Soldier Chooses Family Over Army (misleading headline)

The Denver Post ^ | 11/2/03 | Eileen Kelley

[Fizzie]

Article Published: Sunday, November 02, 2003 Soldier chooses family over Army Woman faces punishment for refusing Iraq duty to avoid losing custody of children

By Eileen Kelley, Special to The Denver Post

FORT CARSON - A soldier forced to choose between her family and her career chose her children over the Army and now faces the punishment that being AWOL is sure to bring.

Simone Holcomb and her husband of three years, Vaughn Holcomb, also a soldier, were both sent to Iraq early this year. The children's paternal grandmother came from Ohio to look after them.

But while the Holcombs were absent, Vaughn's ex-wife filed for child support and was threatening to seek full custody of two of the Holcombs' seven children, who range in age from 4 to 12.

The ex-spouse, who is the biological mother of the two children, was granted temporary joint custody with the grandmother.

The legal action forced the Holcombs to return here on emergency leave in September. A judge in a custodial hearing mandated that one of the parents must stay home to look after the children in order for Vaughn to retain full custody of the two.

Vaughn, 40, went back to Iraq. Simone, 30, stayed - without the Army's permission. Now she faces dismissal and even jail time.

"I was told by the Army ... to get on a plane," Simone said Saturday night. "I even told them it was unlawful and they said 'I don't care, get on a plane.' It's against the law for me to abandon my children. I can no sooner walk out on my children than I can rob a bank just because the Army told me to."

Simone, a medic in the Colorado National Guard, said the word "nightmare" doesn't even begin to describe the war being waged against her family now that she's stateside. She said she's taken the matter to Sen. Wayne Allard's office.

Army officials have already stopped Simone's active-duty pay and are expected to begin the process of dismissing her from the military, according to an Army source.

A spokeswoman for the Colorado National Guard said that because Simone was activated for duty, the matter is no longer in their hands.

"We are trying to be proactive on this," said Senior Airman Carolyn Frankovich. "We're not the deciding factor in this. We have no control over this.

"We'd be happy to help, but we haven't heard from her."

While Simone and Vaughn, a sergeant with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment based at Fort Carson, were half a world away, they got letters from their children saying, "Don't die."

From nightmares that Vaughn and Simone would die to reoccurring problems with bedwetting, the strain was heavy.

"My family is falling apart," 11- year-old Forest Gonzalez, one of Simone's five children, told his teacher recently, according to his grandmother, Sue Bearer.

Bearer, Vaughn's mother, is angered by the war and its lingering effects on her family.

"These guys are over there fighting and they are losing everything they fought and worked so hard to get before going over," Bearer told The Denver Post on Saturday.

Simone, who has been in the military for six years, will find out in the coming days what action the Army will take against her.

She tried to get an emergency release from active duty or a reassignment to Fort Carson, but she was denied. She said she told them that her husband was due to retire from the Army soon, to no avail.

In the meantime, Army officials have made it clear she's breaking the law by being absent without leave - despite the Colorado judge's order.

"She has sent them (commanding officers) e-mails every day from Day 1," Bearer said. "They say she is AWOL. They won't listen to what is going on."

Bearer packed up from Ohio and headed to Colorado nine months ago, as Simone, a citizen soldier, was told to report to Fort McCoy in Wisconsin to train for the war. Vaughn, a tank platoon sergeant, shipped out in the spring with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

When her son left, Bearer became the mother, father and referee of the large brood. She thought it would last only a few months.

Summer came and went without the return of the GI parents. Then came news that they would be in Iraq a full year. Then came the September court hearing.

The Holcombs needed to be back in Iraq in a matter of days when Simone said she would stay behind for the sake of the family, Bearer said.

Home now in Ohio, Bearer said she doesn't know what will become of the family.

"It's not like she is running away," Bearer said. "I cannot believe the military is doing this. Actually, I can."

[Fizzie]

Talk about the Holcomb's being between a rock and a hard place! The children seem to be well cared for by loving grandparents, and the (unnamed)ex-wife took the ultimate in cheap-shot opportunism. I have less kind words for the (unnamed)judge with no common sense.

[Ogmios]

The woman needs some help here.

I don't see how she had any other choice, considering the Ex's opprotunism. The B$%^# should get slapped hard for doing this to 2 soldiers who are serving their country.

This judge needs his gavel shoved where the sun don't shine.

[Gunrunner2]

IIf both parents are in the military then there is a legal obligation for them to make arrangements for custody when they are both deployed.

The fact that some know-nothing judge imposed custody requirements beyond what is lawfully required for those serving in federal service is nonsense, but this is what we get when we allow BOTH parents to serve.

The fault lies not with the military, as they have UCMJ regulations to adhere to, but with the local judge.

The military can't ignore UCMJ.

The parent could have decided to resign rather than merely not show up. If neither parent was in a position to resign, then, not to sound too harsh, but too bad for them. THEY made the decision to place career over family, THEY made the decision to treat life in the military as an average career. It is not, and they should have known that.

Stone the judge and the ex (trying to take advantage of the situation).

And I was wondering, what of the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act. . .what of the civil protections that provides? I'm sure there are some FReepers with military law training that could answer this one.

[GreenLanternCorps]

Wouldn't this be covered under the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act (I think that is the name)? IIRC it protects active duty Military and Naval personnel, on deployment, from certain types of legal action.

Any legal freepers out there who know more?

[GrandMoM]

I thought the services had arbitrators for such problems as this???????

[Ogmios]

They do, that's why I do not understand why this is happening.

She is either not asking the right people, or the military has so much of this going on that they do not have the manpower to cover it all.

Either way, something needs to be done, if our soldiers have to worry about things like this at home, their morale and concentration will be lost. This of course equals casualties.

[Fizzie]

Considering the situation, I think you are being a bit harsh. We agree that they did make arrangements for child care, the judge made a ridiculous ruling, and the ex-wife is shameless. I urge Coloradans to contact their representatives, and all Freepers with representatives on Armed Forces committees to contact those representatives.


For what it's worth, I hear ads for the Army National Guard on the radio daily. A cheery jingle tauting the benefits of part time work for a first rate education. In wartime especially, this is false advertising at its blatant best.

[Gunrunner2]

False advertising it is---Army of One, indeed.

[Tennessee_Bob]

...for a first rate education.

Anyone who believes that needs to take a long look at their ID Card - mine said Department of Defense, not Department of Education. The "I only joined for an education" excuse is old, tired, and stupid.

[meisterbrewer]

Wouldn't this be covered under the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act (I think that is the name)? IIRC it protects active duty Military and Naval personnel, on deployment, from certain types of legal action.

As luck would have it, I am a Navy JAG Officer and am standing watch at Navy Justice School in Newport as I type this. So, I am pretty sure I can address this issue. The SSCRA (Soldier's and Sailor's Civil Relief Act), or soon to become the SCRA (Servicemen's CRA), does address this. With both members absent, the ex-wife should not be allowed to recieve custody. She can file if she wants, but the court is REQUIRED to stay any action until the members return. The judge was way out of line - if, of course, the reporter here is giving the full story. I suspect the mother has fibbed a bit about the judge's order.>p>

Something really stink's here, since the ex-wife is supposedly seeking custody of her own two children. Which means that the mother has NO custodial rights to them in the first place, and her staying in the US would accomplish nothing. I think someone is lying out their ____.

[Fizzie]

Ping

[Gunrunner2]

I think you need to re-read the original post.

BOTH parents are married, and THEY have custody. . .not the ex.

Arrangments were made for the grandmother to have custody if they were both deployed.

Bonehead judge made boneheaded ruling.

Have a nice day.

[Gunrunner2]

See Post 10 for more complete (and legal) reply.

[speekinout]

The judge was way out of line - if, of course, the reporter here is giving the full story.

It sounds like there's a lot more to the story. This couple have been married 3 years, and have 7 children ranging in age from 4-12. Clearly a "blended family".
And the ex-wife didn't even have joint custody of her two kids. Why? Was the reason good enough so that this woman would do anything to keep the kids away from her? Could well be.

Given that, and the SCRA you cite, I have to think this judge was way out of line. Are Colorado judges elected, appointed, or pseudo-elected?

[Newbomb Turk]

If the father had custody on the day of deployment, he gets to decide who will care for his children until he returns.

The ex wife has no rights unless they share custody on the day of his notice of deployment.

No court actions may be taken against a soldier while he is deployed overseas. It's the law. Soldier and Sailors Releif Act.

This judge if the story is correct will soon receive a lesson in this law. And of public opinion I am sure.

[MinuteGal]

I don't even care about the legal niceties. What the H is the Army doing deploying a mother of seven into a war zone? Potential problems for all concerned, as even an idiot would know.

Both the Army and the mother need their collective heads examined.

Leni