Single Mom discharged from the Army...

[domwilson]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_soldier_mom_deployment

[bwells]

Sounds like it turned out well for her.

[RCprince]

She lost ranks and benefits.

[domwilson]

I just don't know. You would think that the army would make a case of "special circumstances" being that she is a single mother trying to serve her country albeit as a cook. But then it is the Military and she shouldn't have joined if she couldn't fulfill her contractual agreements. I think we will be hearing more on this one.

[bwells]

You nailed it, Dom. She could not fulfill her contract and it appears that the army, maybe by mutual agreement, let her out of it. The original contract is null and void as well as the benefits. I would assume this is unusual and publicizing this may be to her detrament as well as the armies as it sets a precedent for others to follow. She is home with her kid and her understanding family and that is what counts.

[domwilson]

But it does cast a negative to the army's PR. The army runs recruitment commercials with the focus on minorities and families. At least in my geographical location. The slogan "We'll make them Army Strong" With the recruits family involved in the decision making process. This makes it look like the family is secondary. I think most will disagree with that. But then again, when you join the military, you give your life to the military.

[bwells]

A negative to the Armies PR? I see this could have been a story about a person that went AWOL, derelliction of duty, disobeying an office as well as breach of contract! I assume heads will roll over this one and not to her advantage. This should have been left alone but to late now. I wonder what my boss would say if I told him I wasn't going to do that job because it interfered with my taking care of my ailing mother but that I want full retirement and benefits with only 75% of my contract fulfilled.

[domwilson]

Employment laws are different for government employees vs. civilian. Granted she does have a military obligation. But we don't know the full content of this story. Whether she was with child prior to her enlistment or not. In the past, the military has made allowances for family and family matters. But it does state that the military has evidence to support that she wasn't going to go regardless of her family situation. Definitely a no-no. It obviously was written to stir controversy. To the general public, family does matter. Public opinion has a way of changing things. You only have to look at how gays are now treated in the military. I don't know the full details of this, so I can't make a valid assessment of the situation. Unfortunately I don't have any books on military law to research it either. But it will be interesting to see how this story progresses, if at all.

[bwells]

She inlisted in 2007, the kid is 13 months old. Not sure what gays have to do with this. I still think she is one lucky chick and should stay quiet or the hammer could come down.

[domwilson]

Didn't see that info. in the article. The reference to gays was in that the public sometimes has a way of influencing Military laws. But as stated earlier. I know very little about this so I really don't have an opinion. Just trying to understand and look at this from both sides. I guess she should have thought things thru a little better? Oh well, it's her fight and not mine. We'll see how this progresses, if at all. I think the article was just trying to stir the pot of controversy. Rattle a few cages and see what pops up. This country has enough problems without the media trying to stir up more trouble.

[RCprince]

The military is not a democracy: it's a dictatorship with in our republic. All militaries are!

[Rumdog]

Family should come first, period. What was her other option? Nothing.

[Steven Vaccaro]

If the baby was conceived after her enrollment, shouldn't she be give the right to watch her baby while on some domestic duty?
Another black mark on Obama's administration.
In case anyone didn't notice on the Obama part i was just kidding!

[domwilson]

This is just something to think about. The importance of serving the military and the importance of a family. I'm on the fence post on this one. But maybe she should have been offered some domestic service? That way she could have fulfilled her military obligation and served her family. But like I said earlier, she gave her life to the military..

[m4a1usr]

Family should come first, period. What was her other option? Nothing.

One option would have had "daddy" show his responsible role as a "parent". That was clearly glossed over in the article. But that might have been because daddy was in jail or out of the picture due to compatibilty between the parents. Still it points to the obvious. Being responsible. Having children should not occur between consenting adults who want to fuel their passion. Children are a responsibilty. The obligation to be met by both conceiving parties.

Now back to the matter of her discharge. In simple language. She is getting off very easy. An adminstrative discharge is a simple matter for her. Its not a dishonorable, so that means she can hold a security clearance. Thats very important if you want a job in law enforcement, with the government or in a technological field should she get a degree in the future and want to work on anything that has a security classification. And there are other fields that require passing a criminal background check as well. Get a dishonorable discharge and your likely to be denied employment.

This story has ended very well for her. I have witnessed personaly and known soldiers to whom the Army was not so kind. Same basic situation but the Army took the hard line. She got very lucky.


John