Posted on 11/16/2009 6:26:41 PM PST by mom aka the evil dictator
SAVANNAH, Ga. – An Army cook and single mom may face criminal charges after she skipped her deployment flight to Afghanistan because, she said, no one was available to care for her infant son while she was overseas.
Spc. Alexis Hutchinson, 21, claims she had no choice but to refuse deployment orders because the only family she had to care for her 10-month-old son — her mother — was overwhelmed by the task, already caring for three other relatives with health problems.
Her civilian attorney, Rai Sue Sussman, said Monday that one of Hutchinson's superiors told her she would have to deploy anyway and place the child in foster care.
"For her it was like, 'I couldn't abandon my child,'" Sussman said. "She was really afraid of what would happen, that if she showed up they would send her to Afghanistan anyway and put her son with child protective services."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
“I once stood as guardian for a fellow airman’s child while she was TDY for training for six weeks. Since the timeframe was “so short”, we agreed that it made more sence for my family to cover hers, instead of the military mom relinquishing guardianship for her dependent child, and returning the child stateside”
Thanks for your service, and for being the wingman we often hear about but too seldom see. Your Air Force is proud of you.
Colonel, USAFR
There is nothing so important about a COOK in the army that would require her to leave her child to a child welfare (government) agency so she can deploy. However, she should not be allowed to remain in the army, either.
“Maybe I am not understanding the instant situation then? Isn’t simple ID in order here?”
If you mean involuntary discharge, the command chain can certainly offer that (for parenthood); however, sounds like she screwed the pooch by missing a movement instead of requesting discharge. Wanting her cake and eat it, too, she (I’m hypothesizing, but we JAGs get to do that) tried to avoid duty and still stay in the service. Selfish and stupid - I’d say she got some bad advice from the barracks lawyers (the same ones who say a general discharge or UOTHC is automatically upgraded to honorable after six months).
Colonel, USAFR
Perhaps she’ll find it easier to care for the baby from the opposite side of the cell bars?
First of all, what about the person who has to take her place in the rotation? Wouldn’t she be the “cold-blooded sumbish” for being selfish and screwing someone else?
Second, I dismiss the notion that a “superior told her she would have to place the child in foster care.” No reasonable supervisor would make such a statement. Until that comment is attributed to someone in her chain of command in a position to enforce such and action and is on record stating such, I think this is an emotional lie perpetrated by her “lawyer”.
Agree on the dismissal from the Army.
SZ
When she had the child, she was required to put together a child care plan in case she was deployed. How does her failure to make an effective and workable plan mean that the Army and/or civilian government has failed her?
She swore an oath, then reneged on it.
When she had the child she was given a choice - put together a plan for the child’s care in case of deployment or leave the service.
She chose to stay.
Now you believe this should be a free “out”.
I strongly disagree. She made a choice, now she needs to live up to her obligation or suffer the consequences. To do otherwise endorses anarchy in the ranks.
Why should a female soldier who gets pregnant and has the baby be given a reward by allowing them to skip deployments?
Are you willing to do the same for ALL soldiers (male or female)?
When she had the child, she could have left the service. To stay in she had to enact a child care plan for just such a situation. She stayed in, with an inadequate child care plan.
This problem is HER problem - not the army’s, and most certainly not the fault of the other soldiers around her. You know - the ones that have to take her place because she cannot fulfill her duties.
I agree with you on this one.....she is a single mother, with no family to take care of the baby.........general discharge, and hit the road....
I wholeheartedy agree!
Wrong! This 'poor lady' failed her country and the Army by getting pregnant out of wedlock while on active duty. I hope she gets a dishonorable discharge and the boot.
Because that's where the wars we're fighting are! Another perfect example of why women should never have been allowed in the military.
The article I read says she and the father are no longer in a relationship.
Maybe, if single and joining the military, and IUD should be part of the plan.
Sorry, she could be the most caring mother in the world with the best intentions but as a whole, I have a real hard time with people just having babies like they are some sort of fashion accessory. The out of wedlock no dad thing makes me insane!!!
Sorry, darlin.’ You took the Queen’s shilling, and you must do the Queen’s bidding.
That said, the worse she really faces is probably a General Discharge, and maybe a fine.
Same reason we have radical muslims and illegals in the military. We are an empire. We have to fill those slots and we have to be PC.
Yes, she would - and I am NOT defending this “lady”. I am concerned primarily about the welfare of the child. NO WAY should the kid be forced to bear the consequences of Mom’s pi$$-poor decisions. Mom should be tossed out of the army forthwith; forfeiting ALL benefits and any right to reenlist.
I don’t so easily dismiss the allegation of the superior making her chose between deployment and her child, however. Why? Because it happened to me.
I was in the 1st ID at Ft. Riley in the early 1980’s. We were to deploy to Germany for REFORGER in 10 days or so, when my off-post housing burned down, leaving me and my family (including three young kids) homeless.
I was NOT asking not to be deployed; in fact, I hadn’t even though of that issue at all when I informed my platoon leader of the fire. His immediate response was “You are STILL going deploy next week!” Huh???
After thinking that over, I requested an audience with my Co. Commander, to see what could be done. REFORGER was an exercise, after all, NOT a combat rotation. His reaction was the same - prepare to deploy in (now) 8 days. My family was STILL wearing what had been on their backs when the fire broke out, and the Red Cross had just issued vouchers so we could get new ones! It took a visit to the post IG to get my deployment orders canceled, and the 1st ID CG personally ordered my transfer to another unit because of my chain-of-command’s obvious lack of concern with the well-being of my dependents.
The US Army MUST have as their first concern the ability of their soldiers to deploy and fight. At the same time, studies have shown the the combat effectiveness of soldiers that are worried about the welfare of their dependents back home cuts their efficiency by greater than 50%. Why do you think the military goes to such efforts to see that dependents are provided for?
IF this Mom is telling the truth, she had no choice. The military ALSO has no choice: she must be discharged immediately.
That is the absolute truth, not baloney at all!
The mother's a tramp who got pregnant out of wedlock. The kid's going to bearing the consequences of her piss poor decisions all his life.
If you instituted a policy that excused single parents from deploying, it would result in chaos. A commander wouldn't know who could deploy and who couldn't until they got deployment orders.
It's not fair to the individuals that have followed the rules because they would have to take up the slack for those who won't go. Some soldier would have to pull additional tours because of this soldier.
Single parents are required to certify that they have a family care plan in the event of a deployment. This soldier signed a statement saying that she had someone who would be responsible for her children when she deployed. If they have a family situation that doesn't allow them to perform full duty they shouldn't be in the military.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.