Birth Control

[em522]

I know that I will be bashed for this, but, I want to say it...

All female soldiers that deploy should be obligated to use some sort of BC... I mean, as soldiers, before deploying, the Army prepares you with shots and physicals and such, why then, not make it mandatory to prevent pregnancies while deployed???

It's crazy the amount of females that get pregnant while deployed and have 2 or more kids to different guys.
And the amount of females that do that just to get out of being deployed.

[mel44]

How bout exercise a little self control and not have sex? Forcing them to take birth control is no different than locking someone up so they don't drink. If a soldier is going to use manipulative means to not deploy or get out of deployment they will just find another way. Birth control is not all together safe and has risk factors that no woman should be forced to take.

Why is it the females responsibility? Lets get the guys fixed up then the females won't have the opportunity would they?

[em522]

Point taken. But I guess it goes both ways. And what about all the meds and vaccines they are forced to take before they go? A lot of them have adverse reactions as well and they (the soldiers) are still obligated to take them. I am all about not having sex period, but some people just don't have that control.

[Woody5]

Okay, I'm wide awake so I figured, why not respond to this. Now, keep in mind, I'm a Christian so my views are obviously slanted. I'm also probably going to regret all this in the morning lol! Be kind readers!

I do not believe woman soldiers should be forced to take bc because that would mean the government doesn't trust the soldiers, female or male. That is unfair to both the female and male soldiers risking their lives for us. We should trust them. Just because there have been a few cases, does not mean all soldiers would do this. Now, I say this without looking up the statistics because I'm being a little lazy, but obviously ALL female soldiers don't get pregnant!

Okay, bring on the critics!

[mel44]

Point taken. But I guess it goes both ways. And what about all the meds and vaccines they are forced to take before they go? A lot of them have adverse reactions as well and they (the soldiers) are still obligated to take them. I am all about not having sex period, but some people just don't have that control.


I agree whats made you think of this?

[ciabatta]

I am with Woody. BC is a personal choice and they shouldn't be forced to take it.

These folks are adults and it's their responsiblity to practice safe sex.

[em522]

I agree whats made you think of this?

When my husband was here for r&r we had this conversation. He was telling me about all the girls that got pregnant while over there. And I just kept thinking about it. What else could be done to help this matter? They are clearly not practicing safe sex, so if it's left up to them, nothings going to change.

[mel44]

When my husband was here for r&r we had this conversation. He was telling me about all the girls that got pregnant while over there. And I just kept thinking about it. What else could be done to help this matter? They are clearly not practicing safe sex, so if it's left up to them, nothings going to change.

there is not a whole lot that can be done. They changed the general order from no sex outside of marriage to it is highly discouraged, which means we don't like it but can't do a lot about it. Girls and guys away together without strong morals are gonna have sex. Unfortunately since they don't intend to have sex they are not prepared when thy do. I would think passing out boxes of prophylactics would be a good idea. The fear of the medications you take while gone should be enough to discourage pregnancy but like so many other young people they only fear it after they have done the deed.

[Woody5]

Yes, but the soldiers are a community. And in any community, you are going to have this problem. I don't think anything can be done. It's like addressing the problem of too many lawyers having a drinking problem. Yes, it's a problem, but all that can be done is address the concern and educate them on the problem. Taking bc is a personal choice and if the government intervenes on this, I can guarentee an uprising of the American people.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's not a problem, I am saying it's not the government's place to intervene.

[ciabatta]

As long as there are men and women on this planet there is going to be bumping of uglies. It is a primal urge that needs to be fulfilled. I can understand that there are plenty that control their urges or find other releases but that is the type of mental/physical restraint that usually comes with age, wisdom and experience.

If we are going to allow the govt to step in and force women to take BC then they should make condoms part of standard gear for the men that deploy.

It is just not the responsiblity of the govt to force contraception on anyone. It goes against the separation of church and state.

[em522]

Yes, but the soldiers are a community. And in any community, you are going to have this problem. I don't think anything can be done. It's like addressing the problem of too many lawyers having a drinking problem. Yes, it's a problem, but all that can be done is address the concern and educate them on the problem. Taking bc is a personal choice and if the government intervenes on this, I can guarentee an uprising of the American people.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's not a problem, I am saying it's not the government's place to intervene.

But Woddy, don't you think the Gov. already intervenes? And we can't compare having a drinking problem with (most likely) unwanted pregnancies. It's by far more delicate and complicated than that.

[em522]

there is not a whole lot that can be done. They changed the general order from no sex outside of marriage to it is highly discouraged, which means we don't like it but can't do a lot about it. Girls and guys away together without strong morals are gonna have sex. Unfortunately since they don't intend to have sex they are not prepared when thy do. I would think passing out boxes of prophylactics would be a good idea. The fear of the medications you take while gone should be enough to discourage pregnancy but like so many other young people they only fear it after they have done the deed.

I second that!

[Woody5]

The government can't force woman to take a drug that is so political controversial based on a woman's religious view. As it was mentioned, it is in violation of Church and State. In addition, many, many, many women have adverse affects from bc. And most importantly, how the heck would the government even go about regulating such a thing? Clearly the US already has a multi-billion dollar deficit problem to address and fix; how would this be reinforced? The government would never have the resources to do this. Again, it would come down to a trust issue.

[hawk71049]

.

I second that!
I remember a chaplain giving us a lecture one time, (before a mission, that involved going into a VILLage”, that was expected to be heavily infested with, bad guys) bottom line…

He said, “don’t use it, don’t lose it… keep it in your pants!” The words still ring out today…lol

Good topic btw, it will be interesting to see where this goes;) )..… hawk


.

[ringjamesa]

dumb da dumb dumb dumb. Stupid idea and it has already been discussed to death. I just can't remember where... You can't say that women should control themselves and give men a free pass.

[em522]

.

I remember a chaplain giving us a lecture one time, (before a mission, that involved going into a VILLage”, that was expected to be heavily infested with, bad guys) bottom line…

He said, “don’t use it, don’t lose it… keep it in your pants!” The words still ring out today…lol

Good topic btw, it will be interesting to see where this goes;) )..… hawk


.

Wouldn't it be great IF both sides listened? The advice is there, the methods too. I guess I just don't see why it has to come to a pregnancy, when there are so many ways to prevent it.

Thanks to all for your smart replies... and the ones that aren't too ;)

[acesfilter]

I do not believe woman soldiers should be forced to take bc because that would mean the government doesn't trust the soldiers, female or male. That is unfair to both the female and male soldiers risking their lives for us. We should trust them. Just because there have been a few cases, does not mean all soldiers would do this.

The military administers random drug tests. Does that mean we don't trust the Soldiers of America to remain drug free? Or is it simply an integrity check?

So many important questions to ask when it comes to stuff like birth control.



Okay, bring on the critics!

Well you did ask. Btw, I wouldn't consider myself a critic so much as..well..read my signature. :cool:

[caliny]

A simple point of fact--you can't FORCE a woman to take contraceptive pills. Sure, you could possibly legislate it (unethical). But you can't physically force a woman to take pills any more than you can physically force a man to wear a condom. Adults are adults and need to be responsible. But we can't legislate that and forcing it would only start on the road toward totalitarianism.

[Woody5]

Again, there is absolutely no way the government could ever reinforce this. Not to mention, how on earth would he females take the pills at EXACTLY the same time every day?

[mel44]

We have this a lot during our last deployment. Our troop was the HHT so we had a larger proportion of women and you know what the ladies that were good soldiers and committed to their job we never had to deal with but the ones that were screw offs seemed to have this issues. Not only with getting pregnant bu they have children and use their kids as excuses why they can't do A, B or C so what it ends up doing is filtering out the soldiers that don't really need to be there anyways. So I say go ahead gt pregnant and stay home your not fit to be fighting/support for the fighters (women don't engage in direct combat) in the first place. Don't hear me wrong, I think women are a valuable asset to the military, my daughter serves in the army and is a great pride of mine, but it incenses me to see women have the honor of serving in the military and then use the "I'm a girl" issues to disrupt or weaken the forces. So kick them to the curb. Tell them to go home and have babies, nothing dishonoring in that but don't commit to a position in a unit, let the unit depend on you and then decide your place is at home. This was the only issue I drilled into my kid before she enlisted.

[hawk71049]

.

Wouldn't it be great IF both sides listened? The advice is there, the methods too. I guess I just don't see why it has to come to a pregnancy, when there are so many ways to prevent it.

Thanks to all for your smart replies... and the ones that aren't too ;)

I hear ya all… sure this has been discussed a lot, both here and everywhere else. I will continue to be discussed until we have the answers, or a solution--

So what’s the solution (or prevention) to unwanted pregnancies.
For both sexes too, not just here in the good USofA, look around the world, various nations are producing children they can’t even feed, forget about the STD’s, aids is now going to destroy some countries:confused:


.

[LOAL-D]

Have each male deploy with their own perty lil’ sheep!:tongue: :tongue:

[mel44]

OW MY GAWD!!!!!!:eek: :eek: - step away from the sheep - does anyone remember "salt peter" Is that a myth or is it something we may need to explore further?

[USN - Retired]

Again, there is absolutely no way the government could ever reinforce this. Not to mention, how on earth would he females take the pills at EXACTLY the same time every day?

We need to think outside the birth control pill box…

Options for women: http://contraception.about.com/od/prescriptionoptions/tp/ContraceptiveInjections.htm

Options for men that may be available in the near future:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISUG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vas-occlusive_contraception

[hawk71049]

.

OW MY GAWD!!!!!!:eek: :eek: - "salt peter"

Lotion, maybe... come on mel......NEVER salt.... I put salt on my steak... never on, well you know....:D :tongue:

.

[incredible_helk]

And the next step would be (Government).... institute mandatory sterilization to individuals that display and/or have mental illnesses, history of sordid abuses, can't afford children, population control?

....right....

Then again, if the US FDA passes male birthcontrol, would men be apt to use it? Or, how would they feel - side effects and all - being made to use something that may not coincide with their religious beliefs much life their own lifestyle.

...hands off the bod - the government really has no right... otherwise, we wouldn't have people alike Octomom, would we?!....

incredible helk

[em522]

Have each male deploy with their own perty lil’ sheep!:tongue: :tongue:

lmao!!!! :D

[2Goofy4U]

Yes, but the soldiers are a community. And in any community, you are going to have this problem. I don't think anything can be done. It's like addressing the problem of too many lawyers having a drinking problem. Yes, it's a problem, but all that can be done is address the concern and educate them on the problem. Taking bc is a personal choice and if the government intervenes on this, I can guarentee an uprising of the American people.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's not a problem, I am saying it's not the government's place to intervene.

Sorry, I'm gonna gross the guys out and say... What woman in her right man wouldn't want to INSIST on having birth control of some type while she's over there, just to avoid having cycles while deployed. It's bad enough women have to deal with it AT ALL! :D

Woody really hit the nail on the head when he clearly stated that the right of conception and/or prevention of is not the government's place to intervene. We all know of AT LEAST one couple that we shake a head at and go, "How in the hell did God let them reproduce?"

For quite some time, I have been in favor of an intelligence test before conception... alas, that is really not an option either.

If you open the door for something as simple as birth control, you open the door for abortion, the morning after pill, genetic selection.... The list can get longer and longer. There are some placed the government should not be allowed to go.

Alas... it all boils down to control, restraint, self-respect and respect for others. It was aptly stated that if they don't want to be there, we really don't want them there either. :eek:

[em522]

Point taken.
For me it seemed as if an "easy way out" could be some sort of pregnancy prevention. Since there isn't any type of prevention for man (aside from condoms) then I honestly believe that a superior "force" could take part in this. I truly believe that if the gov. wanted to, they would take part in some way or another, ignoring whatever consequences it may bring. They've done it before with other "issues"... I know, I'm reaching too high...



Sorry, I'm gonna gross the guys out and say... What woman in her right man wouldn't want to INSIST on having birth control of some type while she's over there, just to avoid having cycles while deployed. It's bad enough women have to deal with it AT ALL! :D

Woody really hit the nail on the head when he clearly stated that the right of conception and/or prevention of is not the government's place to intervene. We all know of AT LEAST one couple that we shake a head at and go, "How in the hell did God let them reproduce?"

For quite some time, I have been in favor of an intelligence test before conception... alas, that is really not an option either.

If you open the door for something as simple as birth control, you open the door for abortion, the morning after pill, genetic selection.... The list can get longer and longer. There are some placed the government should not be allowed to go.

Alas... it all boils down to control, restraint, self-respect and respect for others. It was aptly stated that if they don't want to be there, we really don't want them there either. :eek:

[mel44]

ow yesss we do have birth control for men :eek: snip snip :eek:

[em522]

Mel.... lol!!!! ouch!

[mel44]

Tht thunder almost made me wet my pants:eek: :eek: Did you get any hail?

[2Goofy4U]

Point taken.
For me it seemed as if an "easy way out" could be some sort of pregnancy prevention. Since there isn't any type of prevention for man (aside from condoms) then I honestly believe that a superior "force" could take part in this. I truly believe that if the gov. wanted to, they would take part in some way or another, ignoring whatever consequences it may bring. They've done it before with other "issues"... I know, I'm reaching too high...


Ya know, E, these things are absolutely plausible in socialistic and/or communist governments... Scary as it may seem. We have to be very very careful what we wish for....

[em522]

Ya know, E, these things are absolutely plausible in socialistic and/or communist governments... Scary as it may seem. We have to be very very careful what we wish for....



You are right. Another point taken...

[em522]

Tht thunder almost made me wet my pants:eek: :eek: Did you get any hail?

Mel, did you hear the alarm??? We ran to the closet!!! We had some "funnel type clouds" seen in the Peachers Mill Rd area... And we live just off of PMR!!! I was terrified!!!
And of course there is some wind damage to the fence... ugh...
Yes, we had hail... :eek:

[2Goofy4U]

Mel, did you hear the alarm??? We ran to the closet!!! We had some "funnel type clouds" seen in the Peachers Mill Rd area... And we live just off of PMR!!! I was terrified!!!
And of course there is some wind damage to the fence... ugh...
Yes, we had hail... :eek:

Stay safe, E. Our prayers are with you. :D

[Tigerlily]

Birth control is certainly a personal choice. It should not be mandated by the military or the government. If this were the case, I would think that mandatory castrations would be next on the list. I do agree that many people shouldn't be copulating, particularly during deployments. However, I believe these soldiers should be responsible adults and take precautions when the situations arise. As an aside, I have heard that Medics are supplied with condoms. Is this just a military myth?

[Tigerlily]

Ya know, E, these things are absolutely plausible in socialistic and/or communist governments... Scary as it may seem. We have to be very very careful what we wish for....



Yes, we should be very careful what we wish for. Here is a real life situation. One of my friends is married to a Chinese man. They recently found out that his brother and sister-in-law in China accidentally got pregnant. They were overjoyed initially, but then reality sunk in. Apparently she was on birth-control, but oops (NOT 100% effective). The problem is that they already have a son and the man is a government employee. If they do not abort this pregnancy, this man will lose his very stable job and his home and have to pay a hefty fine. Do you go against the government to bring another precious and wanted human being into this world.....OR....do you comply so that you can continue to support your wife, son, and mother? This is truly a horrible dilemma and I'm grateful that I live in a country that does not FORCE me to do something to my own body against my wishes. Sorry I've digressed, but this is another twist to the birth control topic.

[2Goofy4U]

Yes, we should be very careful what we wish for. Here is a real life situation. One of my friends is married to a Chinese man. They recently found out that his brother and sister-in-law in China accidentally got pregnant. They were overjoyed initially, but then reality sunk in. Apparently she was on birth-control, but oops (NOT 100% effective). The problem is that they already have a son and the man is a government employee. If they do not abort this pregnancy, this man will lose his very stable job and his home and have to pay a hefty fine. Do you go against the government to bring another precious and wanted human being into this world.....OR....do you comply so that you can continue to support your wife, son, and mother? This is truly a horrible dilemma and I'm grateful that I live in a country that does not FORCE me to do something to my own body against my wishes. Sorry I've digressed, but this is another twist to the birth control topic.

Oh Tiger! Such a sad situation. Thank you so much for sharing.

It is a VERY relevant point to this topic. It is an example of how, given control/ opportunity, the military and/or government take power, choices and options away from it's citizens. Decisions have a spiraling effect.

The best of luck and prayers with your friend's family.

[WILDJOKER5]

The government can't force woman to take a drug that is so political controversial based on a woman's religious view. As it was mentioned, it is in violation of Church and State. In addition, many, many, many women have adverse affects from bc. And most importantly, how the heck would the government even go about regulating such a thing? Clearly the US already has a multi-billion dollar deficit problem to address and fix; how would this be reinforced? The government would never have the resources to do this. Again, it would come down to a trust issue.

Here is the double standard, if it is against the religous views of taking the pill, it is again their vews to have sex while down range. When they say no like with the anthrax vaccine, and these girls that declined the BC on religous views, then they get hit doubly hard with punishment when they get prego.

[WILDJOKER5]

Birth control is certainly a personal choice. It should not be mandated by the military or the government. If this were the case, I would think that mandatory castrations would be next on the list. I do agree that many people shouldn't be copulating, particularly during deployments. However, I believe these soldiers should be responsible adults and take precautions when the situations arise. As an aside, I have heard that Medics are supplied with condoms. Is this just a military myth?


Birth control pill = part time controceptive.

Castration = life time ban on having sex.

When I was down range, there was condoms for sale in the BX. Think the hospital gave out condoms on request. They accomadate the achies with the near-beer, why not some bumping and grinding to go along with the frustrastion of not being able to get drunk?

[2Goofy4U]

Birth control pill = part time controceptive.

Castration = life time ban on having sex.

Dude..... THAT was friggin' FUNNY! :eek:

[Tigerlily]

Birth control pill = part time controceptive.

Castration = life time ban on having sex.

When I was down range, there was condoms for sale in the BX. Think the hospital gave out condoms on request. They accomadate the achies with the near-beer, why not some bumping and grinding to go along with the frustrastion of not being able to get drunk?

Hmmm...they have near beer? Haven't heard of that stuff in forever. Anyways, the point is that condoms ARE available and people should spend a few bucks of the money they are saving (since they can't spend it during deployment) to be responsible adults if they decide to engage in sexual activity. While I was being sarcastic about mandatory castrations, I was completely truthful in my story about the couple being forced to to have an abortion. Seriously, in that government I don't think castration is that far away. We are truly lucky to live where we do.

[WILDJOKER5]

Two way different societies. But the gov intention is still the same. A woman prego down range hurts the mission. Another baby in China hurts the food consumption stats, "hurts the mission"

[USN - Retired]

Birth control is certainly a personal choice.

I am all for personal choices AS LONG AS those personal choices don’t create a burden for the public or adversely impact the military's mission.


It should not be mandated by the military or the government.

What if a person’s reproductive decisions are creating a public burden (i.e. Nadya Suleman). Is it still a personal choice?


If this were the case, I would think that mandatory castrations would be next on the list.

Hopefully, vasectomy would be on the list before castration.


However, I believe these soldiers should be responsible adults and take precautions when the situations arise.

I agree, BUT it appears that many persons in the military (male and female) are not being responsible. Should there be any consequences for a military service member who acts irresponsibly? i.e. What if a female military service member gets pregnant shortly before an overseas deployment? Is that just her “personal choice” that we must accept? What if a male military service member gets numerous women pregnant and does not have the financial means to support his children. Is that just his “personal choice” that we must accept?

[2Goofy4U]

Two way different societies. But the gov intention is still the same. A woman prego down range hurts the mission. Another baby in China hurts the food consumption stats, "hurts the mission"

Two different societies? Yes.

But, if the government/ military start dictating (i.e. order) what a man and/or woman should do- only in terms of reproduction- where will the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution fall into play?

Does the decision to force a woman in the military move a democratic government to a socialistic and/or communist government?

Throw the birth control out the window and it gets very tricky when you replace reproduction with religion, the right to bare arms, or the right to vote.

Back to your point of "hurting the mission". If the mission was REALLY on the minds of the copulating man AND woman, would they be having sex in the first place? Obviously the priority at the time was that damn itch that needed scratching.

When it came to that itch, where were duty, honor and commitment?

[WILDJOKER5]

(Playing devils advocate here)
On the other hand, allowing women to become pregnate, will show a guy back at home that his wife is not faithful. Instead of having countles gov "cover-ups" because they gave BC to women who took advantage of the situation. Alot of people say, "what happens TDY, stays TDY". Except herpees, and unexpected pregnancies.

[WILDJOKER5]

My thought of "hurts the mission" comes from comanders prespective. I also said that it could be like anthrax shot, you can decline the BC on the premis of religion, but you forfet that excuse if you get pregnant down range and are subjected to the full punishment of the UCMJ, making false official statement, disobeying a direct comand from your commanding officer, and adultry(if your husband isnt with you). Or even if you get an exam and is shown that you have sex b4. But the exam one might be the touchy subject to push.

[caliny]

An exam would prove absolutely nothing. It would only indicate which female servicemembers were virgins. It can't even prove who is NOT a virgin. Even IF you could create an exam to indicate who has had sexual intercourse, it cannot indicate timing--which is the issue here.

[WILDJOKER5]

Sorry, I meant b4 they deployed do the exam, but reflecting on it, they could have found religion after having sex and it is now an issue to take BC. So there would be too much controversy surounding that statement.
I recant.

[2Goofy4U]

I am all for personal choices AS LONG AS those personal choices don’t create a burden for the public or adversely impact the military's mission.



What if a person’s reproductive decisions are creating a public burden (i.e. Nadya Suleman). Is it still a personal choice?



Hopefully, vasectomy would be on the list before castration.



I agree, BUT it appears that many persons in the military (male and female) are not being responsible. Should there be any consequences for a military service member who acts irresponsibly? i.e. What if a female military service member gets pregnant shortly before an overseas deployment? Is that just her “personal choice” that we must accept? What if a male military service member gets numerous women pregnant and does not have the financial means to support his children. Is that just his “personal choice” that we must accept?

I believe Forest Gump said it best, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Or maybe it was the "The military and society are like a box of chocolates.Ya never know what you're going to get."

How many people do you know that agree with the military objective? How many of those disagree, yet obey because it is a given directive? How many directives have you disagreed with?

How many times have you agreed with the KKK or a White Power group? Hell, many believe that they are some of the most ignorant people in society. Yet, they have rights and freedoms regardless of their common sense, intelligence or LACK thereof.

Nadya Suleman, unfortunately, is not the first woman to burden the state of California with the responsibility of raising her children. How many single mothers are there on welfare taking money from the state? Unlike Nadya Suleman, who went to a baby clinic for her "deposit", many other women like her are just as irresponsible. (Can you say Baby Momma Drama? Or "he's my brother from another mother.") YET the government still approves their welfare checks and continues to support them each month. Regardless of the agreement for or against the support, it IS part of their right and freedom.

Should people be held responsible? YES, absolutely. Take those welfare checks away. Stop using the media to support children that you cannot support yourself. Are you willing to give up your gun because, dammit, they kill children by sitting quickly in the gun cabinet all by their lonesome?

At some point, it is not the government's PLACE to take care of EVERYTHING and EVERYONE. Hence, one of the great debates of the day between Democrats and Republicans. ("Give them a job." "No, make them get off their ass and find it themselves.")

Just like people in foreign countries right now, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, complain about, it is not The United States of America's responsibility to right ALL the wrongs of the world.

Nor is our government's or the military's place to right the wrongs of men and women who can't keep their clothes on and keep sperm and eggs to themselves.

[caliny]

Bravo, Goofy!

[caliny]

WJ5~Thanks for clarifying. Unfortunately, even a vaginal exam before and after deployment wouldn't do any good. A female servicemember could be a virgin when she left and when she returned. However, given the sheer amount of physical activity inherent to deployment, she could easily tear the hymen--which would make it appear that she is no longer a virgin. It's simply not a reliable exam.

To say nothing of not having a similar exam for men.

[WILDJOKER5]

Yeah, that is why i retract my statement. It was a bad thought about something I am not a Dr of so i dont know enough about it being a guy.

[2Goofy4U]

Playing devil's advocate on the subject of birth control... To impose or not to impose....

It just hit me that one really mentioned the Bill of Rights and/or Roe vs. Wade. Think this again goes back to every decision, every requirement has a cause and effect. These two rights cannot (and would not in c court of law) be easily dismissed IF the government started contemplating mandatory birth control.

Just think of all the pro-abortion women who would start screaming, "It's a woman's right... a woman's body...."

[WILDJOKER5]

Playing devil's advocate on the subject of birth control... To impose or not to impose....

It just hit me that one really mentioned the Bill of Rights and/or Roe vs. Wade. Think this again goes back to every decision, every requirement has a cause and effect. These two rights cannot (and would not in c court of law) be easily dismissed IF the government started contemplating mandatory birth control.

Just think of all the pro-abortion women who would start screaming, "It's a woman's right... a woman's body...."

Yes, women’s right yada yada yada. Moot point when in the military. What military Dr does or refers a woman to a abortion clinic? When has tricare covered abortions? Last thing I ever heard was they don’t cause you either should have a plan pregnancy with your husband or you are committing adultery and breaking UCMJ. The gov doesnt want to get into the rape issue of abortions so they make it a blanket policy. When the military is sending someone down range and they disobey GO1, and it costs the military money, why not be able to prosecute them? My wife was in a decent job, she leaked that she was pregnant before her probation period was up. On the 88th day of 90 probation days, she was "let go". This is the military where you and your body are technically property of the US gov. You get a bad sunburn, the mil can prosecute you for destruction or dereliction IF they want to be a dick.

[Tigerlily]

Two way different societies. But the gov intention is still the same. A woman prego down range hurts the mission. Another baby in China hurts the food consumption stats, "hurts the mission"


I am all for personal choices AS LONG AS those personal choices don’t create a burden for the public or adversely impact the military's mission.

What if a person’s reproductive decisions are creating a public burden (i.e. Nadya Suleman). Is it still a personal choice?

Hopefully, vasectomy would be on the list before castration.

I agree, BUT it appears that many persons in the military (male and female) are not being responsible. Should there be any consequences for a military service member who acts irresponsibly? i.e. What if a female military service member gets pregnant shortly before an overseas deployment? Is that just her “personal choice” that we must accept? What if a male military service member gets numerous women pregnant and does not have the financial means to support his children. Is that just his “personal choice” that we must accept?

It all boils down to personal responsibility. Furthermore, why does all of the responsibility fall on the female, when it takes two to tango? Irresponsibility exists in the military and the public sector whether we like it or not. Believe me, I'm tired of paying for everyone else's mistakes. I won't even get started on Nadye Suleman because I think she is a sad and delusional woman. I don't support her poor decisions one bit.

There should be consequences in the military when soldiers disobey and potentially jeopardize the mission with their sexual indiscretions. I will leave that up to your superiors to decide what those penalties should be. Ultimately, it is a personal choice to risk the consequences of sex (ie. Pregnancy or STD) vs. maintaining to keep the mission a priority during a deployment.



Back to your point of "hurting the mission". If the mission was REALLY on the minds of the copulating man AND woman, would they be having sex in the first place? Obviously the priority at the time was that damn itch that needed scratching.

When it came to that itch, where were duty, honor and commitment?


**Wildly Applauding** I couldn't have said it better myself...he he. ;) ;) ;)

[WILDJOKER5]

[COLOR="purple"]It all boils down to personal responsibility. Furthermore, why does all of the responsibility fall on the female, when it takes two to tango? Irresponsibility exists in the military and the public sector whether we like it or not. Believe me, I'm tired of paying for everyone else's mistakes. I won't even get started on Nadye Suleman because I think she is a sad and delusional woman. I don't support her poor decisions one bit.

It shouldnt be just the womans fault, if she is pregnant, than when questioned who knocked you up, she should be able to say so-n-so. But then with the court date of her court marshal, next comes the blood test of whom the father is and his trial is next.

[Tigerlily]

It all boils down to personal responsibility. Furthermore, why does all of the responsibility fall on the female, when it takes two to tango? Irresponsibility exists in the military and the public sector whether we like it or not. Believe me, I'm tired of paying for everyone else's mistakes.


It shouldnt be just the womans fault, if she is pregnant, than when questioned who knocked you up, she should be able to say so-n-so. But then with the court date of her court marshal, next comes the blood test of whom the father is and his trial is next.


Dude, I was just saying that since this discussion started with the notion about forcing female soldiers to take birth control while deployed, the male soldiers should be held equally accountable if they can't keep their pants zipped up. Moreover, there are other forms of birth control male and female deployed soldiers can both practice such as abstinence and the use of prophylactics.

[WILDJOKER5]

Sorry, I was off topic. I am working on keeping to the subject and will erase my post if you erase your response.

[caliny]

Yeah, that is why i retract my statement. It was a bad thought about something I am not a Dr of so i dont know enough about it being a guy.

Gotcha. :)

[USN - Retired]

the male soldiers should be held equally accountable if they can't keep their pants zipped up. .

Agreed. See post # 24 of this thread for birth control options that may be available for men in the near future.


Moreover, there are other forms of birth control male and female deployed soldiers can both practice such as abstinence and the use of prophylactics.

Those two forms of birth control have been in use for generations. How successful have they been?

[Michele]

Women’s groups keep telling us that it’s a women's “right” to have a child even if that means we the tax payers have to pay for that and in this case the military by extension. We all have to have a licence to drive a car yet any idiot can have a child (drug addicts, alcoholics and the list goes on and on and on).

Military wise, I think that yes there should be some form of birth control measures in place to stop this problem. If it happens then both parties should face disciplinary action with out a doubt. The military have compulsory anthrax injections for soldiers. Why not birth control?

http://www.anthrax.osd.mil/ (http://www.anthrax.osd.mil/)

They can be forced to submit to these injections or face disciplinary action.

http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/L_aws_amp_Reg_64/030111332008_Court_Pentagon_can_force_anthrax_vacc ine_on_soldiers.shtml (http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/L_aws_amp_Reg_64/030111332008_Court_Pentagon_can_force_anthrax_vacc ine_on_soldiers.shtml)

Some of you have said that it is and should remain the responsibility of the individuals but that does not address the problem nor is it a question of availability. Clearly it is an issue of individuals not exercising responsibility in using birth control and with any problem like this restrictions must be imposed.

The time is fast approaching where there will be no choice for our governments but to control population.

[2Goofy4U]

When has tricare covered abortions?

Dude, i don't even have Tri-Care and know how to research health benefits online.

Quoting TriCare (http://tricare.mil/mybenefit/jsp/Medical/IsItCovered.do?kw=Abortions&x=16&y=15)'s Medical Benefit Coverage guidelines online as of today:

Abortions

TRICARE covers abortions only when the life of the mother is at risk. The attending physician must certify that the abortion was performed because the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.

TRICARE does not cover:

* Services and supplies related to a noncovered abortion
* Counseling, referral, preparation and follow-up for a noncovered abortion
* Abortions for fetal abnormality or for psychological reasons
* Selective reduction of multi-fetal gestations





Moreover, there are other forms of birth control male and female deployed soldiers can both practice such as abstinence

Those two forms of birth control have been in use for generations. How successful have they been?[/QUOTE]

The first and last virgin, to my knowledge, was Mary. We all know it was a surprise to her. Haven't heard of any other virgins getting pregnant lately, have you?

It's not abstinence that's the problem. It's that lack self-control.


...
The time is fast approaching where there will be no choice for our governments but to control population.

<< Running screaming the other way..... >>> Just say no to "communism".

<< Pulls out protesting poster board >> DOWN WITH COMMUNISM! DOWN WITH COMMUNISM!

<<Secretly to self >> If we closed our damn borders and regulated properly... would population control be an issue? Hmmm.

Back to required birth control it is... :rolleyes:

[caliny]

Moreover, there are other forms of birth control male and female deployed soldiers can both practice such as abstinence and the use of prophylactics.


Those two forms of birth control have been in use for generations. How successful have they been?

Haven't gotten pregnant yet! :D


Self-control really is such a wonderful thing. The less we demand it and more we make it unnecessary, the worse off our society will become.

[WILDJOKER5]

[COLOR="DarkOrange"][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"][SIZE="3"]Dude, i don't even have Tri-Care and know how to research health benefits online.

Quoting TriCare (http://tricare.mil/mybenefit/jsp/Medical/IsItCovered.do?kw=Abortions&x=16&y=15)'s Medical Benefit Coverage guidelines online as of today:

[I][COLOR="Blue"]Abortions

TRICARE covers abortions only when the life of the mother is at risk. The attending physician must certify that the abortion was performed because the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.

TRICARE does not cover:

* Services and supplies related to a noncovered abortion
* Counseling, referral, preparation and follow-up for a noncovered abortion
* Abortions for fetal abnormality or for psychological reasons
* Selective reduction of multi-fetal gestations

Sorry, forgot about that situation. But still, you prove my point.

[WILDJOKER5]

Haven't gotten pregnant yet! :D


Self-control really is such a wonderful thing. The less we demand it and more we make it unnecessary, the worse off our society will become.

But what the fun is in that? Sex is one of most basic, natural, and cheap things to do for fun.

[LOAL-D]

But what the fun is in that? Sex is one of most basic, natural, and cheap things to do for fun.


Hey, I think that's the motto of the "Bunker-Love Gang!":D

[caliny]

But what the fun is in that?

I far prefer my dignity and my heart being intact to some momentary cheap thrill. :) And fwiw, knowing that I'll have that with my husband for the rest of my life is waaay more fun than anything else I can think of.


Sex is one of most basic, natural, and cheap things to do for fun.

To me, it's also one of the most profound and sacred. I do dinner with girlfriends for fun, not a man. Using someone doesn't bring me any joy.

[2Goofy4U]

Yes, women’s right yada yada yada. Moot point when in the military. What military Dr does or refers a woman to a abortion clinic? When has tricare covered abortions? Last thing I ever heard was they don’t cause you either should have a plan pregnancy with your husband or you are committing adultery and breaking UCMJ. The gov doesnt want to get into the rape issue of abortions so they make it a blanket policy. When the military is sending someone down range and they disobey GO1, and it costs the military money, why not be able to prosecute them? My wife was in a decent job, she leaked that she was pregnant before her probation period was up. On the 88th day of 90 probation days, she was "let go". This is the military where you and your body are technically property of the US gov. You get a bad sunburn, the mil can prosecute you for destruction or dereliction IF they want to be a dick.


Sorry, forgot about that situation. But still, you prove my point.

Joker,

If you could, please clarify your original point with the above thread? Was it to imply that the military physicians do not refer women to an abortion clinic?

Abortion may be an option for a woman regardless of rape or sexual assault. If a woman has been in a tragic accident, the unborn child is no longer living... an abortion may be the only medical option for the mother. Just one in a long line of scenarios.

No physician should FORCE any type of treatment (and no, i do not see the Anthrax vaccine as a form of "treatment") onto a patient. Ultimately, it is the patience choice, or that of the consenting adult, parent, legal guardian, etc.

As you so aptly stated in your point, if the military isn't going to pursue for a "sunburn" why would they pursue for birth control?

PS> If your wife was simply fired because of the pregnancy or had suspicious or cause showing that there was NO other reason for the dismissal, then a recommendation could have been to research your specific state law. State laws very but do include information about discrimination because of pregnancy. Most times, it's not worth the trouble to pursue.

[WILDJOKER5]

Joker,

If you could, please clarify your original point with the above thread? Was it to imply that the military physicians do not refer women to an abortion clinic?

Abortion may be an option for a woman regardless of rape or sexual assault. If a woman has been in a tragic accident, the unborn child is no longer living... an abortion may be the only medical option for the mother. Just one in a long line of scenarios.

No physician should FORCE any type of treatment (and no, i do not see the Anthrax vaccine as a form of "treatment") onto a patient. Ultimately, it is the patience choice, or that of the consenting adult, parent, legal guardian, etc.

As you so aptly stated in your point, if the military isn't going to pursue for a "sunburn" why would they pursue for birth control?

PS> If your wife was simply fired because of the pregnancy or had suspicious or cause showing that there was NO other reason for the dismissal, then a recommendation could have been to research your specific state law. State laws very but do include information about discrimination because of pregnancy. Most times, it's not worth the trouble to pursue.



I can answer your "PS" cause i am tired and dont have much time. During your probation period, you can be let go for any reason they deem they want to let you go for. They could just really not like you and release you even though you are compitant worker. She was widely accepted at the job, once people at her job found out she was pregnant, they started nit picking at small issues. They wanted her to answer the phone jumping up and down to show that she was happy to recieve the customers call. No joke, that is what they told her to do.

[2Goofy4U]

The net is such a wonderful tool.

Oh course, this thread isn't the first to bring unplanned pregnancies to the military's attention. As someone has pointed out, unplanned births have really taken place since the beginning of time.

Stumbled across this article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_199906/ai_n8872235/?tag=content;col1) from 1999 talking about knowledge of birth control in the Army.

Highlights from the article:
- Results obtained show a lack of knowledge concerning the newer forms of contraceptives available. This study also indicates that barriers may exist that limit a soldier's ability to acquire prescription forms of contraception while in training.

- Twenty-five percent of all unintended soldier pregnancies occurred in women with less than I year on active duty (unpublished data from the Army Pregnancy Study, 1992-1996)

- Women responders most commonly cited lack of time for routine medical evaluations during their training. Other responses included barriers placed by the medical system, constraints on keeping prescription medications in the barracks, and a general lack of information concerning available methods of birth control. One woman claimed that all women in her basic training unit were told to throw their birth control pills away.

Interesting article. But that last bolded text really stood out to me. WOW! What ignorance!

But, this article to bring out good points in my mind...
- Lack of education about birth control
- Lack of availability to medical care and medical services (either in basic and/or on deployment)
- Lack of initiative on the part of the service personnel ('cause quite honestly.. if someone told me to stop taking my pill or caused barriers between me and my meds... them be grounds for a Witch Fest!)

[Tigerlily]

Sorry, I was off topic. I am working on keeping to the subject and will erase my post if you erase your response.


No worries dude...I appreciate your enthusiasm. :cool:

[2Goofy4U]

I can answer your "PS" cause i am tired and dont have much time. During your probation period, you can be let go for any reason they deem they want to let you go for. They could just really not like you and release you even though you are compitant worker. She was widely accepted at the job, once people at her job found out she was pregnant, they started nit picking at small issues. They wanted her to answer the phone jumping up and down to show that she was happy to recieve the customers call. No joke, that is what they told her to do.

Sorry to hear about that, J!

Actually sounds like your wife might be the lucky one to have gotten away from an employer with such unrealistic expectations.

Hopefully those people are using birth control. hehehe :D

[Tigerlily]

...there are other forms of birth control male and female deployed soldiers can both practice such as abstinence and the use of prophylactics.


Those two forms of birth control have been in use for generations. How successful have they been?


Haven't gotten pregnant yet! :D

Hmmm...how long have I been living through my guy's deployment? Yep, not pregnant either.




See post # 24 of this thread for birth control options that may be available for men in the near future.


I take it you just googled "forms of birth control". First of all, you should know that Depo shots have even worse side-effects than regular birth control pills. Along with reading the literature, I've actually had friends on it. The lovely side effects are excessive weight gain, crazy mood swings, depression, heavy periods, headaches, nausea/vomitting, LOSS of libido, the eventual cessation of periods after a year of use, and apparently a lot of "oops" pregnancies despite being on the drug. Sounds fun doesn't it? It is NOT a good form of birth control in women and most cease using it once they experience the nasty side effects. It is scientifically proven that birth control in combinations of Progesterone AND Estrogen are more effective with decreased side-effects compared to Depo alone. A better suggestion, aside from the regular old pills, would have been the BC patch.

And seriously...RISUG and Vas-occlusive contraception? Do you actually know real men, let alone soldiers, who have had these procedures done? I work in healthcare and I certainly haven't met any. Most men fear prostate exams alone and I'm fairly certain that "elective" penile procedures are not going to receive a warm welcome from them. Therefore, I guess that leaves the usual prophylactics and the good ol' **snip snip**.

[Michele]

<< Running screaming the other way..... >>> Just say no to "communism".

<< Pulls out protesting poster board >> DOWN WITH COMMUNISM! DOWN WITH COMMUNISM!

<<Secretly to self >> If we closed our damn borders and regulated properly... would population control be an issue? Hmmm.

Back to required birth control it is... :rolleyes:

Communism? What are you talking about?

[2Goofy4U]

Yes, we should be very careful what we wish for. Here is a real life situation. One of my friends is married to a Chinese man. They recently found out that his brother and sister-in-law in China accidentally got pregnant. They were overjoyed initially, but then reality sunk in. Apparently she was on birth-control, but oops (NOT 100% effective). The problem is that they already have a son and the man is a government employee. If they do not abort this pregnancy, this man will lose his very stable job and his home and have to pay a hefty fine. Do you go against the government to bring another precious and wanted human being into this world.....OR....do you comply so that you can continue to support your wife, son, and mother? This is truly a horrible dilemma and I'm grateful that I live in a country that does not FORCE me to do something to my own body against my wishes. Sorry I've digressed, but this is another twist to the birth control topic.


...

The time is fast approaching where there will be no choice for our governments but to control population.

The comment about communism refers to TL's story about the Chinese governments current practices of population control with their one-child policy.

Population control, by definition, is purely the practice of limiting population increase, typically through a reduction of birth rate within the country/ region in question.

There are multiple forms of controlling a population such as contraceptives, abstinence, abortion, decrease/ setting laws against immigration, etc. The United States currently contributes to population control through multiple avenues such as public family planning through Medicaid and the infamous Planned Parenthood.

In comparison, China's one-child policy as a form of population control has other detrimental effects, such as infanticide (intentional death of babies) and gendercide (gender selection of born babies), which scientists and economists are already proving have a negative impact of the society promoting such. Just look at the adoption rate of baby girls from China and Asia to prove that one.

To tie all this wonderful information back up to the original topic about mandatory birth control within the military, again I state that it is a slippery slope when considering such an option. The ramifications go far beyond stopping people from humping like rabbits in the field.

I do believe the military is doing it's part by continuing education, research and resources available to men and women both home and abroad, deployed and non-deployed. They cannot cure ignorance nor stupidity, so why force birth control on service personnel.

[USN - Retired]

, so why force birth control on service personnel.

So do we just let female military service members get pregnant whenever they choose to get pregnant?

Is the mission of the military a lower priority than the reproductive desires/intentions of female military service members?

Will we just have to wage wars and battles around the pregnancies of female military service members?

[USN - Retired]

[COLOR="purple"] Furthermore, why does all of the responsibility fall on the female, when it takes two to tango?

How many male military service members have been excused from their militiary duties because they were pregnant?

[2Goofy4U]

So do we just let female military service members get pregnant whenever they choose to get pregnant?

Is the mission of the military a lower priority than the reproductive desires/intentions of female military service members?

Will we just have to wage wars and battles around the pregnancies of female military service members?


How many male military service members have been excused from their militiary duties because they were pregnant?

USN,

In a nutshell, I believe the individual rights of a HUMAN BEING, regardless of sex, precede the purposes of a military and/or the furthering of a government's politic agenda. These are the very freedoms our country was founded on.

I will go straight to foundation of our country, the United States of America, and the protection of it's people over the goals and intent of the British Army. The root of all should come from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The government as a whole has the responsibility to protect it's citizens. BOTH military and non-military... Quoting the Preamble of the Constitution

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The military, it's goals and intents, didn't come first. The people, in all their ignorance, stupidity, lack of common sense and failing accountability, came first.

It is not mere coincidence that the first three amendments of the Bill of Rights refer to freedom, right to protect one's self i.e. bare arms, and protection from the military.

While referring to the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment, protection from search or seizure, the argument could be made by BOTH men and women that the government is illegally confiscating, seizing or security a woman's egg or the lot of a man's sperm.

Let me state AGAIN, for the record, that you can nit-pick details about holding people responsible, holding people accountable, but if you do NOT get at the root of rights and freedoms of an individual and just go to the crux of the solution, the decision to "force" could have DETRIMENTAL effects.

As i seem men and women join the armed forces and deploy for places like Iraq or Afghanistan, I find it admirable and heart warming and see the sense of responsibility, when they site their reasoning for this is to protect our BASIC rights and freedoms as citizens of the United States. And to fight for those that are being bullied by their own government and/ or insurgents and terrorists who want to keep these basic rights and freedoms for others for their own political gain.

Yet, I am absolutely fathomed by suggestions within the forum to stifle or remove those basic rights that have allowed our country to thrive above all others and set us apart as an example for others to see.

[Tigerlily]

Furthermore, why does all of the responsibility fall on the female, when it takes two to tango?



How many male military service members have been excused from their militiary duties because they were pregnant?


I assume that you are simply reacting when you make such unintelligible statements.

Anyone who has taken basic biology knows that it is physically impossible for men to get pregnant...duh. Unless you are Thomas Beatie (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5302756), who originally started off as a female, or a hermaphrodite it isn't going to happen.

My original statement was in reference to the fact that it takes an egg from a woman and a sperm from a man to promote conception. Male soldiers, along with females, should also be responsible and take precautions on their end to prevent pregnancy.

[USN - Retired]

USN,

In a nutshell, I believe the individual rights of a HUMAN BEING, regardless of sex, precede the purposes of a military and/or the furthering of a government's politic agenda. These are the very freedoms our country was founded on.

I will go straight to foundation of our country, the United States of America, and the protection of it's people over the goals and intent of the British Army. The root of all should come from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The government as a whole has the responsibility to protect it's citizens. BOTH military and non-military... Quoting the Preamble of the Constitution

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The military, it's goals and intents, didn't come first. The people, in all their ignorance, stupidity, lack of common sense and failing accountability, came first.

It is not mere coincidence that the first three amendments of the Bill of Rights refer to freedom, right to protect one's self i.e. bare arms, and protection from the military.

While referring to the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment, protection from search or seizure, the argument could be made by BOTH men and women that the government is illegally confiscating, seizing or security a woman's egg or the lot of a man's sperm.

Let me state AGAIN, for the record, that you can nit-pick details about holding people responsible, holding people accountable, but if you do NOT get at the root of rights and freedoms of an individual and just go to the crux of the solution, the decision to "force" could have DETRIMENTAL effects.

As i seem men and women join the armed forces and deploy for places like Iraq or Afghanistan, I find it admirable and heart warming and see the sense of responsibility, when they site their reasoning for this is to protect our BASIC rights and freedoms as citizens of the United States. And to fight for those that are being bullied by their own government and/ or insurgents and terrorists who want to keep these basic rights and freedoms for others for their own political gain.

Yet, I am absolutely fathomed by suggestions within the forum to stifle or remove those basic rights that have allowed our country to thrive above all others and set us apart as an example for others to see.



Are you (or were you) on active duty with the military?

[USN - Retired]

I assume that you are simply reacting when you make such unintelligible statements.

Anyone who has taken basic biology knows that it is physically impossible for men to get pregnant...duh. Unless you are Thomas Beatie (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5302756), who originally started off as a female, or a hermaphrodite it isn't going to happen.

My original statement was in reference to the fact that it takes an egg from a woman and a sperm from a man to promote conception. Male soldiers, along with females, should also be responsible and take precautions on their end to prevent pregnancy.

I suspect that you know what point I was trying to make.

Now I will make one change to my question:
How many female military service members have been excused from their military duties because they were pregnant?

[2Goofy4U]

Are you (or were you) on active duty with the military?

As I am sure you are aware, OPSEC and anonymity are wonderful.

I fail to see the relevancy of the question nor feel the need to divulge my personal information to you.

As it clearly states in the Community Guidelines, if this post is not in direct correlation to the original post, it can be subject to reporting by another member and/or deletion by the forum monitor. Just in case you forget, the exact verbiage will be posted below for you. Either respond to the thread as it related to the original post, move on or contact me via PM.

Community Guidelines on Disruption:

Posts that do not fall within the topic presented in the first post of the thread can disrupt discussions. (For example, a post about what cell phone plans are good if you deploy overseas is off-topic in a conversation about the Secretary of Defense resigning. True story, btw.) Please read the first post and other posts to get an idea of what the conversation is about before you post. Off-topic posts and their responses may be removed without notification.

[2Goofy4U]

Are you (or were you) on active duty with the military?

But, while being on the subject, have you ever been a deployed female soldier who can aptly speak about birth control and pregnancy while deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Is that what has given you the opportunity to spend time on the forum. Pregnancy have you putting your feet up, per doctor's orders? It would be interesting to hear a woman's point of view.

[Tigerlily]

How many female military service members have been excused from their military duties because they were pregnant?

Since you are so fond of Google…find out for yourself.



Are you (or were you) on active duty with the military?

Until you’ve sprouted a uterus and a couple ovaries, you really have no business forcing chemical contraception upon women. Actually, no one does. If the military ever forced male soldiers to endure the injected penile contraception techniques you brilliantly suggested in post # 24 (http://www.militarytimes.com/forums/showpost.php?p=205068&postcount=24) or testosterone-lowering medications, I’m sure it would be mutiny amongst the boys.

[mel44]

Since you are so fond of Google…find out for yourself.




Until you’ve sprouted a uterus and a couple ovaries, you really have no business forcing chemical contraception upon women. Actually, no one does. If the military ever forced male soldiers to endure the injected penile contraception techniques you brilliantly suggested in post # 24 (http://www.militarytimes.com/forums/showpost.php?p=205068&postcount=24) or testosterone-lowering medications, I’m sure it would be mutiny amongst the boys.


Happy B-day TL - I am still strong supporter of SNIP SNIP!!!!:eek: :eek: :D - Much quicker, cleaner, all natural, and we would not have near the problem with PG now would we???:D It gets my vote!!!!!

[Tigerlily]

Happy B-day TL - I am still strong supporter of SNIP SNIP!!!!:eek: :eek: :D - Much quicker, cleaner, all natural, and we would not have near the problem with PG now would we???:D It gets my vote!!!!!


No kidding right? While I was trying to be polite and stick to less permanent forms of B.C., I know that **snip snip** can be reversed...he he.

[mel44]

No kidding right? While I was trying to be polite and stick to less permanent forms of B.C., I know that **snip snip** can be reversed...he he.

I think we should form an alliance! Protect our female soldiers snip a grunt!!!! We could make it part of MEPS, right after that last oath! Give a little ointment and send them on their way! I mean if you ever live near a infantry post lets do a little statistical investigation and see just how the partners of the guys line up with the partners of the gals. I would be willing to put money on the 2 to 1. Then we would never have that "It ain't mine" famous statement! Heee heee I love it - I'm gonna get my scissors!:eek: :D

[Measure Man]

I think the difference...is that men do not make themselves physically unfit for duty by parenting a child.

I don't think anything can be done to change that.

While I understand the practicality of this proposal....the invasion on individual liberty does make me uneasy..and I would vote "no" on making women take birth control. Does not apply to men, because they do not render themselves physically unfit by fathering a child.

[Tigerlily]

I think the difference...is that men do not make themselves physically unfit for duty by parenting a child.

I don't think anything can be done to change that.

While I understand the practicality of this proposal....the invasion on individual liberty does make me uneasy..and I would vote "no" on making women take birth control. Does not apply to men, because they do not render themselves physically unfit by fathering a child.


Thank you for being the "voice of reason" MM. I have to add that while they may not be rendered physically unfit, it DOES apply to male soldiers when they are the ones impregnating the other female soldiers during deployment.

[Measure Man]

Thank you for being the "voice of reason" MM. I have to add that while they may not be rendered physically unfit, it DOES apply to male soldiers when they are the ones impregnating the other female soldiers during deployment.

Right...I hear you.

On one side...we're raised that we are all responsible for our own readiness. As a male...that means I can have sex with whoever I want...without really jeopardizing my own personal readiness.

A female can not do that.

Is that fair? Maybe not...but, is there anyway to make that fair?

If a male soldier fathers a child while he is under General Order 1 (no sex, among other things) than I am all for appropriate punishment however. But, he has still not rendered himself physically unfit for duty as the female has...that's just biology and nothing we can do about it.

If we are all to be responsible for our own physical readiness...only the female needs to be concerned with birth control

[Tigerlily]

Right...I hear you.

On one side...we're raised that we are all responsible for our own readiness. As a male...that means I can have sex with whoever I want...without really jeopardizing my own personal readiness.

A female can not do that.

Is that fair? Maybe not...but, is there anyway to make that fair?

If a male soldier fathers a child while he is under General Order 1 (no sex, among other things) than I am all for appropriate punishment however. But, he has still not rendered himself physically unfit for duty as the female has...that's just biology and nothing we can do about it.

If we are all to be responsible for our own physical readiness...only the female needs to be concerned with birth control


Hell NO it's not fair, but point taken on biology...you can't change that. However, I still feel that both deployed soldiers should equally be responsible when it comes to considering contraception methods, even though it is the female who ultimately bears the physical burden of pregnancy.

[Measure Man]

Hell NO it's not fair, but point taken on biology...you can't change that. However, I still feel that both deployed soldiers should equally be responsible when it comes to considering contraception methods, even though it is the female who ultimately bears the physical burden of pregnancy.

Life just isn't fair...I understand the sentiment, but, it's just not reality...a male can go on a deployment...and becoming a parent is not an issue....yeah, he may become one, but it doesn't change a thing about his individual readiness.

We are "forced" to take vaccinations...med check-up...training, etc. to keep ourselves individually ready...if BC were considered in that light...it is only applicable to females.

I'm not really advocating mandatory birth control for women...I think it is unreasonably intrusive...but, I don't really have the big picture if it is a major issue or not....I don't think it is, but if it is, I do see the potential practicality in birth control...and it simply does not apply to males, as far as thier own personal individual readiness.

[Tigerlily]

Life just isn't fair...I understand the sentiment, but, it's just not reality...a male can go on a deployment...and becoming a parent is not an issue....yeah, he may become one, but it doesn't change a thing about his individual readiness.

We are "forced" to take vaccinations...med check-up...training, etc. to keep ourselves individually ready...if BC were considered in that light...it is only applicable to females.

I'm not really advocating mandatory birth control for women...I think it is unreasonably intrusive...but, I don't really have the big picture if it is a major issue or not....I don't think it is, but if it is, I do see the potential practicality in birth control...and it simply does not apply to males, as far as thier own personal individual readiness.


Fair enough. I completely understand your point regarding individual readiness. Thank you for the thoughtful and stimulating discussion.

[mel44]

Life just isn't fair...I understand the sentiment, but, it's just not reality...a male can go on a deployment...and becoming a parent is not an issue....yeah, he may become one, but it doesn't change a thing about his individual readiness.

We are "forced" to take vaccinations...med check-up...training, etc. to keep ourselves individually ready...if BC were considered in that light...it is only applicable to females.

I'm not really advocating mandatory birth control for women...I think it is unreasonably intrusive...but, I don't really have the big picture if it is a major issue or not....I don't think it is, but if it is, I do see the potential practicality in birth control...and it simply does not apply to males, as far as thier own personal individual readiness.

I think you hit it on the head - I don't think getting pregnant is that big of an issue and accidental pregnancy is very uncommon. For those that get pregnant as a means to come home or get out of the army they will just do something else if pregnancy is not a concept. I have a daughter in the army. She worked much harder to gain the same physical endurance my son did. she definitely is not gonna give that up for pregnancy.

[2Goofy4U]

I think you hit it on the head - I don't think getting pregnant is that big of an issue and accidental pregnancy is very uncommon. For those that get pregnant as a means to come home or get out of the army they will just do something else if pregnancy is not a concept. I have a daughter in the army. She worked much harder to gain the same physical endurance my son did. she definitely is not gonna give that up for pregnancy.

The article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_199906/ai_n8872235/?tag=content;col1) referred to in Post #72, posted in Military Medicine, confirmed that, as of 1999, confirmed 25% of pregnancies were in soldiers with less than one year active duty. These women have not completed training for deployment yet.

Found this statement and thought it was very appropriate:
"Remember a soldier who doesn't want to be a soldier hurts us all far worse than someone who realizes it and gets out."

A pregnant woman who chooses to "opt out" is no different than a man faking an ailment such as a bum knee, bum back, etc. or any other condition to avoid deployment.

In researching the net, a thread (http://www.militarywoman.org/leave.htm) very similar to this was started on MilitaryWomen.org, running from 1997 to 2003. It is interesting to read opinions from women who were pregnant while serving and chose to remain in service to "prove" themselves and to serve their country. What better than to hear the opinions of those who have gone through it first hand.

[USN - Retired]

I don't think getting pregnant is that big of an issue

If a man said something like that, how would women respond?


and accidental pregnancy is very uncommon.

Unintended pregnancies account for about 50% of all pregnancies in the United States.

[caliny]

Unintended pregnancies account for about 50% of all pregnancies in the United States.

But what is the rate among active duty female servicemembers?

What is the rate among deployed or rapidly deploying female servicemembers?

[mel44]

2Goofy4U;207816][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"][SIZE="3"][COLOR="DarkOrange"] The article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_199906/ai_n8872235/?tag=content;col1) referred to in Post #72, posted in Military Medicine, confirmed that, as of 1999, confirmed 25% of pregnancies were in soldiers with less than one year active duty. These women have not completed training for deployment yet.

Well again pregnancy is not a huge factor- 25% of what number? Are you saying that 25% of the women that join the army get pregnant in the first year? 25% of the unwanted pregnancies? When our ladies get pregnant we just shuffle them around and they come on the next deployment. Of course there are accidents but our experience with the women we have in our unit is they joined the army to be in the army not to find a way out of the army. Remember there is not a draft issue the women we have seem to take pride in their job and are responsible enough to know the dynamics of sex and birth control. They all deploy whether its on this deployment or the next but they all go its part of their job.



Found this statement and thought it was very appropriate:
"Remember a soldier who doesn't want to be a soldier hurts us all far worse than someone who realizes it and gets out. the soldiers from our squad had 6 men go home from issues that were unrelated to fighting or injury, they had no pregnancy. We have one of the highest percentage of females. It is there but certainly not the top of the list of issues that are hurting troop cohesion.




A pregnant woman who chooses to "opt out" is no different than a man faking an ailment such as a bum knee, bum back, etc. or any other condition to avoid deployment.

I am curious are you making reference to experience or opinion? This is completely reverse from m experience here and the men and women that serve where I am at. I work in correlation with he family resources and we do some work with the wounded warriors and warriors transition unit. We have the greatest problem with mental health issues stemming from TBI or PTSD. We have helped a few soldiers that have gotten pregnant but usually it is correlated with some other serious issue such as physical health or family dynamics. I personally in my 8 years here have never worked with a female soldier that has opted pregnant for the purpose of getting out of the army or because they didn't want to be deployed. Most of the females I do know would much rather deploy than be pregnant:eek:

As I said if you go home Preg or get preg before leaving your assigned to the replacement group. Your gonna serve or get out there is no free pass. the biggest issues are the guys that have a melt down and just don't want to be there. A pregnant woman can be very dangerous if she is suffering morning sickness but a soldier that is shut down is a much worse problem to deal with and more common, and not only a danger to himself but to his buddies.

[mel44]

USN - Retired;207853]If a man said something like that, how would women respond?

Hee hee they would probably get smacked!!! I mean percentage wise on the army scale of problems. General order #1 made sex other than your spouse a prosecutable offense but after changing that order it is no longer forbidden just highly discouraged. So in essence pregnancy is just no that big of an issue.



Unintended pregnancies account for about 50% of all pregnancies in the United States.

ya I know sad but on the scale of good order and discipline it just doesn't rank that high. You get pregnant you have a baby. You can get out or choose to stay and go out on the next load but I think the insinuation of the OP is our ladies are over there servicing the soldiers and getting pregnant and that is a disgrace to our women in uniform

[mel44]

But what is the rate among active duty female servicemembers?

What is the rate among deployed or rapidly deploying female servicemembers?


Thats my question C. I don't know any service women here that got pregnant and the married ones actually planned theirs around deployment. it doesn't mean these scenarios don't happen but they certainly aren't the norm. I guess having a daughter in the army and watching her work so hard at what she does offends me that she is just lumped in because she is a female. When a soldier gets pregnant while deployed then 2 soldiers got pregnant while deployed and thought he woman deals with the physical the emotional can be equal and equally disturbing to good order and discipline.

[USN - Retired]

But what is the rate among active duty female servicemembers?[/I]?

That's a good question. This article seems to indicate that the unintended pregnancy rate for active duty females is the same as civilian females:

http://www.blnz.com/news/2008/04/23/Women_War_Operational_Issues_Menstruation_6250.htm l


What is the rate among deployed or rapidly deploying female servicemembers?

That's another good question. If a woman gets pregnant in order to avoid an overseas deployment or some other arduous military duty, would/should we still consider that pregnancy to be accidental or unintended?

[caliny]

That's a good question. This article seems to indicate that the unintended pregnancy rate for active duty females is the same as civilian females:

http://www.blnz.com/news/2008/04/23/Women_War_Operational_Issues_Menstruation_6250.htm l

Actually, what it indicates is that the RISK FACTORS for unintended pregnancies are the same in civilian or military populations--not the outcome.

"Despite a wide variety of contraception options, unintended pregnancies still account for one-half of all pregnancies in the United States, with the unintended pregnancy rates being highest among women 18 to 24 years of ages, unmarried, low income, and African American or Hispanic. In the military, these risk factors mirror the civilian statistics."

Furthermore...
"Unpublished data from the Army Pregnancy Study dated 1992-199673 revealed that 25% of all unintended pregnancies among Army soldiers occurred in women with <1 year on active duty. Self-reported among those troops was an inability to obtain contraception because of limited access to care."

Again, this falls to a matter of personal responsibility. Surely women realize that they cannot get pregnant if they don't have sex. Blaming pregnancy on limited health care is ludicrous. The fact that these statistics are cited for new servicemembers seems to indicate a lack of maturity and responsibility more than anything else. I wonder how the remaining 75% is split among demographics.

[USN - Retired]

Actually, what it indicates is that the RISK FACTORS for unintended pregnancies are the same in civilian or military populations--not the outcome.

"Despite a wide variety of contraception options, unintended pregnancies still account for one-half of all pregnancies in the United States, with the unintended pregnancy rates being highest among women 18 to 24 years of ages, unmarried, low income, and African American or Hispanic. In the military, these risk factors mirror the civilian statistics." .

If the risk factors are the same, then shouldn’t the outcome be the same or similar? The article is somewhat ambiguous on that point.

Did you see this sentence in that article?:
“During the Persian Gulf War, evacuation of a pregnant woman out of theater cost approximately $10,000 and was the most common reason for female troop evacuation.”

Here’s another interesting article about unplanned pregnancy:
http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA481175&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf



. Blaming pregnancy on limited health care is ludicrous. .

I agree. I suspect that unwanted pregnancies are a result of our society’s attitudes about sex and reproduction and not about the availability of health care resources.

[caliny]

If the risk factors are the same, then shouldn’t the outcome be the same or similar? The article is somewhat ambiguous on that point.

Not necessarily. The outcome is also based on the resources that are available and the resolve/responsibility of the individual. For example, a 19 year old single Hispanic woman from a lower income family may enlist to provide herself discipline, financial security and the possibility of continuing education. Those reasons alone can help counter the risk factors.

From a very quick Google search, it does appear that unintended pregnancy rate hovers around 50% for both military and civilian populations. However, the military population offers many more hairs to split in terms of demographics. Are we talking officers or enlisted? What age groups? Married or single? MOS? Unit? Often or rarely deploying? Time in? All of those play a role, and dramatically different ones.

I'm also just generally curious about the definition of "unintended". Does this imply "unwanted"? I can imagine plenty of couples that are open to having a child but didn't specifically PLAN to get pregnant. That ambigous category is often lumped in with "unintended", and I'm not so sure it belongs there.

[2Goofy4U]

My apologies for the length and presentation.

There seems to be some confusion. We might be saying the same thing, but rather making an assumptions let's just go with an attempt to clarify and gain understanding:


The article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_199906/ai_n8872235/?tag=content;col1) referred to in Post #72, posted in Military Medicine, confirmed that, as of 1999, confirmed 25% of pregnancies were in soldiers with less than one year active duty. These women have not completed training for deployment yet.



[QUOTE=mel44;207864]Well again pregnancy is not a huge factor- 25% of what number? Are you saying that 25% of the women that join the army get pregnant in the first year? 25% of the unwanted pregnancies? When our ladies get pregnant we just shuffle them around and they come on the next deployment. Of course there are accidents but our experience with the women we have in our unit is they joined the army to be in the army not to find a way out of the army. Remember there is not a draft issue the women we have seem to take pride in their job and are responsible enough to know the dynamics of sex and birth control. They all deploy whether its on this deployment or the next but they all go its part of their job.

[SIZE="3"][COLOR="SeaGreen"] 25% of what? Intended or unintended?

The article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_199906/ai_n8872235/?tag=content;col1), "Knowledge and Use of Birth Control..." by Military Medicine, 1999, clarifies (inserting hyperlink for a third time):

Twenty-five percent of all unintended soldier pregnancies occurred in women with less than I year on active duty (unpublished data from the Army Pregnancy Study, 1992-1996)

Reading could have saved those two sentences and the need for clarification. Alas, hopefully it will provide greater insight.

The rest of the sentences are somewhat confusing about draft and women who take pride in their job. Generally speaking, one would HOPE that anyone, male/ female, young/ old, military/ non-military, etc. etc. would take pride in their job. Alas, that is not the case.


[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]"Remember a soldier who doesn't want to be a soldier hurts us all far worse than someone who realizes it and gets out." [/I]

A pregnant woman who chooses to "opt out" is no different than a man faking an ailment such as a bum knee, bum back, etc. or any other condition to avoid deployment.

In researching the net, a thread (http://www.militarywoman.org/leave.htm) very similar to this was started on MilitaryWomen.org, running from 1997 to 2003. It is interesting to read opinions from women who were pregnant while serving and chose to remain in service to "prove" themselves and to serve their country. What better than to hear the opinions of those who have gone through it first hand.





I am curious are you making reference to experience or opinion? This is completely reverse from m experience here and the men and women that serve where I am at. I work in correlation with he family resources and we do some work with the wounded warriors and warriors transition unit. We have the greatest problem with mental health issues stemming from TBI or PTSD. We have helped a few soldiers that have gotten pregnant but usually it is correlated with some other serious issue such as physical health or family dynamics. I personally in my 8 years here have never worked with a female soldier that has opted pregnant for the purpose of getting out of the army or because they didn't want to be deployed. Most of the females I do know would much rather deploy than be pregnant:eek:

"Found this statement and thought it was appropriate" refers to an opinion. When clarifying experience, it's usually included with phrases such as "In my experience" or includes words such as "I", "me" or "my".

However, to clarify:

IF someone, regardless of gender, finds an excuse to AVOID deployment, be it a mental or physical ailment for a man OR, as in the case with this thread, a pregnant woman to avoid deployment, it is safer for both that individual and the unit for that soldier to be removed and/or discharged.

Yes, there are those that are not deployed or who are pulled from deployment for various reasons such as physical or mental ailments. But, this does not mean that their intent was to avoid deployment, that they do not have a strong work ethic or that the "want" does not exist to serve alongside the members of their unit.


As I said if you go home Preg or get preg before leaving your assigned to the replacement group. Your gonna serve or get out there is no free pass. the biggest issues are the guys that have a melt down and just don't want to be there. A pregnant woman can be very dangerous if she is suffering morning sickness but a soldier that is shut down is a much worse problem to deal with and more common, and not only a danger to himself but to his buddies.

In reference to the above underlined sentence, this will be used as another opportunity to refer to the opinion/ thread on MilitaryWoman.org around "Pregnancy in the Military" (http://www.militarywoman.org/leave.htm), one specific post refers to "opt out". Taking the direct quote:

"I am a military woman that got pregnant and I was offered the option to get out and I believe that it is a very useful option to offer.... "

First, this quote was taken in 1997. Have the guidelines changed? Does the term "opt out" refer to a dishonorable discharge? An honorable discharge? On what basis?

Details aren't given. Nor has the internet proven to provide back ground to support/ refute this statement.

However, conversely, there are also quotes from other women such as:

"I spent 9 years in the military and from the time I came in until the time I left in April 1996, there was always someone with an opinion about women in the military, especially pregnant ones. During my tenure I had three children, the first two on active duty and third being part of the reason I finally left active duty..."

While pregnancy in the military, deployment or not, does not appear to be a MAJOR concern for the military. A concern, but seemingly not the top of the totem pole. IF pregnancy is not a concern for the military, then forcing/ requiring birth control on it's service personnel should not be a major concern either.

[mel44]

In your post I really didn' find anything that referred to current deployment issues and what the OP was making a statement about. Anything prior to 2002 is whole different animal today. The study you posted is over 10 years old. The general orders have changed, the view of pregnancy and the capacity that women serve has changed. The response to said pregnancy is different. Women have always served behind the front lines until 9-11 now there are no set front lines so the effects of war and the indirect effects women have on the military as a whole is quite different.

I am sorry, I just don't hyperlink - if you have something to say or agree with what you found then put it out there but I just don't usually go read articles someone else found unless I am verifying references.

Yes, I am saying they scream foul to get out of deployment. We have one guy that has cried his testicles hurt for over 18 months. No problem could ever be found and when he was transfered to a non-deployable unit he screamed Jesus and he was healed :).

When you get Preg. You visit with your commander and are given the option to get out and they will simply process you out as Preg/medical or you have to choose to stay in. Medical is the discharge.

Mandatory birth control is very similar to Prohibition - not gonna happen - ITS A PERSONAL MATTER NOT A ARMY MATTER. A soldier could use a little coke or cut their hand off and get out, doesn' mean the army has control over what an idividual does if he makes his mind up to.

[2Goofy4U]

In your post I really didn' find anything that referred to current deployment issues and what the OP was making a statement about. Anything prior to 2002 is whole different animal today. The study you posted is over 10 years old. The general orders have changed, the view of pregnancy and the capacity that women serve has changed. The response to said pregnancy is different. Women have always served behind the front lines until 9-11 now there are no set front lines so the effects of war and the indirect effects women have on the military as a whole is quite different.

As nice as it would have been, unfortunately, the internet did not provide more recent statistics. If someone can find any, please feel free to share both statistics with a link, source and/or the internet site with the available information.

Many case studies can take 2-3 years to gather data, firm statistical findings and present information for the community to review and provide supporting/ refuting documentation. Much has changed since 2002. Hopefully the statistics to show any improvement or opportunities that still exist will be coming soon.

While things have changed, there will still be those that maintain "old school" mindsets or the few that do not represent the many. Sensitivity training cannot change ones mindset or heart. That has to come from within.


I am sorry, I just don't hyperlink - if you have something to say or agree with what you found then put it out there but I just don't usually go read articles someone else found unless I am verifying references.

Thank you for this information. It is understandable that one may be mindful of spamming sites and viruses. But, our community monitor does a good job of advising that these are grounds for dismissal and banning from the forum.

It seems to be a tad bit unrealistic for many to cater posts for one specific request, however, it is important to remain more cognizant of others. Any article, such as the one provided was five pages long and provided more relevant information than the brief information provided. When not read in it's entirety, information can be taken out of context, as was seen in some of the above posts to another article. It is important for an individual to make sure there is a wide range and educational background of a subject, as much as possible. However, when applicable, I will personally try to remain more mindful of others when referring to articles and informational data.

Yes, I am saying they scream foul to get out of deployment. We have one guy that has cried his testicles hurt for over 18 months. No problem could ever be found and when he was transfered to a non-deployable unit he screamed Jesus and he was healed :).

Thank you for sharing this one. Good chuckle.s. Miracles happen, but something tells me his wife has a bigger pair than he does. :D Good laughs! hehehe

When you get Preg. You visit with your commander and are given the option to get out and they will simply process you out as Preg/medical or you have to choose to stay in. Medical is the discharge.

Mandatory birth control is very similar to Prohibition - not gonna happen - ITS A PERSONAL MATTER NOT A ARMY MATTER. A soldier could use a little coke or cut their hand off and get out, doesn' mean the army has control over what an idividual does if he makes his mind up to.

Very well stated! :tongue: << Applause! Applause! >>