General bans pregnancy

**James48843** · 12-20-2009, 07:14 PM

U.S. personnel in Iraq could face court-martial for getting pregnant

By Teri Weaver, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Saturday, December 19, 2009

The Army general commanding U.S. forces in northern Iraq has added pregnancy to the list of prohibitions for personnel under his command.

The policy, which went into effect Nov. 4, makes it possible to face punishment, including a court-martial and jail time, for becoming pregnant or impregnating a servicemember, according to the wording of the policy and confirmations from Army officials.

The rule governs all those serving under Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo III, who commands Multi-National Division-North, including Balad, Kirkuk, Tikrit, Mosul and Samarra. According to the order, it is “applicable to all United States military personnel, and to all civilians, serving with, employed by, or accompanying” the military in northern Iraq, with few exceptions.

Someone would violate the policy by “becoming pregnant, or impregnating a soldier, while assigned to the Task Force Marne (Area of Operations), resulting in the redeployment of the pregnant soldier,” according to the order.

The policy also applies to married couples who are at war together, Army spokesman Maj. Lee Peters told Stars and Stripes in an e-mail message. Both the husband and wife could face punishment under the policy.

Peters said that, despite the broad wording of the policy, it is meant to apply only when pregnancies affect a unit’s ability to perform its mission.

“When a soldier becomes pregnant or causes a soldier to become pregnant through consensual activity,” Peters said, “the redeployment of the pregnant soldier creates a void in the unit and has a negative impact on the unit’s ability to accomplish its mission. Another soldier must assume the pregnant soldier’s responsibilities.”

No one has been punished or accused under the new policy, according to Col. David S. Thompson, the inspector general for all soldiers in Iraq.

Military staff judge advocates for both MND-North and Multi-National Force Iraq have reviewed and approved the policy, according to Peters and Thompson.

“It is a lawful order,” Thompson said Friday during a phone interview.

Thompson, who has served 29 of the past 39 months in Iraq as an inspector general, said it’s the first time he can recall pregnancy being prohibited.

Armywide policy requires that a pregnant soldier in Iraq be removed from the war theater within 14 days.

Eugene Fidell, who teaches military law at Yale Law School and is president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said he understands the motivations of the order.

“You have to assume it’s in response to a number of incidents that have caused female GIs to be sidelined at a time when they can’t be spared,” he said.

But he said the prohibition is fraught with “a mare’s nest of legal, ethical and policy issues” that highlight the discord between personal autonomy and military needs.
“Here you really have issues that go to the core of personal integrity: reproductive rights,” he said.

There are also issues of enforcement, Fidell said. The woman is immediately suspect once the pregnancy comes to light, but unless she identifies her partner, the male could go unpunished despite bearing the same culpability under the order.

Stars and Stripes reporter Megan McCloskey contributed to this report.
Source:
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?s...&article=66764

**nnuut** · 12-20-2009, 08:28 PM

I remember when women in the Military were DISCHARGED if they got Pregnant.

**alevin** · 12-20-2009, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by nnuut

I remember when women in the Military were DISCHARGED if they got Pregnant.

would that have been when we were not in a war and "stop-loss" situation, nnuut? My sister asked and got a discharge from the Navy when she was pregnant, she worked practically up to delivery date, night shift on another island, Navy husband worked day shift-early 80s.

She first requested a change in duty hours so there would be some overlap at home for her and her husband facing early childcare situation. Navy refused to change duty hours, so she and her husband decided to live on one enlisted paycheck. They managed to get by but it wasn't ideal way to cope and raise family.

**nnuut** · 12-20-2009, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by alevin

would that have been when we were not in a war and "stop-loss" situation, nnuut? My sister asked and got a discharge from the Navy when she was pregnant, she worked practically up to delivery date, night shift on another island, Navy husband worked day shift-early 80s.

She first requested a change in duty hours so there would be some overlap at home for her and her husband facing early childcare situation. Navy refused to change duty hours, so she and her husband decided to live on one enlisted paycheck. They managed to get by but it wasn't ideal way to cope and raise family.

That was back in the mid 60s Mam!

**Show-me** · 12-20-2009, 10:31 PM

That rumor went around when I was in the Gulf, my CO refused to take any women. Guess he did not want to deal with it.

**James48843** · 12-21-2009, 06:47 AM

The question needs to be asked- exactly where are you going to imprison all these women once they have been courts-martialed, and found guilty of violating orders.

And further, what do you think an order like this will do to the abortion rate? Does anyone not think that someone caught up in a situation here will rush to get a short leave to leave the country, and go "get it take care of" before anyone finds out?

Bad policy, if you ask me.

While pregnant soldiers leaving adversely impacts the ability to do the mission, you have to understand the moral consequences of such an order- not only among the soldiers, but how that is perceived by the rest of the world as well. Didn't we just say that women's rights were part of what our soldiers in Afghanistan were trying to fix?

And this is only limited to soldiers under this one general's command.

Bad policy here. Needs to be revisited by higher authorities.

**phil** · 12-21-2009, 07:46 AM

Yes. It needs to be examined. What is it that we're saying here by this policy? Either, we take a principled stance on this, or we make changes. One piece of advice is to simply require females to have an injection that would make them infertile for 3-4 months at a time, conversely there may be a chemical equivalent for the males.

At a million dollars a soldier for one year......that's not too much added on.

**Show-me** · 12-21-2009, 11:23 AM

Yes, what do you do when the pregnancy rate skyrockets prior to a combat deployment.

I have seen it first hand, more gaming the system. Bad conduct discharge works for me.

**alevin** · 12-21-2009, 12:44 PM

It still takes 2. And if it's not consensual, then this policy puts the burden of proof on the victim. How's that go again in our justice system? So now the victim has to prove they aren't guilty and that it wasn't consensual? Talk about piling injury upon injury on the victim! Granted that might be the minority case, but still.....it's bad policy all around.

**Birchtree** · 12-21-2009, 03:07 PM

My daughter was an Army company commander all of last year and yes some females end up pregnant prior to a deployment - that means someone else has to fill that slot. It does happen so a policy was warranted.

**Steadygain** · 12-21-2009, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by James48843

U.S. personnel in Iraq could face court-martial for getting pregnant

The Army general commanding U.S. forces in northern Iraq has added pregnancy to the list of prohibitions for personnel under his command.

The policy, which went into effect Nov. 4, makes it possible to face punishment, including a court-martial and jail time, for becoming pregnant or impregnating a servicemember, according to the wording of the policy and confirmations from Army officials.

When stationed where the potential for frost bite was a likely possibility we were trained on ways to 'avoid it' and told at the end of our training that anyone who got frost bitten would be charged for destruction of government property. We knew getting hurt would not result in sympathy and anything that took from our ability to remain 100% focused was WRONG.

I personally felt that was the most appropriate action and by far the best message to give across the board. We were soldiers before we were anything else and it was 'our responsibility' to remain in top fighting condition.

Women have more than proven their status as 'worthy soldiers' in every way I could imagine. They are 'combat soldiers' actively engaged in an ongoing war if they are in Iraq/Afgan and I believe a policy like this is an appropriate Military Decision. This kind of policy would all the more hopefully keep the Men from 'using them'.

I have no problem with Women in the Service -- but I do have a problem with any of them trying to become pregnant while serving actively as a soldier in an ongoing war. To me there is simply no place for this - and this would be far more appreciated if they were more collectively involved with Fighting Operations.

It may be the most effective way of implementing this policy is by reinforcing the 'equality' women have in every operation. When I know my life depends on her and her life depends on me and she is doing everything I am doing then she is fully a soldier and should be regarded as such.

Anyway -- I believe if female soldiers were increasingly allowed to function as male soldiers - this would be less and less of a problem.

Maybe this is more a reflection of how poorly the Military overall has done with the female soldiers in general.

**Steadygain** · 12-21-2009, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by alevin

My sister asked and got a discharge from the Navy when she was pregnant, she worked practically up to delivery date, night shift on another island, Navy husband worked day shift-early 80s.

She first requested a change in duty hours so there would be some overlap at home for her and her husband facing early childcare situation. Navy refused to change duty hours, so she and her husband decided to live on one enlisted paycheck. They managed to get by but it wasn't ideal way to cope and raise family.

Alevie,
I wholly believe any woman in the Service who is currently pregant should be stationed outside of a war zone. The life of the 'unborn child' should take priority over everything else.

Your sister proved her committment to the highest possible degree and should have been recognized accordingly. I believe anyone who lives up to the calling should be treated with the highest regard. The Service 'can' fail the 'soldier' and if that happens it's wrong. They expect the BEST from us and we should always expect the BEST from them.

It has to go both ways -- the more the Government does its part and proves its committment the better off everyone is.