War zone pregnancy punishments being dropped

[CommunityEditor]

WASHINGTON — An Army general in northern Iraq has added pregnancy to the list of reasons a soldier under his command could be court-martialed.

The new policy, outlined last month by Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo and released Friday by the Army, would apply to both female soldiers who become pregnant on the battlefield and the male soldiers who impregnate them.

Civilians reporting to Cucolo also could face criminal prosecution under the new guidelines.

Army spokesman George Wright said the service typically sends home from the battlefield soldiers who become pregnant. But it is not an Army-wide policy to punish them under the military’s legal code, he said.

However, division commanders like Cucolo have the authority to impose these type of restrictions to personnel operating under their command, Wright said.

Cucolo oversees forces in northern Iraq, an area that includes the cities of Kirkuk, Tikrit and Mosul. His Nov. 4 order was first reported by the military newspaper Stars and Stripes.

Cucolo’s order outlines some 20 barred activities. Most of them are aimed at keeping order and preventing criminal activity, such as selling a weapon or taking drugs.

But other restrictions seemed aimed at preventing soldiers from leaving their unit short-handed, including becoming pregnant or undergoing elective surgery that would prevent their deployment.

Under Cucolo’s order, troops also are prohibited from “sexual contact of any kind” with Iraqi nationals. And, they cannot spend the night with a member of the opposite sex, unless married or expressly permitted to do so.


Article: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/12/ap_iraq_pregnant_soldiers_court_martial_121809/

[smarg]

Yet another reason to OIF/OEF dodge in Korea. :D

[SailorDave]

Unless they're going to criminalize sexual contact between military members or non-Iraqi civilians, I don't think it will hold up. If you're Catholic, you're prohibited by your religion from using birth control. Of course, you're also not supposed to have pre-marital sex, either. It will be interesting to see the first case.

[MCGYVER]

I don't think you'll see this one enforced. It's purely a scare tactic. The congresswomen would have a field day with it. Besides, everyone knows that the female terps make a lot of money on the side.

[Yggdrasil]

Unless they're going to criminalize sexual contact between military members or non-Iraqi civilians, I don't think it will hold up. If you're Catholic, you're prohibited by your religion from using birth control. Of course, you're also not supposed to have pre-marital sex, either. It will be interesting to see the first case.

It's not just Catholics. The "Fundy" faiths (i.e., Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals) have the same restrictions.

[Yggdrasil]

I don't think you'll see this one enforced. It's purely a scare tactic.

I couldn't agree more. Believe me, I'm one the last people you'll hear say that "nothing" should be done. I honestly feel that getting pregnant while assigned to a deployable unit should result in unpaid lost time that does not count toward fulfillment of the contract, seniority, or pay raises.

Of course, my favorite - and I've said this before - would be the nursery on the carrier. Pregnant? We can take pregnant women from all five services and put them on the next deploying carrier - you can have your baby there, and work in the nursery six until six weeks after delivery - then we'll put you to work. Air Force F-22 mechanic? The AM's in one of the embarked squadrons can put you to work on the F/A-18's. Army cook? You can work down in the galley with our CS's. Coast Guard BM? We got those in the Navy too.

I know it will never happen, but it would be awesome if it did.

[JD2780]

No matter where the females are stationed everybody is deployable to an extent. My wife for instance finally got her chace to deploy. Shes leaving before christmas, we had our daughter a yr ago. Now we knew she was probably deploying with in the yr therefore we just planned and took the proper precautions. I know every now then one gets passed the goalie, but you can tell who does it on purpose to dodge a deployment.

[WILDJOKER5]

You know...its called restraint and people should use it more often, esecially when deployed. You take the risk, you have to accept the consequences. Court martial them all.

[chucksnee]

It will not stop sex....

You see this is a problem with the older people that run the Army.....a person who is a 0-6 or above will be around 45-50ish in age if not older.....and they think Normal vaginal intercourse...

Not today....it's all about having SEX, vaginal or anal.....they have no clue....

[WILDJOKER5]

It will not stop sex....

You see this is a problem with the older people that run the Army.....a person who is a 0-6 or above will be around 45-50ish in age if not older.....and they think Normal vaginal intercourse...

Not today....it's all about having SEX, vaginal or anal.....they have no clue....
This isnt about stopping sex, it is about stopping pregnancy. Cant get pregnant by oral/anal.

[chucksnee]

This isnt about stopping sex, it is about stopping pregnancy. Cant get pregnant by oral/anal.

Agreed, but they will continue to have anal/oral.....and that is what they are trying to stop....ALL SEX....but they do not understand today's younger generation....that includes anal and oral....

It's already UCMJ action if they are found to be having sex....while deployed...right....unless you are married....

[WILDJOKER5]

Agreed, but they will continue to have anal/oral.....and that is what they are trying to stop....ALL SEX....but they do not understand today's younger generation....that includes anal and oral....

It's already UCMJ action if they are found to be having sex....while deployed...right....unless you are married....

BUT...Your are not for sure cought having sex till you are pregnant. Yes, sex can be a morale builder or a morale destroyer if that one person who like another person finds out they are having sex with someone else. But most of those problems can be worked out. The pregnant woman has hurt the unit because she is no long able to fulfill her duties and the guy(s) who got her that way is an acompliss. Not if there is just one guy punished for this consentual sex, then it could set the precident of making the father responsible for a pregnancy, so there for men should have the right in saying if a baby of his gets aborted or not.

Lastly, it is not in the UCMJ to not have sex down range. In the UCMJ says no sodemy, and then you have art 92, disobeying a direct order, which would be GO1.

[SailorDave]

Lastly, it is not in the UCMJ to not have sex down range. In the UCMJ says no sodemy, and then you have art 92, disobeying a direct order, which would be GO1.

Actually, there is nothing in USCENCTOM GO-1B, dated March 2006 (http://www.tac.usace.army.mil/deploymentcenter/tac_docs/GO-1B%20Policy.pdf) or MNC-I GO-1B, dated Apr 2009 (http://www.tac.usace.army.mil/deploymentcenter/tac_docs/GO-1.pdf) that prohibits sexual contact among US military service members. In fact, USCENTCOM GO-1B doesn't even address sexual contact at all. MNC-I GO-1B only says you can't cohabitate, reside or spend the night in quarters of the opposite sex.

[WILDJOKER5]

Actually, there is nothing in USCENCTOM GO-1B, dated March 2006 (http://www.tac.usace.army.mil/deploymentcenter/tac_docs/GO-1B%20Policy.pdf) or MNC-I GO-1B, dated Apr 2009 (http://www.tac.usace.army.mil/deploymentcenter/tac_docs/GO-1.pdf) that prohibits sexual contact among US military service members. In fact, USCENTCOM GO-1B doesn't even address sexual contact at all. MNC-I GO-1B only says you can't cohabitate, reside or spend the night in quarters of the opposite sex.

Yes, you are right and me and the other 150 people I am currently working with as I am currently deployed have discussed that point. So now that I work night shift, they arnt actually spending the night with me right? Next, where else to have sex other than in public? Vehicle? Misuse of GOV? Indecent exposure? But you are right, there is nothing about sex. Other than porn, so just dont take videos of the 2/3 of you in the bunker or parked behind the T-walls.

[SailorDave]

How, when and where you choose to have sex in the area is up to you. I'm just telling you what the regulation says. During my first deployment in 2006, the regulations had just changed and there was much confusion as to what was allowed and what wasn't. At the time, CENTAF had a provision that no even married people could cohabitate, which ticked off a bunch of USAF people who's spouses were also deployed in theater. My USAF O-6 in 2008 had her husband deployed to another FOB at the same time and, legally, they couldn't share living quarters, even when he only came through the FOB on visits. What they actually did is left to your speculation.

[ramrod]

Sex will happen during deployments....this happened back in the old times(70's..just kidding)..and this will continue till the end of time. Why is this even a topic? What....we can't find anything else to talk about?

[FatCat40]

[QUOTE=chucksnee;314671
It's already UCMJ action if they are found to be having sex....while deployed...right....unless you are married....[/QUOTE]

Actually no. If I remember correctly, the way General Order #1 read during my last tour was "American soldiers are prohibited from having sexual intercourse w/local nationals or any third country nationals". This did not expressly forbid intercourse w/other military members (to include those of other foreign countries) or civilian contractors. We were even allowed opposite sex visitation b/hours of 0900 and 2100, you just couldn't cohabitate or spend the night. (The number of "sexual assaults" dropped tremendously as opposed to the 5-10 per week it seemed during my prior deployment when everytime a consensual sexual encounter was caught the female suddenly became "assaulted").

[chucksnee]

GO #1, I will guard my post and quit my post when properly relieved....or has that gone away now.....

Oh hell...it's late....

Depending on where you are at Go1 means ...Korea, you will not drink while an exercise is going on...as long as it is put out....by your command....

[WILDJOKER5]

The point of thread was to dicuss if a court martial would even happen if a female soldier ever got pregnant and had to be sent home early, leaving the unit short manned. This decision to have sex is no different than if you choose to speed on base and wreck the truck, then have to be sent home. You could get a punishment for this careless behavior, even though "everyone speeds so why am i getting punished for it".

[chucksnee]

O.K. I knew I was not crazy....just a little out dated.....and the wrong country....

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=54774

Soliders WERE NOT allowed to have sex....read the article....So when people JUMP to conclusions, maybe some research should be done.....

To the orginal post.....

I think its a good idea...they should be given an article 15....both of them...

[RetSgtMajUSMC]

Lastly, it is not in the UCMJ to not have sex down range. In the UCMJ says no sodemy, and then you have art 92, disobeying a direct order, which would be GO1.[/QUOTE]

Also under Article 134, para 69 (no joke), is "wrongful cohabitation". No one touches this article due to PC. They need to go back to what they did in the late 60's and early 70's. If a single woman got pregnant, she got a general discharge - no medical benefits or anything. Whole process took about a week.

[WILDJOKER5]

I could accept that if you got sent back early from down range. Even if a married woman got pregnant and her husband wasnt down range with her, she should get the same treatment.

As for if the girl got kick but the guy didnt, again, if he gets in trouble, then it will set the precedent that guys have control over an unborn fetus and has a say in abortions.

[MADAMESINCERE]

So what happens when a Soldier goes home during R & R and gets pregnant?

[chucksnee]

What a stupid B!tch that NOW president is.....alll she heard was women will be punished if they get pregnant. She does not know the entire story of why the general made that regulation....

This is the reason that non-military personnel should have no say in how the military conducts business...and why we are so PC....

[Michaep]

So what happens when a Soldier goes home during R & R and gets pregnant?

General Order 1 doesnt apply to him/her while stateside on R&R

The leave time at home would be sufficient enough to prove that the act was performed at home, and not while in a combat zone

[mngkkr21]

We are in a state of war. Every person serving should be able and ready to deploy at a moment's notice. This is not new. This war has been going on since after September 11, 2001. Any person joining after that date should already know that they will deploy sometime in the near future. I understand that the female soldier's care plan failed after her mother accepted to take care of the child and then later said that she couldn't. First of all, the daughter should have known that her mother was not able to take care of an infant considering everything else going on in her household. Second of all, the mother should have told her daughter that she was not able to care for him. When you are a single parent in the military, you need to have a plan A, a plan B and so on to make sure that your bases are covered. She knew about this deployment so I have no sympathy because I have been serving in the U. S. Army for 10 years and I have 2 boys ages 8 and 7 and I am always were I need to be when I need to be.

[chucksnee]

We are in a state of war. Every person serving should be able and ready to deploy at a moment's notice. This is not new. This war has been going on since after September 11, 2001. Any person joining after that date should already know that they will deploy sometime in the near future. I understand that the female soldier's care plan failed after her mother accepted to take care of the child and then later said that she couldn't. First of all, the daughter should have known that her mother was not able to take care of an infant considering everything else going on in her household. Second of all, the mother should have told her daughter that she was not able to care for him. When you are a single parent in the military, you need to have a plan A, a plan B and so on to make sure that your bases are covered. She knew about this deployment so I have no sympathy because I have been serving in the U. S. Army for 10 years and I have 2 boys ages 8 and 7 and I am always were I need to be when I need to be.

Wrong thread??:confused: :confused:

[Seasons]

Very wrong thread.

[MCGYVER]

Yep, I called this one. :)

[JodieCoyotie]

I wholly support the general's decision. It's about time that female AND male Soldiers were held accountable for putting a Solider that is mission essential (they wouldn't be deployed if they weren't) into an avoidable, medically induced non-deployable status.

I was on active duty during the Gulf War. The unit across the "quad" from ours was a topographic engineering unit that was deploying to the Gulf. There was a rumor that female Soldiers were buying the urine of a pregnant Soldier in order to fake positive pregnancy tests.

I knew a Soldier that faked a pregnancy (again, borrowed urine from a pregnant woman) and used it to obtain a chapter 8 so she could get out of the Army and join her boyfriend who ETSed and left Germany.

When I was stationed in Korea, there were two NCOs who were married and sharing a room in the barracks (don't even get me started on how unfair that was). She hated Korea, so she told her husband (a SFC) to 'get her pregnant' so she could leave Korea early (back in those days, pregnant Soldiers had to 'fly' before 24 weeks of pregnancy, so it was an easy way to shorten your tour.) She did become pregnant, but developed complications. She was transported to Japan for her and the baby's sake and of course, her husband was flown over there, too, as a non-medical attendant. So, in the end, the Army spent thousands of dollars and lost two senior NCOs from the unit MTOE because she didn't want to serve 12 months in Korea.

It's about time that females (and the males they are having sex with) are held accountable for malingering in a combat zone. I don't think the rules on pregnancy go far enough. I believe that any female who becomes pregnant during IET (Basic and AIT) or with less than 6 months of Active Duty who becomes pregnant shoud be involuntarily separated without veteran's benefits. The Army spends thousands and thousands of dollars to recruit, train and assign Soldiers to needed positions in a time of war. A pregnancy makes a Soldier non-deployable and forces someone else to take up the slack (usually a male).

If you cannot keep your legs closed in a combat zone for goodness sake, and then are stupid enough to get pregnant, you deserve to be punished. A local letter of reprimand doesn't go far enough to me. The only male that has been punished was married and screwing around on his wife -- i.e. adultery. Again, a GOLOR doesn't go far enough for him either.

I knew a female CPT who got pregnant during an R&R pass to Kuwait during the Gulf War. The baby's father was her husband, also deployed. She hid her pregnancy until she was 28 weeks along and then was sent home. She was later passed over for major and believes it was because she got pregnant (even unintentionally) in a combat zone.

A retired SF NCO once told me, "A pregnancy is the only self-inflicted injury for which you cannot be court martialed."

[RONALD45]

Once again proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that America's military leaders will bow to whatever politically correct winds are blowing instead of standing by their convictions and words. Further proof that the only "brass" anywhere near their bodies is what little is contained on their uniforms, the General backs down from a court martial offense on deployed pregnant females.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/12/ap_pregnancy_courtmartial_122209/

Well considering that the political winds got hold of this General as soon as his words became public he had no choice but to pander to the feminazi's and political correctness that resulted in the shootings at Ft. Hood and back down.

However as I have stated before want to stop pregnancy on deployment the answer is simple HAVE THE ARMY QUIT PAYING FOR PREGNANCIES!!!!!!!. Of course AMEDD will never see this through as it will limit their cash cow and the massive Labor and Delivery departments in their hospitals but the solution is simple. Get pregnant YOU pay for all the prenatal care, the check ups, the ultra sounds, the birth and the hospital stay at a CIVILIAN hospital. Get the Army out of the baby business unless it is an emergency delivery period!!!! As soon as these females and males realize they now have to pay to have that kid you will see pregnancies drop in number drastically.

In addition, any female that gets pregnant while on deployment or while getting ready to deploy automatically adds another 9 MONTHS OF SERVICE onto their contracts or as stated is released from military service without benefits, their choice. If your condition puts you in a state where the military does not get your full potential from you due to a medical condition of YOUR choice and YOUR making then they should get 9 extra months for you to fulfill your obligations.

Now I know we will hear the story of "no birth control is 100% effective" yep exactly so here is another clue USE MORE THAN ONE METHOD OF BIRTH CONTROL AT A TIME (example the pill, plus a condom, hell throw in a "morning after" pill if still not sure), to further prevent the pregnancy.

[JodieCoyotie]

However as I have stated before want to stop pregnancy on deployment the answer is simple HAVE THE ARMY QUIT PAYING FOR PREGNANCIES!!!!!!!. Of course AMEDD will never see this through as it will limit their cash cow and the massive Labor and Delivery departments in their hospitals but the solution is simple. Get pregnant YOU pay for all the prenatal care, the check ups, the ultra sounds, the birth and the hospital stay at a CIVILIAN hospital. Get the Army out of the baby business unless it is an emergency delivery period!!!! As soon as these females and males realize they now have to pay to have that kid you will see pregnancies drop in number drastically.

In addition, any female that gets pregnant while on deployment or while getting ready to deploy automatically adds another 9 MONTHS OF SERVICE onto their contracts or as stated is released from military service without benefits, their choice. If your condition puts you in a state where the military does not get your full potential from you due to a medical condition of YOUR choice and YOUR making then they should get 9 extra months for you to fulfill your obligations.

Now I know we will hear the story of "no birth control is 100% effective" yep exactly so here is another clue USE MORE THAN ONE METHOD OF BIRTH CONTROL AT A TIME (example the pill, plus a condom, hell throw in a "morning after" pill if still not sure), to further prevent the pregnancy.

I agree with your idea of adding 9 months to a service contract -- up to the 8 year obligation under current Federal enlistment laws. I don't agree with forcing Soldiers to pay for prenatal care -- Soldiers have the right to have families, too. And actually, using a condom with spermicide in conjunction with the Pill (or patch or IUD, etc) is pretty much foolproof. Pregnancy is very easy to prevent.

My father is retired Navy medical service corps and was once asked about why the Navy had OBs, etc. His reply was that OBs are also very, very good 'belly surgeons" and are very necessary for abdominal surgeris from the minor (like hernia repairs) to the traumatic -- like gunshot wounds.

[logic man]

Let me see if I remember the purpose of being in the military...ahh yes; be prepared to go to war. So, I'm a unit commander deployed to a war zone - my sole mission is to ensure my personnel do their job and support the warfighter/mission. So, you're a female and intentionally (or not) get pregrant while deployed to a war zone - you get to go home, immediately. You haven't fulfilled your deployemnt committment and likely will get out of future depolyments as well. Don't get me wrong; there a number of male "Einsteins" depolyed 'in-country' as well - but when they screw up they stay.

To sum it up: women demand equal opportunity, which is fine and the way it should be - but with equal opportunity comes equal responsibility. I imagine as long as males put up with this double standard we get what we deserve. If you get pregnant in a war zone you should be discharged from the military (thank you for your service - now go home!!). Oh yes, if the male that contributed to the 'family way' is in country as well - he gets to stay depolyed and as of today both participants get a letter of repremand; that's all. Pleasre, give me a break! Nuf' said!!!

[SailorDave]

Once again proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that America's military leaders will bow to whatever politically correct winds are blowing instead of standing by their convictions and words. Further proof that the only "brass" anywhere near their bodies is what little is contained on their uniforms, the General backs down from a court martial offense on deployed pregnant females.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/12/ap_pregnancy_courtmartial_122209/

Well considering that the political winds got hold of this General as soon as his words became public he had no choice but to pander to the feminazi's and political correctness that resulted in the shootings at Ft. Hood and back down.

However as I have stated before want to stop pregnancy on deployment the answer is simple HAVE THE ARMY QUIT PAYING FOR PREGNANCIES!!!!!!!. Of course AMEDD will never see this through as it will limit their cash cow and the massive Labor and Delivery departments in their hospitals but the solution is simple. Get pregnant YOU pay for all the prenatal care, the check ups, the ultra sounds, the birth and the hospital stay at a CIVILIAN hospital. Get the Army out of the baby business unless it is an emergency delivery period!!!! As soon as these females and males realize they now have to pay to have that kid you will see pregnancies drop in number drastically.

In addition, any female that gets pregnant while on deployment or while getting ready to deploy automatically adds another 9 MONTHS OF SERVICE onto their contracts or as stated is released from military service without benefits, their choice. If your condition puts you in a state where the military does not get your full potential from you due to a medical condition of YOUR choice and YOUR making then they should get 9 extra months for you to fulfill your obligations.

Now I know we will hear the story of "no birth control is 100% effective" yep exactly so here is another clue USE MORE THAN ONE METHOD OF BIRTH CONTROL AT A TIME (example the pill, plus a condom, hell throw in a "morning after" pill if still not sure), to further prevent the pregnancy.
While we're at it, lets add a month-for-month extension of obligated service for every month a service member is on limited or no duty for a sports or other injury. We're also losing those personnel when they're no able to fulfill their primary duties.

[RONALD45]

Soldiers have the right to have families, too

Agreed, however Soldiers do not have the "RIGHT" to have the military in effect "pay" for those families. Stop and think free prenatal care, free birth, free hospitalization, free housing now for the "mom and child" (a way for a single Soldier to get out of the barracks environment), free medical for the child now until 18 years old etc.

Maybe if the Army was to stop playing "DADDY SAM" and get back to playing "UNCLE SAM" we would have far less pregnancies. No other "occupation" I know of pretty much takes the financial responsibilities of raising your child when you decide to have one other than the military. Want to have a child fine I agree more power to you. However my tax dollars should not go to aiding you in building and raising your family. Way it stands now the military is little more than "welfare" for single pregnant female Soldiers. Want a baby not a problem you INCUR all the costs involved in having it, another way of forcing folks to take at least some modicum of "responsibility" for their actions (granted if they took responsibility for their actions then they probably wouldn't have become pregnant to begin with) something that seems to be lost in today's PC world.

[RONALD45]

While we're at it, lets add a month-for-month extension of obligated service for every month a service member is on limited or no duty for a sports or other injury. We're also losing those personnel when they're no able to fulfill their primary duties.

With one notable exception sports related injuries in a combat zone do not usually result in immediate return to CONUS. However to an extent I agree with you I saw many injuries in Iraq that were a result of some type of intermural sports activity fostered by a command but again these are usually "command or Army" sponsored activities, which should also be limited. The Army does not usually sponsor "sex in a warzone" activities which lead to pregnancy.

Another way this could be handled, the pregnant Soldier is sent back stateside, after the birth of the baby and the resulting "maternity leave" that Soldier IMMEDIATELY becomes redeployable to any unit serving deployed who is short the MOS that Soldier holds. In other words put them in a "reserve pool" they go and now replace the next Soldier who becomes pregnant in a deployed unit that holds the same MOS that they do.

[SailorDave]

We had a person get his head busted open after falling off a bar stool and hitting his head on a table at our first port call on our way to the Gulf. Nothing punitive happened to him, but he certainly left us short handed and another senior enlisted had to take his place because his division was too big to manage without adult supervision. Not only did he not have to extend his active service, he got almost 100% disability from the VA. Is that any less irresponsible than getting pregnant ? These kinds of things happen all the time. Unless someone shows intent to avoid deployment (malingering), nothing happens to them, either.

If we're going to do this to pregnant women or the men who get them pregnant, then we have to use the same policy when individuals in the combat zone get injured in a pickup game of basketball or soccer and have to be medevac'd out for treatment. Treat it just like any other non-combat related condition that requires redeployment.

[tangent5]

I think that the policy if perfectly appropriate when applied to the combat zone. Each soldier is responsible for his/her actions and having some type of punitive action for preventable conduct that could adversely impact combat readiness is reasonable. Each pregnant soldier removed from the combat zone means more work for those soldiers who remain.

I am a little dismayed that MG Cucolo has backed off the statement that soldiers breaking the policy could face courts martial. I think they should face that, with potential punishment equal to the amount of time they failed to complete during their deployment. If a soldier gets pregnant 3 months in, then the punishment, if convicted should include the remaining 9 months to be "served" in some capacity. For the males who impregnated them, they should get the same sentence AFTER the deployment.

[twoZJbrass]

(Quote: However, division commanders like Cucolo have the authority to impose these type of restrictions to personnel operating under their command, Wright said.

Cucolo oversees forces in northern Iraq, an area that includes the cities of Kirkuk, Tikrit and Mosul. His Nov. 4 order was first reported by the military newspaper Stars and Stripes.

Cucolo’s order outlines some 20 barred activities. Most of them are aimed at keeping order and preventing criminal activity, such as selling a weapon or taking drugs. )

Finally, HooRay! There is a senior officer fielded out there that is being an OFFICER by leading out front.
Tonight, The MSM anchor -itch on ABC acted as if California just broke of into the pond. Watch the PC Washington DC group go stark bunkers on this one.

Check Cucolo DNA for a gene from Patton's. God help this commander in every way.

[zulu62]

I'm a former Army Medical dept. officer. I didn't sign on to deal with this kind of nonsense, it started to take up a good deal of my time and dealing with this stuff was a big factor in my descision to bail out..

They may not miss me on active duty, and the feeling is mutual. I can live without an outfit that puts more value on the party line, making retirement points to look the other way, than a bleeding soldier

[blkhwk15t]

Honestly, I understand what he is doing. Will it prevent soldiers from "hooking up", probably not. But, every action has a consequence. To get a female soldier pregnant is to take them out of the fight. After the Army, or any service for that matter, has spent the time and money to train them in the position they occupy and expect them to perform that role is negligent on both parts. I have had my own temptations, but in a deployed environment, the mission is first above anything. Because, you have other soldiers that count on you to get the job done, however big or small.

[kenny10]

Let me see if I remember the purpose of being in the military...ahh yes; be prepared to go to war. So, I'm a unit commander deployed to a war zone - my sole mission is to ensure my personnel do their job and support the warfighter/mission. So, you're a female and intentionally (or not) get pregrant while deployed to a war zone - you get to go home, immediately. You haven't fulfilled your deployemnt committment and likely will get out of future depolyments as well. Don't get me wrong; there a number of male "Einsteins" depolyed 'in-country' as well - but when they screw up they stay.

To sum it up: women demand equal opportunity, which is fine and the way it should be - but with equal opportunity comes equal responsibility. I imagine as long as males put up with this double standard we get what we deserve. If you get pregnant in a war zone you should be discharged from the military (thank you for your service - now go home!!). Oh yes, if the male that contributed to the 'family way' is in country as well - he gets to stay depolyed and as of today both participants get a letter of repremand; that's all. Pleasre, give me a break! Nuf' said!!!


LMAO............so the female gets booted from the military and the ass who got her pregnant gets to stay in? GREAT LOGIC

[zulu62]

LMAO............so the female gets booted from the military and the ass who got her pregnant gets to stay in? GREAT LOGIC

make the impregnator do 2 tours to make up the difference in lost time. reduce in rank and he does the extra tour as an E-1. The male can still hump a ruck, stay outside the wire, put rounds down range.

The impregnee is a fobbit who probably spent most of her time filing EO complaint and in mental health working on her personality disorder. probably won't be missed and probably falls under the paperwork reduction act.

keep treating the army like a Job Corps program, it's all yours.

[Wardog_11]

As a current commander in Afghanistan who lost his three females to pregnancy in the 2.5 months prior to deployment I'm completely in support of some sort of accountability. During a deployment- criminal. Four months in to a 12-month deployment and I'm still waiting for replacements.

[Okie]

MG Cucolo has come out and said he doesn't intend to enforce the rule. Then, sir, may I politely ask, "What's the point?" Anybody with kids knows that empty threats don't work.

To all of the military gals that aren't afraid to deploy and uphold their oath, "Thank you."

[zulu62]

As a current commander in Afghanistan who lost his three females to pregnancy in the 2.5 months prior to deployment I'm completely in support of some sort of accountability. During a deployment- criminal. Four months in to a 12-month deployment and I'm still waiting for replacements.

Keep talking like that, and you'll be the only one held accountable.

[kenny10]

make the impregnator do 2 tours to make up the difference in lost time. reduce in rank and he does the extra tour as an E-1. The male can still hump a ruck, stay outside the wire, put rounds down range.

The impregnee is a fobbit who probably spent most of her time filing EO complaint and in mental health working on her personality disorder. probably won't be missed and probably falls under the paperwork reduction act.

keep treating the army like a Job Corps program, it's all yours.

riiiiiiiiiight cause all Females are fobbits......grow up. Tours should not be used as a punishment, thats some bullshit. So if males were the ones that could get pregnant, I bet my ass you would have a different view. LOL did you read the article? He states he does not want to lose his INVALUABLE soldiers to pregnancy

[TJMAC77SP]

MG Cucolo has come out and said he doesn't intend to enforce the rule. Then, sir, may I politely ask, "What's the point?" Anybody with kids knows that empty threats don't work.

To all of the military gals that aren't afraid to deploy and uphold their oath, "Thank you."

It is MG Cucolo's order.....................

What he DID say is that is does not intend to court martial (I believe he even said NJP's are out). To date the soldiers who have gotten pregnant and the soldiers who impregnated them have received Letters of Reprimand.

Can't see what NOW and other groups are bitching about. They are all ignoring the fact that the order covers the male soldier responsbile as well.

Another inconvenient truth I guess

[oldman]

Good for you General! I have been deployed to Iraq several times and there is nothing that is more demoralizing than seeing a soldier who plays soldier until the unit gets mobilized then pops pregnant and does not get deployed or gets sent back from deployment pregnant. If you can get a UCMJ action for being sunburned and not being able to perform you duty then why not the same for getting pregnant- both are voluntary acts. Both the male and the female should pay the price. The only excuse for getting pregnant while in a combat zone is rape and then the service needs to take care of its own.

[mngkkr21]

NO I was in the righ thread. I feel that if a femal becomes pregnant while in country then her and the man should recive and Article 15. I was also talking about the Soldier from Georgia who missed movement because her family care plan fell through. Both of these incidences should have some reprimands. It makes all women serving in the military look bad when you have carelessness going on.

[MCGYVER]

Gotta say that I saw this one coming. Too many civilian higher ups getting their fingers in the military pies. It's all about being Politically Correct and keeping the public happy now. Gone are the days. Gone are the days.

P.S. Anyone that is truly surprised by this probably was also shocked when General McKiernan was "replaced".

[USN - Retired]

MG Cucolo's policy states that a male soldier can be punished for getting a female soldier pregnant. Does anyone have a problem with that part of MG Cucolo's policy?

[Seasons]

MG Cucolo's policy states that a male soldier can be punished for getting a female soldier pregnant. Does anyone have a problem with that part of MG Cucolo's policy?

Not really.

Cause and effect.

Punish the cause after the effect.

[chucksnee]

MG Cucolo's policy states that a male soldier can be punished for getting a female soldier pregnant. Does anyone have a problem with that part of MG Cucolo's policy?

Nope....you cannot get prego by looking...

[ROBERT4]

So sad a GO attempting to hold the females feet to the fire, caved under pressure from the feminist of the military. This falls into the same sand trap, similar to when females were under consideration to be pulled out of war zones. As with this situation, the GO arena was pressured into caving into the feminist world. It is alarming we spent so much to get them to equality, to see a large portion of females use the regulations for promotion, petty interests, and another means to use feminity to get their way. BLUFF: Female is a term of gender, not Soldiering. Sooner we move on by setting those females straight, not all females, attempting to use feminity to get the upper hand the better the US Army will be. Equality and consideration of others are fine principles but when bent, and torqued out of proportion by female lobbyist, special interests groups, and those siding with them in the military the principles lack purpose and originality.

Here is a simple way for all. Treat all Soldiers, as Soldiers. Do not walk around seeking special allowances in promotions, positions, and favor for the betterment of a gender. Earn everything one step-by-step, you will earn the respect you attempt to tell eveybody you have earned. When respect and dignity are earned commercials, posters, and quarterly briefings wlll not be necessary.

[sarge89]

I love how so many don't want to hold the male/father accountable at all. My first thought has always been how and why would anyone WANT to have sex in a combat zone? It's amazing how many people just can't wait till they are home....so friggin stupid. The Army will not discharge any females who are pregnant in combat due to a liability. They will not withhold pay etc either or else they will certainly come under fire for some type of discrimination if a soldier says they can't afford to care for the child since the Army took some pay from them.

I served on AD from 89-92 then served 8 more years between the Reserves and Guard. When my unit was sent to Ft Bragg after 9-11 it sickened me to see how mayn AD soliders are on a profile - they can't run, walk, etc...the Army has slowly turned into a place where ppl who don't want to work and just collect a pay check can linger. The able bodied soldiers pay for this and in many cases they have to fill slots for those who come up "nondeployable" and it's a joke. IMO you can't run or do the job you signed up for.. GET OUT.

[USN - Retired]

I love how so many don't want to hold the male/father accountable at all. .

Who doesn't want to hold the male/father accountable?

[ROBERT4]

Attempting to hold special interests groups feet to the fire but caved under pressure. This falls into an old sand trap, removing females from front lines. At time of consideration, combat organizations pulled a “Paul Revere” sacrificing integrity to allow those in question to remain with the units, in unlawful positions. Lobbyists rallied to decry how the military would suffer without their presence. Therefore, here is an up close and personal. How did that work for your special interest groups? The groups lobbied have proven to be a vast majority of the problem.

So far, lobbyists have tons of egg or pie in the face. As with this situation, some caved into groups unwilling to understand this is a military formed by once civilian populace. The members have an inherent responsibility, known as an oath to support, defend, and follow the orders of those appointed over them. It is alarming we spend billions on equality programs, to see genders use regulations, policies, and a petty agenda for self-gratification. If genders cannot be in the same battle space without sex, there are issues.
The issues, lack of self-discipline, integrity, and morality, reinforced by recanting stern policies to appease groups. Here is a simple way for all. Treat all Soldiers, as Soldiers, and when you mess up be an adult accept the punishments. Do not revert to recidivism, in attempts to elude punishment. The sooner militaries move on by setting ranks straight, attempting to skirt regulations and guarder in ranks criminals, the better off the USA will be.

Equality and consideration of others are fine principles but when bent out of context by lobbyist, genders of all ranks, special interests groups, and those siding with them the principles lack purpose, originality, and validity. Do not walk around seeking special allowances in promotions, positions, and favor for the betterment of a gender. Earn everything step-by-step thus earning respect, when attempting to tell everybody you have earned said respect, this is admittance of failure thus weakness. Earned respect and dignity will diminish necessity for billions in commercials, posters, and quarterly briefings to remind populaces of duties, responsibilities, and moral responsibilities to each other.

BLUFF: Male and female are perpetual terms for gender, not Soldiering. Gender is not a prelude for excuses. Be a combat enabler, not a detractor.

[JodieCoyotie]

Soldiers have the right to have families, too

Agreed, however Soldiers do not have the "RIGHT" to have the military in effect "pay" for those families. Stop and think free prenatal care, free birth, free hospitalization, free housing now for the "mom and child" (a way for a single Soldier to get out of the barracks environment), free medical for the child now until 18 years old etc.

Maybe if the Army was to stop playing "DADDY SAM" and get back to playing "UNCLE SAM" we would have far less pregnancies. No other "occupation" I know of pretty much takes the financial responsibilities of raising your child when you decide to have one other than the military. Want to have a child fine I agree more power to you. However my tax dollars should not go to aiding you in building and raising your family. Way it stands now the military is little more than "welfare" for single pregnant female Soldiers. Want a baby not a problem you INCUR all the costs involved in having it, another way of forcing folks to take at least some modicum of "responsibility" for their actions (granted if they took responsibility for their actions then they probably wouldn't have become pregnant to begin with) something that seems to be lost in today's PC world.

My husband is a senior noncommissioned officer who has given over 20 years of his life to the Army and is still "Army Strong." I chose to leave Active Duty so we could have a family and not face the choice of having to provide another home for our child(ren) in the case of deployment. Not all Soldiers who have families are single parents. The provisions for military families ARE a force multiplier -- the medical coverage afforded to our Soldiers and their wives, husbands, and children encourages reenlistment. There are also some studies that suggest Soldiers with families are more likely to reenlist when they feel their families are well provided for by the military's healthcare system. I think a great number of people would choose to ETS if they knew they would have to foot the bill for a pregnancy and instead choose civilian jobs with better prenatal coverage. My husband spent 23 months in Iraq for my prenatal care (in addition to other benefits), so I think our bills are more than covered.

Medical care is NOT free. Housing is NOT free. If you think the Army's medical care system is "free" I have a few widows I would like you to meet. Their husbands DIED in exchange for FREE healthcare. Any job that requires you to risk injury or loss of life for healthcare coverage has a pretty steep "co-pay." We can wax poetic all we want to about service to our country and sacrifice for our freedoms, but there are other issues just as important to our Soldiers, like medical coverage, life insurance, and affordable, convenient housing for their families.

The real issue we are discussing here is whether Soldiers who become pregnant/get someone pregnant should be punished for doing so in a combat zone. For me, it's a no-brainer -- you don't get pregnant/or get someone pregnant and create a "loss" to the unit, just like you don't shoot your buddy in the foot so he can go home. If Soldiers went around intentionally injuring one another for a plane ticket home, they'd be court-martialed for it.

[AnneS]

I'm not sure how this is going to work but if a female does get pregnant in country, it will not be the first time it has happened. A few years ago, some Navy female got pregnant and had her kid on the ship. It seems that no one noticed she was pregnant until she went into labor. About the same time, one of my young female Airmen returned from a 3 month deployment to Diego Garcia and came home and had her baby. no one knew she was pregnant until she delivered! (and she was deployed with a lot of males who had kids at home so you'd think someone would have noticed her weight gain). At that time, the AF was not screening women for pregnancy before they deployed so it is possible someone could go over there pregnant first. On the other hand, I think that it's a good idea to prosecute both the female and the male who put her in that position!

[JodieCoyotie]

We had a person get his head busted open after falling off a bar stool and hitting his head on a table at our first port call on our way to the Gulf. Nothing punitive happened to him, but he certainly left us short handed and another senior enlisted had to take his place because his division was too big to manage without adult supervision. Not only did he not have to extend his active service, he got almost 100% disability from the VA. Is that any less irresponsible than getting pregnant ? These kinds of things happen all the time. Unless someone shows intent to avoid deployment (malingering), nothing happens to them, either.

If we're going to do this to pregnant women or the men who get them pregnant, then we have to use the same policy when individuals in the combat zone get injured in a pickup game of basketball or soccer and have to be medevac'd out for treatment. Treat it just like any other non-combat related condition that requires redeployment.


A barstool? You mean an alcohol related incident? Sounds like it wasn't in the line of duty if that is the case and thus he should not have been eligible for VA benefits -- blame the system for that. The problem with comparing a drunken incident and a pregnancy with a sports related injury is that maintaining physical fitness is a requirement of service.

In a combat arena, there are limited avenues for exercise, and a basketball court takes up little space. Exercise also reduces stress, promotes teamwork, improves unit cohesion, and alleviates boredom and loneliness. Soldiers who have trouble 'decompressing" after combat missions might benefit from "shooting a few hoops" with their buddies. It's a way of saying, "Hey, we are here, we are together, we are a team, we are making it."

My husband provided his Soldiers with a PS2 and a TV set, several board games, playing cards, and paperback books of various titles -- all at his own expense. He did everything in his power to bring a sense of normalcy to Soldiers who were far, far from home. He fought the chain of command to get the Soldiers internet access and satellite phone access to contact their families back home. Since he's Infantry, sex among the ranks wasn't an issue, but boredom, loneliness, and stress were real problems.

[CommunityEditor]

BAGHDAD — A U.S. general in Iraq who listed pregnancy as a reason for court-martialing soldiers said Tuesday that he would never actually seek to jail someone over the offense, but wanted to underline the seriousness of the issue.

Last month, Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo issued a policy that would allow soldiers who become pregnant and their sexual partners to be court-martialed. But he appeared to back away from the policy in a conference call with reporters, saying the policy was intended to emphasize the problems created when pregnant soldiers go home and leave behind a weaker unit.

"I have never considered court-martial for this, I do not ever see myself putting a soldier in jail for this," said Cucolo, who oversees U.S. forces in northern Iraq. But since pregnant women automatically go home, their units are left short-staffed, he said.

"I need every soldier I've got," Cucolo said. "I need them for the entire duration of this deployment."

Cucolo commands a task force of 22,000 soldiers, which oversees northern Iraq, including cities such as Tikrit, Kirkuk and Mosul. He said he has 1,682 female soldiers.

As soon as the military knows a soldier is pregnant, she is immediately sent home.

"If you are a pregnant female in a combat zone, you are redeployed, period. That is actually not my call; that is just what we do," he said.

Cucolo is thought to be the first to make the pregnancy an offense that could be dealt with by court-martial — for both the man and the woman. The ruling only applies to troops under his command. He said women who are raped would not be subject to this order.

"I have to accomplish a very complex mission," he said. "I'm going to do what it takes to maintain our strength."

Cucolo's order outlines some 20 barred activities. Most of them are aimed at keeping order and preventing criminal activity, such as selling a weapon or taking drugs.

Troops also are prohibited from "sexual contact of any kind" with Iraqi nationals. And, they cannot spend the night with a member of the opposite sex, unless married or expressly permitted to do so.

The general said he consulted with a number of women in his unit before coming up with the policy and all supported it. He also consulted with his unit's lawyer.

"It's a very difficult issue because pregnancy does impede readiness," said Genevieve Chase, the founder of American Women Veterans, an organization designed to help female veterans. "Enforcing the rule of this is what's going to be difficult."

Chase said she was especially concerned about holding both males and females responsible.

The general said that since his Nov. 4 policy went into effect, four women and three men have been found in violation of it.

The women and two of the men received letters of reprimand that will not become part of their permanent record, the general said. The third man would receive a letter of reprimand in his file — a more serious punishment — because he was also found guilty of offenses including adultery.

All the women were sent home.

Chase also said there is already a heavy stigma on women who get pregnant in the battlefield.

"Every time a female does get pregnant there's that automatic assumption, that you're trying to get out of the deployment," she said.


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2009/12/ap_pregnancy_courtmartial_122209/

[twoZJbrass]

((Quote; WarDog_11 .. .. As a current commander in Afghanistan who lost his three females to pregnancy in the 2.5 months prior to deployment ---snip snip --- still waiting for replacements. ))

WD-11, Thanks Commander, for being there and your service for this country. God bless you with your hands at the controls in the trenches with our kids and battling on two fronts, the enemy there and PC Army behind you. May the wisdom of Gen Cucolo reach over and tab you on the shoulder. Keep the spirits high. We (gen public on the right) recognize your stress everyday and continue to call the congress ones, lame representatives and Mr Gates. .

((Ronald45; """Maybe if the Army was to stop playing "DADDY SAM" and get back to playing "UNCLE SAM" we would have far less pregnancies. No other "occupation" I know of pretty much takes the financial responsibilities of raising your child when you decide to have one other than the military. Want to have a child fine I agree more power to you. However my tax dollars should not go to aiding you in building and raising your family. Way it stands now the military is little more than "welfare" for single pregnant female Soldiers. Want a baby not a problem you INCUR all the costs involved in having it, another way of forcing folks to take at least some modicum of "responsibility" for their actions (granted if they took responsibility for their actions then they probably wouldn't have become pregnant to begin with) something that seems to be lost in today's PC world."""" ))

Ron45, Post #35, Had to show your post again to the PC lurkers on this tread. Could not have been stated any better. To get our US Army and all services back on center, focus on the primary mission there has to be steps to get out of the mission of family building after a certain point. The ticket is getting too costly for all of us. The female knows very well when paired, they are in control of the situation 95% of the time because the male switches from the top head controls to the lower head desires, then all bets are off for manly common sense.

Sarge89; Yes, the system has got to hold the military male/father accountable for losses and support expense charges toward the pregnancy to get a handle on this situation of having the services taking the full hit from every angle.

[CommunityEditor]

WASHINGTON — A recent military policy that added pregnancy to the list of reasons a soldier could be disciplined in a war zone will be rescinded by a new order drafted by the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Gen. Raymond Odierno has drafted a broad new policy for the U.S. forces in Iraq that will take effect Jan. 1, and that order will not include a controversial pregnancy provision that one of his subordinate commanders enacted last month, according to the U.S. military command in Iraq.

Odierno's order comes about a week after the pregnancy policy issued by Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo triggered a storm of criticism. Cucolo had issued a policy that would allow soldiers who become pregnant and their sexual partners to be punished.

The order listed a variety of offenses, and the punishments for them could range from minor discipline to a court-martial. But in a conference call with reporters earlier this week, Cucolo said he would never actually seek to jail someone over the pregnancy provision.

And he said the policy was intended to emphasize the problems created when pregnant soldiers go home and leave behind a weaker unit.

U.S. military leaders in Iraq conducted a full review of all existing orders as part of the ongoing transition in Iraq, and a new general order has been drafted. The order would consolidate several general orders from the U.S. commanders across Iraq. That policy, the military said Thursday, will not include the pregnancy provision.

Previously, the commanders have had the authority to draft their own restrictions.


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2009/12/ap_pregnancy_in_iraq_122409/

[garhkal]

I couldn't agree more. Believe me, I'm one the last people you'll hear say that "nothing" should be done. I honestly feel that getting pregnant while assigned to a deployable unit should result in unpaid lost time that does not count toward fulfillment of the contract, seniority, or pay raises.


I like that suggestion of having their pregnancy time being not counted for seniority or pay..


Agreed, but they will continue to have anal/oral.....and that is what they are trying to stop....ALL SEX....but they do not understand today's younger generation....that includes anal and oral....

Well, technically that is still an offense, of the Sodomy rules.


The number of "sexual assaults" dropped tremendously as opposed to the 5-10 per week it seemed during my prior deployment when everytime a consensual sexual encounter was caught the female suddenly became "assaulted"

I saw that before. Right after tail hook. We had a KNOWN group of 9 females at Signalmen school in Orlando, who were noted by many as being the 'paid for pussy' in the barracks, but the higher ups could not get them for lack of evidence (but they knew). One finally got caught, and immediately cried rape... Since she used the R word, they couldn't do anything against her.


I was on active duty during the Gulf War. The unit across the "quad" from ours was a topographic engineering unit that was deploying to the Gulf. There was a rumor that female Soldiers were buying the urine of a pregnant Soldier in order to fake positive pregnancy tests.

Did anyone grass them out? Did they get caught?


A retired SF NCO once told me, "A pregnancy is the only self-inflicted injury for which you cannot be court martialed."

Ain't that the truth... AND i agree, it should not be so.


However as I have stated before want to stop pregnancy on deployment the answer is simple HAVE THE ARMY QUIT PAYING FOR PREGNANCIES!!!!!!!. Of course AMEDD will never see this through as it will limit their cash cow and the massive Labor and Delivery departments in their hospitals but the solution is simple. Get pregnant YOU pay for all the prenatal care, the check ups, the ultra sounds, the birth and the hospital stay at a CIVILIAN hospital. Get the Army out of the baby business unless it is an emergency delivery period!!!! As soon as these females and males realize they now have to pay to have that kid you will see pregnancies drop in number drastically.

Very interesting suggestion. And though i could see some stopping it, i don't see all.


While we're at it, lets add a month-for-month extension of obligated service for every month a service member is on limited or no duty for a sports or other injury. We're also losing those personnel when they're no able to fulfill their primary duties.

I have advovcated many a time to my local commanders that things like that get hit. Heck imo they should be charged with damage of govt property.


If you can get a UCMJ action for being sunburned and not being able to perform you duty then why not the same for getting pregnant

Well said. And though i have been one of those who got LL for 4 days due to sunburns (after a flight deck picknick) and who did not get done, i do think more should be done to stop this, or at least show there are repercussions.


It is alarming we spent so much to get them to equality, to see a large portion of females use the regulations for promotion, petty interests, and another means to use feminity to get their way.

And until both society and the mil stops letting this happen, it will continue to be so. I hate seeing all the gyms etc i see that are advertised as 'women only', stay that way as it is not considered sexist to have one. BUT as soon as one is opened up male only, it is discriminatory to have it so...

[homeslice3482]

Everyone is so quick to judge. I am a female Soldier, active duty for almost 6 years. I am a NCO and I will be the first to admit there are some females in the Army who give the rest of us a bad name. But don't assume all females who get pregnant before a deployment or during are trying to get out of the deployment. There are a alot of married couples deployed together. And, gasp, I know this is hard to believe or admit, but military women do get raped and sexually assaulted while deployed with people they are supposed to be able to trust. And yes you can know the ones trying to get out of deployment but it would be hard to prove unless she admitted to it therefore, hard to punish.
I'm really just tired of (mostly males) who just assume all Army females are easy and trying to avoid deployment. Considering the fact that FOBs/COBs in Iraq are treated just like garrison bases, what do people expect to happen? For the people who are on the base all the time and your chain of command nitpicks on PT belts or things like that, then what do you think will happen? Is it right? No. But don't assume it's the females' fault. We do get sexually assaulted, harrassed and raped in Iraq and Afghanistan by our fellow male Soldiers. But yet we still serve and many times, women do not report for the simple fact she won't be believed. Let's just not be quick to judge...

[MCGYVER]

I'd bet a dollar to a donut that there are way more "unsubstantiated" cases of rape (a.k.a. false accusations) than actual rapes. This in no way is meant to trivialize or minimize the occurence of the acts. The other point is that the likelihood of that one rape turning into a pregnancy is so incredibly remote that using it to justify ANY point at all makes one look amazingly naive and ignorant. If you are a Soldier and you either get pregnant or impregnate a female Soldier before or during a deployment you need to be given a Field Grade Article 15 and a General Letter of Reprimand. Just my opinion.

[Wardog_11]

This is not about judging peoples' motives- it's about setting standards. We have rules and regulations that govern our actions. This is about readiness. This is about combat performance. If I, as a father, want to be home more with my kids, I have two options- move to a non-deployable billet, or get out. For me to occupy a deployable slot, where people count on me, and yet not be a ready asset is a disservice to those around me. If I choose to do something personally that jeopardizes my ability to perform my duty, then it is MY FAULT and MY RESPONSIBILITY. I have made a choice that negatively impacts my mission and those around me. This is no different.
Getting pregnant on R and R is like me bungee-jumping to my death on R and R- personal choice on my own time that has hurt the mission.

[JodieCoyotie]

This is not about judging peoples' motives- it's about setting standards. We have rules and regulations that govern our actions. This is about readiness. This is about combat performance. .

Exactly. Very well said. Rape and sexual assaults are a completely different issue than a pregnancy that occurs from consensual sex. It's not about females being "easy" or being "paid" for sex. It's about making a decision to have sex that results in a pregnancy and leaving a combat deployed unit short of a needed asset. Women who become pregnant prior to a deployment are far easier to replace than ones who are "in theater."

When the military decided to allow females to continue to serve during and after pregnancies, women did not serve in the MOSs or units they serve in today. You cannot say that women deserve to fill combat roles or serve with front-line units and then not hold them accountable for deliberate actions that leave them non-deployable. There are only two options -- go back to the days when a pregnancy became grounds for involuntary discharge, or hold women to the same standard that ANY Soldier would be held to for a self-inflicted "injury" that removed them from the combat theater.

If you consent to having sex, then you consent to pregnancy unless YOU are sterile. There are plenty of men and women who are parents after a sexual partner assured them that sex without contraception was "safe' based on infertility. Furthermore, sex without contraception usually means vulnerability to sexually transmitted infections. Since many are 'silent' infections that do not cause symptoms, imagine how many cases of chlamydia or gonorrhea could be spread through a unit through indiscriminate sexual activity.

I am an adult who has spent her entire life in the military community -- as a child, Soldier, and wife. I know that Soldiers are going to have sex -- whether they are in IET, garrison, or deployed. I really don't care what consenting adults do together, but I DO care when a loss to a unit's combat readiness creates a void that leads to other Soldiers picking up the slack and incurring greater risk for physical injury and emotional duress from the extra workload. I think Soldiers should be provided with access to contraception, including emergency contraception, while deployed. It's a new time in the Army with women taking on more and more roles and a steadily blurring line between men and women. Equality means accountability.

[JodieCoyotie]

Everyone is so quick to judge. I am a female Soldier, active duty for almost 6 years. I am a NCO and I will be the first to admit there are some females in the Army who give the rest of us a bad name. But don't assume all females who get pregnant before a deployment or during are trying to get out of the deployment. There are a alot of married couples deployed together. And, gasp, I know this is hard to believe or admit, but military women do get raped and sexually assaulted while deployed with people they are supposed to be able to trust. And yes you can know the ones trying to get out of deployment but it would be hard to prove unless she admitted to it therefore, hard to punish.
I'm really just tired of (mostly males) who just assume all Army females are easy and trying to avoid deployment. Considering the fact that FOBs/COBs in Iraq are treated just like garrison bases, what do people expect to happen? For the people who are on the base all the time and your chain of command nitpicks on PT belts or things like that, then what do you think will happen? Is it right? No. But don't assume it's the females' fault. We do get sexually assaulted, harrassed and raped in Iraq and Afghanistan by our fellow male Soldiers. But yet we still serve and many times, women do not report for the simple fact she won't be believed. Let's just not be quick to judge...

The discussion is not about females getting pregnant before a deployment, but rather WHILE deployed to a combat theater, and since pregnancy is VERY easy to prevent, it's quite easy to assume it was intentional. Being married does not exempt you from the physical readiness standards. Rape and sexual assault are separate issues. Clearly, no woman who was raped and impregnated would be punished for it. The assumption that servicewomen are "easy' goes back more than 40 years -- it's a stereotype, and yes, some women seem to embrace it wholeheartedly. I remember a very pregnant and very unmarried Soldier telling me how another female was a "slut" and I pointed out to her that being pregnant out of wedlock might appear "slutty" to someone else. Women are far harder on one another than men ever are.

I have no doubt that women are raped, harrassed, and assaulted, even in Iraq and yes, from people that they thought they could trust. Many women think that because a guy is in uniform, or in their unit, he is a "good guy" or a "buddy," and it's not always true. I would offer this advice to you as an NCO -- counsel your female Soldiers about being careful and discriminate and safe. Years ago, I mentioned to my roommate (an NCO) that a new Soldier in our unit in Korea gave them the "creeps" because he was very forward and even showed up at my room one day to "ask me to lunch" which I politely declined. She told my supervisor (a female SFC). I was verbally counseled about "making assumptions" and "judging" people and told to apologize. He was later arrested for stalking a female captain and breaking in to her room. Women should trust their instincts, use a buddy system, and be encouraged to verbalize their feelings to a supervisor without fear of reprisal.

[MCGYVER]

Actually...... the discussion is about whatever ANYONE wants to discuss. Last time I checked there weren't cyber cops on here with the authority to tell people what to think or what to discuss. Be that as it may, once someone does bring up a subject, for another person to TELL them what they should or should not be talking about is incredibly condescending and the act of a cyber bully. I like to think that ALL peoples opinions are valuable and should be heard but I'm crazy weird like that. :) For the most part, women in the military are NOT a force multiplier but a training distractor. Luckily there are no females in my MOS and aren't likely to ever be. They could not physically hack it. Just my humble opinion.

[JodieCoyotie]

Actually...... the discussion is about whatever ANYONE wants to discuss. Last time I checked there weren't cyber cops on here with the authority to tell people what to think or what to discuss. Be that as it may, once someone does bring up a subject, for another person to TELL them what they should or should not be talking about is incredibly condescending and the act of a cyber bully. I like to think that ALL peoples opinions are valuable and should be heard but I'm crazy weird like that. :) For the most part, women in the military are NOT a force multiplier but a training distractor. Luckily there are no females in my MOS and aren't likely to ever be. They could not physically hack it. Just my humble opinion.

There's a reason why "threads" have 'topics." It's designed to keep the conversation "on track" and prevent others from having to wade through posts that aren't germane to the conversation. Sorry if I hurt your delicate little feelings by being a big, bad "cyber bully." And no, not all opinions are valuable. For example, your assertion that women are a "training distractor" is nothing more than misogyny. It's a shame that you can't focus on your job or mission if a woman is around. Sounds like a personal problem to me. Perhaps you could seek medical advice to overcome your shortcomings -- or maybe just buy a really big pick-up truck. Or get a pitbull. Whatever makes you feel bigger, er, better about yourself.

[MCGYVER]

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that YOU were the one that decided what is or is not "off topic". Now I'm squared away. I'm a bit confused as to what you mean by "shortcomings"? I'm quite fine, thanks. I never said that "I" could not focus, I was speaking in general. The truth hurts sometimes and it sounds like someone may need some midol or vagisil. Have a nice day.

[Ghost1s]

Everyone is so quick to judge. I am a female Soldier, active duty for almost 6 years. I am a NCO and I will be the first to admit there are some females in the Army who give the rest of us a bad name. But don't assume all females who get pregnant before a deployment or during are trying to get out of the deployment. There are a alot of married couples deployed together. And, gasp, I know this is hard to believe or admit, but military women do get raped and sexually assaulted while deployed with people they are supposed to be able to trust. And yes you can know the ones trying to get out of deployment but it would be hard to prove unless she admitted to it therefore, hard to punish.
I'm really just tired of (mostly males) who just assume all Army females are easy and trying to avoid deployment. Considering the fact that FOBs/COBs in Iraq are treated just like garrison bases, what do people expect to happen? For the people who are on the base all the time and your chain of command nitpicks on PT belts or things like that, then what do you think will happen? Is it right? No. But don't assume it's the females' fault. We do get sexually assaulted, harrassed and raped in Iraq and Afghanistan by our fellow male Soldiers. But yet we still serve and many times, women do not report for the simple fact she won't be believed. Let's just not be quick to judge...

I think rape and assault is a separate issue.

You've been in for 6 I've been in since 1990 and have served in three components (USMC, USA, ARNG), no I don't think that Female Soldiers are that easy, but some 3,000 Soldiers were separated from the Army last year due to pregnancies. That's just the Army. It is almost common knowledge that if you don't want to deploy or be stationed overseas......get pregnant. That's the quick deferment. And that is a problem.

I celebrated when the news of this policy first came out, I was sitting at the kitchen table and my wife must have thought I won the lotto.

Not only would the female Soldier be punished but also the male Soldier! HERE! HERE!

WOO HOO! ITS ABOUT TIME.

But I knew when I heard the news it wasn't going to fly. I knew it would be perceived as an attack on motherhood, or single parenting, or 'FREEDOM'. We can "what if they were raped" and "I know a Soldier who [insert random get-out-duty-offense] until we are all blue in the face, but the fact remains on THIS issue; this is something that removes a Soldier from the fight/duty. And it is something that a Soldier does KNOWINGLY, WITTINGLY, and of their own free will. Like knowing you have to stand duty, and deciding....."Well I'm just going to sleep in"

That's what I think of this. And given the state of the Army, it should come as no surprise.

[Ghost1s]

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that YOU were the one that decided what is or is not "off topic". Now I'm squared away. I'm a bit confused as to what you mean by "shortcomings"? I'm quite fine, thanks. I never said that "I" could not focus, I was speaking in general. The truth hurts sometimes and it sounds like someone may need some midol or vagisil. Have a nice day.

Hey why do people end negative argument with "Have a nice day" When you aren't really wishing the person a nice day.

I always wanted to ask that question. ooh ooh ooh and why when to people walk past each other, make eye contact, and they both do this sorta-not-really smile, lip pressing thing.

Man.....I need answers.

You two kids arguing is cracking me up!

carry on.

[JodieCoyotie]

. ... it sounds like someone may need some midol or vagisil. Have a nice day.

LOL!! Touche'! :D You know, Midol is great for a hangover -- not that I have one, mind you, but yeah, it works.

[JodieCoyotie]

Hey why do people end negative argument with "Have a nice day" When you aren't really wishing the person a nice day.

I always wanted to ask that question. ooh ooh ooh and why when to people walk past each other, make eye contact, and they both do this sorta-not-really smile, lip pressing thing.

Man.....I need answers.

You two kids arguing is cracking me up!

carry on.

Or what about when you are trying to walk by someone and they move to the left and you move the same way and you dance back and forth for a few seconds -- oh, wait, that's not on topic either. I guess I should take my own advice -- and my Midol. LOL!:tongue:

[MCGYVER]

I try not to take the stuff typed in here personally and am usually (99% of the time) successful at doing so. I have a bad case of passive aggression though and it shows in my font. I don't take anything too seriously and it's VERY hard to get me riled as I know that stress is (for the most part) self imposed and a choice.

Sometimes when I tell someone to "have a nice day" I truly mean it (even though most would not believe it based on prior verbal jousting). I don't believe you have to necessarily dislike someone that you don't agree with.

If I don't like someone I will either tell them or (if they outrank me) will simply avoid them like the plague. It works for me but makes me a bit unpopular with the brown nosing crowd which is actually a bonus as I'm convinced that those people have no spines nor character. Hell, I won't even shake someones hand in a formal environment if I truly don't like them regardless what rank they are.

In closing I would like to qualify an earlier statement about females being a training distractor. It was a statement made "in general". In specific I have worked around some females who were very squared away and competent at their jobs. They were the exception, not the rule. I guess I'm just very "old school" in this respect but it's merely my perception/opinion and has absolutely no effect on anyone but me.

If you don't like my opinion(s) it is okay. It's alright to disagree and have your own opinions about things. That's just one of the things that makes our Country great. btw, I'm not a woman hater, I love and respect women to the fullest. I simply think that there are certain areas of the military where they cause more harm than good and putting them in those situations to "make a statement" or in the interest of "equality" doesn't pass the Cost-Benefit analysis or the smell test (a.k.a. common sense test). Just my opinion.

[JodieCoyotie]

I try not to take the stuff typed in here personally and am usually (99% of the time) successful at doing so. I have a bad case of passive aggression though and it shows in my font. I don't take anything too seriously and it's VERY hard to get me riled as I know that stress is (for the most part) self imposed and a choice.

Sometimes when I tell someone to "have a nice day" I truly mean it (even though most would not believe it based on prior verbal jousting). I don't believe you have to necessarily dislike someone that you don't agree with.

If I don't like someone I will either tell them or (if they outrank me) will simply avoid them like the plague. It works for me but makes me a bit unpopular with the brown nosing crowd which is actually a bonus as I'm convinced that those people have no spines nor character. Hell, I won't even shake someones hand in a formal environment if I truly don't like them regardless what rank they are.

In closing I would like to qualify an earlier statement about females being a training distractor. It was a statement made "in general". In specific I have worked around some females who were very squared away and competent at their jobs. They were the exception, not the rule. I guess I'm just very "old school" in this respect but it's merely my perception/opinion and has absolutely no effect on anyone but me.

If you don't like my opinion(s) it is okay. It's alright to disagree and have your own opinions about things. That's just one of the things that makes our Country great. btw, I'm not a woman hater, I love and respect women to the fullest. I simply think that there are certain areas of the military where they cause more harm than good and putting them in those situations to "make a statement" or in the interest of "equality" doesn't pass the Cost-Benefit analysis or the smell test (a.k.a. common sense test). Just my opinion.

Honey, is that you? You remind me of my husband. He's no politician (i.e. brown noser) either. And, to be honest, his opinions on women in the service are very similar to yours. Regretfully, I have to agree with you that women can be a training distractor now that you've quantified your remarks. I still don't think that men and women should train together in BCT (how's that for "old school?")
I love the "passive aggression in my font line," what a hoot!

[garhkal]

I'd bet a dollar to a donut that there are way more "unsubstantiated" cases of rape (a.k.a. false accusations) than actual rapes. This in no way is meant to trivialize or minimize the occurence of the acts. The other point is that the likelihood of that one rape turning into a pregnancy is so incredibly remote that using it to justify ANY point at all makes one look amazingly naive and ignorant. If you are a Soldier and you either get pregnant or impregnate a female Soldier before or during a deployment you need to be given a Field Grade Article 15 and a General Letter of Reprimand. Just my opinion.

While i do agree that there are a lot of false claims (had one in A school. Everyone knew the chick was banging the instructor, but when it was finally OFFICIALLY found out she cried rape to avoid any reprocussions against her), but to say that there are way more unsubstantiated ones is doing imo a disservices to the ones which DO happen.

[CommunityEditor]

Editorial: Pregnancy vs. readiness

Army Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo, commander of Multi-National Division-North in Iraq, learned a thing or two about messaging after threatening courts-martial for soldiers, male or female, involved in war-zone pregnancies.

The National Organization for Women criticized the move, as did female Democratic senators and others who said it could deter women from service and pregnant troops from getting medical care.

Moreover, some said, the threatened punishment was far harsher than necessary to meet Cucolo’s aim: to ensure all deployed troops remain available to serve their full war tours.

Cucolo quickly backed off after receiving, as he put it, “great guidance and great professional development” from his boss, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey.

But the issue at hand reflects a valid underlying concern of war commanders — readiness.

Keeping every service member in the fight is critical to unit cohesion and effectiveness, and it is an increasing challenge after eight years of war.

More than 3.3 million troops have served war tours since 2001. About 800,000 of those have served more than one tour — and some have served four or five. The pace has taken a toll both on troops and loved ones back home.

Army leaders are actively rooting out soldiers who have not served war tours, pulling them from assignments that have kept them out of harm’s way. The Air Force has a campaign to strip the undeserving of deployment exemptions, whether for training assignments or medical waivers.

To help support the Army and Marine Corps, the Navy has thousands of sailors serving in the war zones as individual augmentees.

Whatever one’s opinion of Cucolo’s order, motivating troops to keep themselves ready and fit for duty is a critical obligation of all commanders.

[MCGYVER]

I remember reading in a history book about ancient times when the military commanders gave orders, made policies and actually ran the military as they saw fit. Must have been a grand time.

[garhkal]

No shit, and no worry's about Politicians butting in.