Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Army says no punishment planned for soldier-mother
AP | 11/14/03 | COLLEEN SLEVIN

Posted on 11/14/2003 3:32:31 PM PST by kattracks

DENVER (AP) -- A soldier who refused to return to Iraq so she could care for her children will not be punished, the Army said Friday.

Spc. Simone Holcomb, 30, had feared she would face criminal charges and a discharge that would cause her to lose the benefits she earned as a member of the Colorado National Guard.

But Army spokesman Maj. Steve Stover said the medic will face no administrative or criminal penalties.

For compassionate reasons, she will be allowed to remain at Colorado's Fort Carson and will be given time to resolve the custody dispute that led to her refusal to return to Iraq, the Army said.

Holcomb's attorney, Giorgio Ra'Shadd called the announcement good news but said he had not received confirmation in writing. "Every soldier knows that unless it's in writing, it's not true," he said.

Holcomb and her husband, Sgt. 1st Class Vaughn Holcomb, 40, were both sent to Iraq in February and a grandmother cared for the children. The couple returned on leave in September to settle a dispute with Vaughn Holcomb's ex-wife, who was seeking custody of two of the children.

A judge said one of the Holcombs had to stay home with the children to resolve the dispute. Simone Holcomb said she decided to stay because she is a reservist, while her husband has 20 years of active-duty service and is near retirement. She also said her husband, a tank platoon sergeant, would be more sorely missed by his unit.



TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: militarymothers; usarmy

1 posted on 11/14/2003 3:32:31 PM PST by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Meanwhile, Lt Col West gets reamed.
2 posted on 11/14/2003 3:36:40 PM PST by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Uurah glad to hear it.

Now what about Col. West? Anyone heard the skinny on his situation?
3 posted on 11/14/2003 3:38:04 PM PST by Leatherneck_MT (If you continue to do what you've always done, you will continue to get what you've always got)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Thank you for saying it.
4 posted on 11/14/2003 3:39:01 PM PST by SICSEMPERTYRANNUS (Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Not even admin punishment. No loss of rank/pay. Not bad.
5 posted on 11/14/2003 3:43:35 PM PST by Old Sarge (Serving You... on Operation Noble Eagle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
What kind of judge would put someone in that position? Most parents, even both, can stand leaving...if they are assured their kids are in good hands in their absence.
6 posted on 11/14/2003 3:48:19 PM PST by Conservababe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Conservababe
What kind of judge would put someone in that position?

A family court judge, that's who. Hey, this is good news, considering what the judge could have decreed. "Each child shall be cut in half, with one half to go to the biological mother, and one half to go to the biological father. Court is in recess!" (Gavel comes down.)

7 posted on 11/14/2003 3:54:58 PM PST by mrustow (no tag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
This is complete crap, but it's typical of the double standard. Women like this see the army as an alternative to welfare. She has kids she can't take care of, and it becomes the unit's problem.

Wonder what the troops picking up the slack for this faithless GI Jane are thinking?

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F
8 posted on 11/14/2003 3:58:24 PM PST by Criminal Number 18F (The essence of life, I concluded, did not lie in the material. -- Charles A. Lindbergh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Parent step-parent power struggles can be easily nixed by having the phrase "The children shall reside in the custody of the mother(or father) when the father is away from home overnight" written into to the custody arrangement.



9 posted on 11/14/2003 4:05:17 PM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F
Hey, women and men are the same.... doncha know nothing? She wants to be at the tip of the spear.... leading the way. I mean women and the men are the same...... no difference.

Most men get to QUIT and go home to take care of the kids when they FEEL like it. Well Hillary, NOW, hairy armpit women, and Pat Schroeder all say that women should be front line troops. You know that person you can count on in combat when the sh$t hits the fan. The type of person that would die trying to cover your back..... or die trying to save your ass.

Gee I heard about a bunch of Force Recon and Navy Seals opting out of some spec ops to go to their kid's soccer games. I mean that happens all the time....... I say let the Army be the "welfare" department of the Pentagon... just leave the Marines out of the PC quagmire.

10 posted on 11/14/2003 4:39:45 PM PST by Dick Vomer (liberals suck....but it depends on what your definition of the word "suck" is .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F
This is complete crap, but it's typical of the double standard. Women like this see the army as an alternative to welfare. She has kids she can't take care of, and it becomes the unit's problem.

Given that the kids aren't biologically hers, and the judge gave her and her husband only a single option, I think that's a bit harsh a parenting judgement. I think women in the military do as you describe quite often, but I don't think it's entirely applicable here.

11 posted on 11/14/2003 4:40:14 PM PST by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lepton
This is a good example of the military having an objective that it can't justify. Putting women in a military combat unit is ridiculous. But their policy leaves a woman in a situation such as this vulnerable and they make an exception. The policy is wrong but nothing is done to eliminate the policy.
12 posted on 11/14/2003 4:53:17 PM PST by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
That's not right. She signed up, someone had to go in her place. Either she is a soldier or she isn't. Children are not issued.
13 posted on 11/14/2003 4:53:27 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I'm a little confused here. Why would the father's ex wife be a threat to the current wifes children?
14 posted on 11/14/2003 5:05:26 PM PST by Arpege92
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Court martial the judge!
15 posted on 11/14/2003 5:06:19 PM PST by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F
The military sent my husband home from overseas when I had a miscarriage. They gave us a reassignment near family when our son was diagnosed with autism.

Men, too, benefit from humanitarian, family-friendly military policies. I think a huge part of the problem really is that we have a military that is top heavy with highly-trained, older people--who have families. They need to retain these people, so they need to accomodate the fact that they've made families. You can't run an army on 19 year old single guys anymore.

I don't think you're wrong in principle, but the reality is something else again. :sigh:
16 posted on 11/14/2003 6:15:05 PM PST by ChemistCat (Hang in there, Terri. Absorb. Take in. Live. Heal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
As much as I hate to say this, when I was a Marine we were constantly reminded of this mysterious thing could the MISSION which took precedence over all things. If we weren't willing to make the sacrifices for the MISSION then we should get the HELL out and not come back. If family comes first to you, your in the wrong field.Simple.
17 posted on 11/14/2003 6:32:50 PM PST by BBell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BBell
As much as I hate to say this, when I was a Marine we were constantly reminded of this mysterious thing could the MISSION which took precedence over all things. If we weren't willing to make the sacrifices for the MISSION then we should get the HELL out and not come back. If family comes first to you, your in the wrong field.Simple.

BRAVO!

18 posted on 11/14/2003 7:13:26 PM PST by SAMWolf (Great leaders resolve conflicts with words. Words like Carpet Bombing, Cruise Missle & Daisy Cutter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Her attorney has an interesting last name.

Leni

19 posted on 11/14/2003 7:17:21 PM PST by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson