the facts lol!


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 19, 2009)

Been there, done that, heard the excuses before.

If we had "to wait for the facts" before discussing things here there wouldn't be much to talk about. As we are not in this soldiers chain of command, or going to be participants in a court martial I think we are free to discuss our "hunches" and "educated guesses" (based on prior experience) as we please.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 19, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Been there, done that, heard the excuses before.
> 
> If we had "to wait for the facts" before discussing things here there wouldn't be much to talk about. As we are not in this soldiers chain of command, or going to be participants in a court martial I think we are free to discuss our "hunches" and "educated guesses" (based on prior experience) as we please.


 

I love it too when people bite and say 'I'm entitled to my opinion', I wonder what they'd say if they were ever done for libel lol!
People are so quick to condemn, I wonder what it's like always thinking the worse of people? 
Frankly, 'discussing' things without waiting for the facts when talking about someone is no more than gossiping.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ore-time-gossiping-than-women-poll-finds.html


----------



## shesulsa (Nov 19, 2009)

No one seems to be thinking about possible circumstances that I pointed out. Perhaps her mom was her plan and the plan went bad - the article says the mom is caring for others in the family. 

I wonder if the plan was laid and backup plan was other family until other family got sick?  Was the mom caring for other sick family when she was put on the plan?

Oh, whatever.  It's not that I think she should have had a better plan and I'm not dismissing the possibility she did this to purposely get out of deployment or even the Army, but I am just not into potentially shooting my own foot.

But I'm tired of the I'm right, you're wrong stuff.

Begging off the study again for a while.


----------



## MJS (Nov 19, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Everyone underestimates the possiblities of totally crossed wires when it comes to organisations such as the armed forces, everyone imagines with all that discipline things must run smoothly which always makes me laugh as the expression 'left hand not knowing what the right is doing' was made for the military and it's organistation.
> But then again I love that so many people can read so much into a newspaper report without knowing the facts lol!


 


Tez3 said:


> I love it too when people bite and say 'I'm entitled to my opinion', I wonder what they'd say if they were ever done for libel lol!
> People are so quick to condemn, I wonder what it's like always thinking the worse of people?
> Frankly, 'discussing' things without waiting for the facts when talking about someone is no more than gossiping.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ore-time-gossiping-than-women-poll-finds.html


 
I havent seen a story yet, thats been posted here, thats been a complete article, with all of the facts.  That being said, what we have currently, at least until someone posts a different article or more info. comes out, is the best that we can go on, and we have to form an opinion on what we see at the time.

There could be a thousand reasons that we dont know, but until they come out....

So, that being said, I'm really not seeing that the issue here is?


----------



## MJS (Nov 19, 2009)

shesulsa said:


> No one seems to be thinking about possible circumstances that I pointed out. Perhaps her mom was her plan and the plan went bad - the article says the mom is caring for others in the family.
> 
> I wonder if the plan was laid and backup plan was other family until other family got sick? Was the mom caring for other sick family when she was put on the plan?
> 
> ...


 
IMO, I dont think this is a topic that warrants you leaving, but if you want a break, you're entitled. 

As for what you've said....I've said it myself.  I've wondered about the plan in place currently, the backup plan, if any, if any other family members are stepping up to help.  I've asked it all, already. 

According to the link, the Army said they would not deploy someone like her....if she adivised them.  When did she advise them?  Seems to me, just going on what was said, that she flat out refused.


----------



## MJS (Nov 19, 2009)

shesulsa said:


> I think the bigger question is this: Are military families just not supposed to reproduce? And if we're going to prohibit women from getting pregnant in the service, then the military needs to pay for their ongoing birth control via implant.
> 
> I don't like the flavor of a soldier getting pregnant during wartime ... and the smell of this case isn't appealing ... but I'm just not going to judge anyone here ... yet.


 
This goes back to what I said earlier though....

If she, or anyone else is not in a position to have a kid, then dont have one.  Now, I know....people will accuse me of dictating when they can have kids.  Not what I'm saying, as I've pointed out, that you may have a pregnant wife, a good job, then BOOM, you get laid off, no job, baby on the way, loss of income, etc.  

If a military family wants kids, fine, have them...but make damn sure that you have plan A....and b, c, d, e and f in place.  Back in the day, when they had the draft, and people dodged it, what were the reasons behind that?  People made excuse after excuse after excuse, so....here we have the same thing.  All goes back to what I said about firefighting.  If you cant or do not think that you can deal with the requirements of the job, dont do it....plain and simple.

And as for the military paying for BC....why can't the people having sex pay for it?  I mean, come on now...since when did condoms spike up to $50 a pack???  And please, dont tell me that they're not 100% safe.  I think we already went down that road with Pings posts.  I still stand by what I said to her....you're not going to tell me that everyone in the world, who uses 1 form of BC only, is either lucky or sterile...because I'll call BS on that all day, every day.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 19, 2009)

Just for the record, most bases will supply you with free condoms if you go to the right office....


----------



## MJS (Nov 19, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> Just for the record, most bases will supply you with free condoms if you go to the right office....


 
Well, there ya have it.  Of course, and perhaps I missed it, but we could all be assuming that this girl used protection and it failed.  What if she used nothing?  Certain people keep harping on the 'things aren't 100%' line and we dont even know what her situation was.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 20, 2009)

How many soldiers in the American army? And you are arguing about ONE of them missing her plane, discussing her family planning and generally second guessing everthing about her....sorry that's just laughable. 

here's one for you, she may have been raped and chose to keep the child.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8005198.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...ng-risk-raped-assaulted--male-colleagues.html

http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/CD9BC82F-13FB-4429-A096-918437F9606D/


Now there's a problem.


----------



## Carol (Nov 20, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> Just for the record, most bases will supply you with free condoms if you go to the right office....



Its usually more than just condoms, eh?    Can't military members and spouses get various family planning options for free at a military treatment facility or with a local doctor that accepts TRICARE coverage?


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> How many soldiers in the American army? And you are arguing about ONE of them missing her plane, discussing her family planning and generally second guessing everthing about her....sorry that's just laughable.
> 
> here's one for you, she may have been raped and chose to keep the child.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8005198.stm
> ...


 
No, whats laughable is how people are looking to make excuses for the girl, rather than talk about what she did...which was what I intended.  And its not about her missing her plane...its about her refusing to deploy.  

Rape?  So now another thing comes into the mix.  And people talk about ME speculating...LOL!  Raped, accident, not an accident, whatever...fact of the matter is, is that she supposedly, that being the key word here, had a plan in place.  It failed!  Did she have a backup plan?  Did any other family members step up and offer to help?  Did she follow procedure that the military has in place, for service men and women with kids?  Was this whole thing cooked up so she wouldn't have to deploy?  

We dont know the whole story, so despite you not wanting to talk about half a story, others do, and until more surfaces, we only have that to go on.  I mean really, how many things get talked about in the study, that are only half stories?


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 20, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> Its usually more than just condoms, eh? Can't military members and spouses get various family planning options for free at a military treatment facility or with a local doctor that accepts TRICARE coverage?


 
Most certainly.  Women can go and get birth control for 100% free for no other reason than family planning at any time from TriCare.  We don't pay for prescription either and they are filled on base.  

In addition to that, every base has some version of the "Family Advocacy" or "Airmen and Family Readiness Center" (don't know what the other services call it) and any soldier or dependent can go in there at any time and get advice on family planning.

Did I mention that we have daycares on our bases?  Rated pretty high and the rates are proportionate to your pay.  Oh yeah, and free babysitting a few times a month so that parents can get a break.  Plus countless activities for families and kids.

I'll say it again....if military members chose not to have kids just because "They might be deployed" or some other nonsense....none of us would have kids.  The truth of the matter is, most of us choose the best times in our careers, have kids and hope for the best.  Some airmen and young soldiers end up in trouble unexpectedly and for the most part, we take care of them too.  

This was a failure in communication.  Either between the soldier and her mother, the soldier and her leadership, or her leadership and the deployment process.  Plain and simple.


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> Most certainly. Women can go and get birth control for 100% free for no other reason than family planning at any time from TriCare. We don't pay for prescription either and they are filled on base.
> 
> In addition to that, every base has some version of the "Family Advocacy" or "Airmen and Family Readiness Center" (don't know what the other services call it) and any soldier or dependent can go in there at any time and get advice on family planning.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for this info.   So, all this being said, the question is....did she take advantage of the programs offered?  I mean, if you have all this available to you, and you fail to use it, whos fault is that?  If all this was available to her, then IMO, she has no excuse for not deploying.  Here's her plan b right here.


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 20, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> How many soldiers in the American army? And you are arguing about ONE of them missing her plane, discussing her family planning and generally second guessing everthing about her....sorry that's just laughable.


 
About 350,000 or so.  Yep....I'm sure that it is making news on purpose.  The general populus never hears about the thousands that are shortfalled and for some other reason not deployed when tasked.  We do it all the time (my section runs the deployments for our unit).  We probably work 5-10 substitutions every time that a large tasking comes down.  The process isn't hard to shortfall and get a sub.  The Army isn't too much different in that regard......but that person has to have a good reason.  Just not showing up is bad juju.



MJS said:


> No, whats laughable is how people are looking to make excuses for the girl, rather than talk about what she did...which was what I intended. And its not about her missing her plane...its about her refusing to deploy.


 
That's what this is really about....she just didn't show.  She simply refused.  Now, maybe she felt that she didn't have any other options, but she certainly handled it badly.  This is the kind of thing that could have been worked without lawyers and making a national case out of it.  Although, I'm sure that the media involvement was her lawyer's FIRST STEP.  If I was her lawyer, hell, I'd have the media involved immediately!  That is perfect, gain public support by saying that the evil Army was going to deploy this poor lonely single mother and leave her child on the street!


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 20, 2009)

MJS said:


> Thanks for this info.  So, all this being said, the question is....did she take advantage of the programs offered? I mean, if you have all this available to you, and you fail to use it, whos fault is that? If all this was available to her, then IMO, she has no excuse for not deploying. Here's her plan b right here.


 
And that's a big part of it.  A lot of this was her own fault....just beacuse there were other options that she didn't investigate.  now, as an officer I'm forced into thinking "This is a young soldier and SOMEONE above her should have been helping and taking care of her."  That is why the chain of command exists.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 20, 2009)

MJS said:


> No, whats laughable is how people are looking to make excuses for the girl, rather than talk about what she did...which was what I intended. And its not about her missing her plane...its about her refusing to deploy.
> 
> Rape? So now another thing comes into the mix. And people talk about ME speculating...LOL! Raped, accident, not an accident, whatever...fact of the matter is, is that she supposedly, that being the key word here, had a plan in place. It failed! Did she have a backup plan? Did any other family members step up and offer to help? Did she follow procedure that the military has in place, for service men and women with kids? Was this whole thing cooked up so she wouldn't have to deploy?
> 
> ...


----------



## Gordon Nore (Nov 20, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> Did I mention that we have daycares on our bases?  Rated pretty high and the rates are proportionate to your pay.  Oh yeah, and free babysitting a few times a month so that parents can get a break.  Plus countless activities for families and kids.



I must say, I'm quite impressed. I also agree with your assessment that this case sounds like a failure to communicate.


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> MJS said:
> 
> 
> > No, whats laughable is how people are looking to make excuses for the girl, rather than talk about what she did...which was what I intended. And its not about her missing her plane...its about her refusing to deploy.
> ...


----------



## Carol (Nov 20, 2009)

Gordon Nore said:


> I must say, I'm quite impressed. I also agree with your assessment that this case sounds like a failure to communicate.




[yt]1u-I0D9ReqI[/yt]



I saw a comment, I can't recall if it was from one of the articles here, or something that I read on the web.  A spokesperson for the base said that if her childcare plans had gone totally wrong at the last minute (or seemingly even if her choice was unreliable), all she would have needed to do was show up for her deployment with her baby in her arms, and there would have been no way that she would have been put on the plane over.

That does imply though, that the key was showing up for duty.


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> [yt]1u-I0D9ReqI[/yt]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Good point.  Of course, this brings up another question.  If what was said in the link was true...that she wouldn't have been deployed, does that mean not deployed at that time or ever?  I mean, it was suggested earlier that this whole thing could've been cooked up, in an effort between her and mom, to not put herself in danger.  So, does any female with a child, never have to go overseas?  What about the fathers who leave pregnant wives and girlfriends, who never see their child born, who get deployed?  Its really no different.  If you're going to do for one, you better do for all.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 20, 2009)

MJS said:


> Tez3 said:
> 
> 
> > Umm...you, not me, were the one who posted the links about rape. I assume you did so, to prove that it does happen, and the possibility that it may have happened to this girl. So...I'm not speculating anything.
> ...


----------



## Carol (Nov 20, 2009)

MJS said:


> Good point.  Of course, this brings up another question.  If what was said in the link was true...that she wouldn't have been deployed, does that mean not deployed at that time or ever?  I mean, it was suggested earlier that this whole thing could've been cooked up, in an effort between her and mom, to not put herself in danger.  So, does any female with a child, never have to go overseas?  What about the fathers who leave pregnant wives and girlfriends, who never see their child born, who get deployed?  Its really no different.  If you're going to do for one, you better do for all.



As far as I know it means not deployed at that time.  It doesn't mean not ever...nor does it mean that the single parent has to like the options that are presented to them by the military.  This is why the short-term and long-term care plans can get very detailed, it allows the service person to make the arrangements they want in advance.  

Considering that single parents make up 11 percent of the U.S. Army, there have undoubtedly been times when an emergency has happened before and dealt with accordingly.


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> MJS said:
> 
> 
> > Bollocks and over dramatic
> ...


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> As far as I know it means not deployed at that time. It doesn't mean not ever...nor does it mean that the single parent has to like the options that are presented to them by the military. This is why the short-term and long-term care plans can get very detailed, it allows the service person to make the arrangements they want in advance.
> 
> Considering that single parents make up 11 percent of the U.S. Army, there have undoubtedly been times when an emergency has happened before and dealt with accordingly.


 
And if I'm reading the article right, it said the child was placed with someone on the base.  That tells me, that there was another plan in place, in the event the girl didn't have one herself.  That being said, it seems to me, that she wasn't happy with that, thus her refusal to obey an order, which, and perhaps Buzzy can comment on this, is a violation.  

Seems to me that she didn't want to leave her child with just anyone.  And while that may be the case, then perhaps the service isn't for her.  She seems like she doesnt want to do anything that she doesnt like.  I dont believe it works that way.  I'm sure a very large portion of the service people today, dont want to leave family, miss holidays, miss seeing their children grow up, while they fight terrorists overseas....but they do it!


----------



## MBuzzy (Nov 20, 2009)

There are no permanent care facilities on base.  But the family of another solider could have volunteered to take the kid.

By regulations, you're right.  She was AWOL and under "Failure to go" status.  She can also be hit with failure to obey and order and the general article.

Nope, none of us want to leave our families, but all of the single parents that I know have had to and the kids go to friends or relatives while they are gone.  We have a few of those.  Many just go to the other parent's house for the duration of the deployment.  Luckily my squadron doesn't have any situations like this.


----------



## Grenadier (Nov 20, 2009)

This thread has promoted some good discussion. There are some sidetracks that could make for some good discussion, but I'd rather we keep things in this thread on topic. 

If someone wants to start a new thread on significantly different material, please feel to do so, but until then, 

*Attention all users:*

Please, return to the original topic.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Supemoderator


----------



## KELLYG (Nov 20, 2009)

I am not military nor have I ever been.  I am under the impression that once you join and are sworn in you are then government property, with in reason.   If she was schedule to deploy then she should have shown up or at least made someone aware of her situation.   The thing that disturbs me the most was that someone had to go in her place.   How could you live with your self knowing that someone else had to take your place and could end up dying?


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> There are no permanent care facilities on base. But the family of another solider could have volunteered to take the kid.
> 
> By regulations, you're right. She was AWOL and under "Failure to go" status. She can also be hit with failure to obey and order and the general article.
> 
> Nope, none of us want to leave our families, but all of the single parents that I know have had to and the kids go to friends or relatives while they are gone. We have a few of those. Many just go to the other parent's house for the duration of the deployment. Luckily my squadron doesn't have any situations like this.


 
Yeah, I figured that unless there was a damn good reason, she'd probably be charged with something.  And yes, I agree....in times like this, nobody likes to leave their family.  I hate seeing stuff like that in the paper and on the news....all the families seeing their loved ones go off.  Young kids, babies, seeing mom and dad leave...its really very, very sad.  I'm looking forward to more of the story...if there is any, on what happens with this situation.



KELLYG said:


> I am not military nor have I ever been. I am under the impression that once you join and are sworn in you are then government property, with in reason. If she was schedule to deploy then she should have shown up or at least made someone aware of her situation. The thing that disturbs me the most was that someone had to go in her place. How could you live with your self knowing that someone else had to take your place and could end up dying?


 
Agreed.  This is really the crux of what I wanted to discuss.  Not necessarily what form of birthcontrol, if any, she was using.  Fact of the matter is, she has a child, she is in the service, was about to be deployed, and then this happens.  Much like you said...how could you live with yourself knowing someone else went...I'd love to know if this whole thing was cooked up in a ploy to not go.  Hmm.......


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 20, 2009)

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/11/18/georgia.soldier.mom/



> *(CNN)* -- To hear Spc. Alexis Hutchinson tell it, the Army forced her to make an agonizing choice between serving her country and taking care of her son.
> 
> The Army, however, takes issue with the soldier's story and Hutchinson could now be facing serious charges for desertion.
> 
> ...


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 20, 2009)

We're marching everywhere.
It's getting in our hair.
We follow the rules
and follow the mules
We're in the Army now.


----------



## MJS (Nov 20, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/11/18/georgia.soldier.mom/


 
Well, well, well.....very interesting.  Why is it that the more stories that I hear, the more I lose sympathy for the girl. Hmm.....


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 21, 2009)

I would appreciate not being called by my first name in discussions online, thank you. Tez will do nicely. 

I didn't say I didn't like the thread far from it it's amusing to see some people get their knickers in a twist. I may not be in the States but the fact that others aren't in the UK has never stopped people posting about stuff that happens here, so fair's fair. Hell we even have threads about stuff that happens in the UK posted by non residents, but my point is not about what country it's in, it's that people are conjecturing about the whys and wherefores even going so far as to be quite nasty to each other and making personal comments that have nothing to do with the OP. What one silly girl does seems to have raised the blood pressure of some and turned it into an argument not a discusson, all those quite personal remarks when talking about contraception for example, that wasn't nice, was it?


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 21, 2009)

Ummm..OK. Girl misses deployment. 

Let's all wait till we get ALL the facts before any of us state an opinion, make a conjecture or start a discussion. 

Thread over.

Happy?


----------



## Carol (Nov 21, 2009)

I think this is an emotionally charged issue because this strikes some deeper nerves than just a wayward soldier that missed a deployment.  Soldiers going AWOL rarely make the news in their hometown paper, let alone be brought to the national stage.

Our service people are getting more support and respect at home now than they were during the Vietnam era, but serving in the military is still not very fashionable or universally respected.  Ask a veteran that has transitioned to the corporate world if s/he has every had to downplay or bury their military experience while job hunting or in a white-collar environment and one might get some painful answers.  The U.S. media coverage has been skewering the Army to some degree over the issue, making it look like the military is this inhumane fighting machine.  To me, that's a slap in the face to the people that have put on the uniform and made the sacrifices.  

Perhaps another factor is that what this woman did probably brings back some painful memories.  I think if she had garnered her attention by climbing to the top of the highest building in town and screamed at the top of her lungs that she could not be deployed because she was yellow-blooded high priestess that had to be returned to Planet Krypton, many folks here would be fine with rolling their eyes and dismissing her as a silly nut.

There are many veterans in my line of work and over the years I have heard men and women alike complain bitterly about a particular subset of women that had a habit of bunking off demanding or unpleasant responsibilities by saying (often at the last minute) they can't do the job in question because oops!  They might be pregnant!  The women get cycled in to a rotation of easier, less demanding duties for 30-60 days and then when it can be confirmed that gee, it must have been a false alarm, she goes back to her original post....until the next time she thinks she's pregnant. 

While this is not specifically what the Specialist did, I suspect there is enough similarity in her behavior that her actions strike a nerve with some of the folks that have served.  She represents more than just an isolated goofball with bad judgment.


----------



## MJS (Nov 21, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> I would appreciate not being called by my first name in discussions online, thank you. Tez will do nicely.
> 
> I didn't say I didn't like the thread far from it it's amusing to see some people get their knickers in a twist. I may not be in the States but the fact that others aren't in the UK has never stopped people posting about stuff that happens here, so fair's fair. Hell we even have threads about stuff that happens in the UK posted by non residents, but my point is not about what country it's in, it's that people are conjecturing about the whys and wherefores even going so far as to be quite nasty to each other and making personal comments that have nothing to do with the OP. What one silly girl does seems to have raised the blood pressure of some and turned it into an argument not a discusson, all those quite personal remarks when talking about contraception for example, that wasn't nice, was it?


 
Do you have anything useful to add to this thread, or are you going to keep sidetracking it?  If you have something useful to add, fine, but if you're just going to keep posting about why you can't understand what this girl did to cause us to make such a fuss, is really off topic.  We're discussing what this girl did.  Whether or not you like it, isn't important to me.


----------



## MJS (Nov 21, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Ummm..OK. Girl misses deployment.
> 
> Let's all wait till we get ALL the facts before any of us state an opinion, make a conjecture or start a discussion.
> 
> ...


 
This is what cracks me up.  Someone (not you) doesnt like the thread, doesnt like the fact that all the facts are not out, so what..we're supposed to not talk?  Gee, I guess when a cop gets to a crime scene, they're not supposed to investigate it until they figure out everything that happened.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 21, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> She represents more than just an isolated goofball with bad judgment.



When I was in we called people (men and women) who constantly tried to shirk duty, "**** birds".


----------



## MJS (Nov 21, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> I think this is an emotionally charged issue because this strikes some deeper nerves than just a wayward soldier that missed a deployment. Soldiers going AWOL rarely make the news in their hometown paper, let alone be brought to the national stage.
> 
> Our service people are getting more support and respect at home now than they were during the Vietnam era, but serving in the military is still not very fashionable or universally respected. Ask a veteran that has transitioned to the corporate world if s/he has every had to downplay or bury their military experience while job hunting or in a white-collar environment and one might get some painful answers. The U.S. media coverage has been skewering the Army to some degree over the issue, making it look like the military is this inhumane fighting machine. To me, that's a slap in the face to the people that have put on the uniform and made the sacrifices.
> 
> ...


 
I think someone, maybe MBuzzy, mentioned that it was her lawyer that most likely brought the issue to the media, causing such a fuss.  I'm not in the service, but the fact that what she did, is starting to seem more and more like a ploy to avoid deployment, is disgusting, IMHO.  If she wanted to enlist, then she should be willing to accept ALL of the duties, including deployment.  She had a plan in place, she had a backup plan, which was provided by the military, she failed or refused to take advantage of that...she deserves to go up the river.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 21, 2009)

*Folks, I'm seeing some heat generating here that's not needed.  Lets cool it before it flames up.

K? Thanks.*


----------



## MJS (Nov 21, 2009)

So....in an effort to get this thread back on topic....does anyone think this girl has any grounds to stand on?  I mean, it seems to me that her and the lawyer and doing a good job of making her out to be the poor victim and the Army, the badguy.  Personally, I think this is BS!  She, IMO, had a plan, it failed.  She didn't seem to take advantage of ANY other plans, especially anything that the military offered. 

I think that as time goes on, more and more will come out, showing that this girl was the innocent victim she's portraying herself to be.


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 24, 2009)

I was just thinking about this case: While people are focusing on the "what should a single parent do about their child while on deployment", it seems like nobody is thinking about the "what will happen if she gets killed" question. Which is always a possibility when you put on the uniform. What is in her will (which is a deployment necessity) regarding the care plan in event of death? 

Theoretically, lets say it's her mother. She already said she can't handle it. If mom says "well if she dies that's another matter"..well IS IT? So you cant watch the child so the mother can do her job but you will take custody in the event of her death?


----------



## KELLYG (Nov 24, 2009)

Another theoretical point.  Who will take car of her baby if she is arrested and jailed for failure to deploy?


----------



## Archangel M (Nov 24, 2009)

Who woul'd take care of the baby if she were arrested for ANY crime?


----------

