Posted on 01/25/2006 5:17:39 AM PST by ShadowDancer
Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Military Discharges Hundreds
POSTED: 6:59 am EST January 25, 2006
WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of officers and health care professionals have been discharged in the past 10 years under the Pentagon's policy on gays, a loss that while relatively small in numbers involves troops who are expensive for the military to educate and train.
The 350 or so affected are a tiny fraction of the 1.4 million members of the uniformed services and about 3.5 percent of the more than 10,000 people discharged under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy since its inception in 1994.
But many were military school graduates or service members who went to medical school at the taxpayers' expense - troops not as easily replaced by a nation at war that is struggling to fill its enlistment quotas.
"You don't just go out on the street tomorrow and pluck someone from the general population who has an Air Force education, someone trained as a physician, someone who bleeds Air Force blue, who is willing to serve, and that you can put in Iraq tomorrow," said Beth Schissel, who graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1989 and went on to medical school.
Schissel was forced out of the military after she acknowledged that she was gay.
According to figures compiled by the Pentagon and released by the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military, Schissel is one of 244 medical and health professionals discharged from 1994 through 2003 under the policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve as long as they abstain from homosexual activity and do not disclose their sexual orientation. Congress approved the policy in 1993.
There were 137 officers discharged during that period. The database compiled by the Pentagon does not include names, but it appears that about 30 of the medical personnel who were discharged may also be included in the list of officers.
The center -- a research unit of the Institute for Social, Behavioral & Economic Research of the University of California -- promotes analysis of the issue of gays in the military.
"These discharges comprise a very small percentage of the total and should be viewed in that context," said Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a Pentagon spokeswoman. She added that troops discharged under the law can continue to serve their country by becoming a private military contractor or working for other federal agencies.
Opponents of the policy on gays acknowledge that the number of those discharged is small. But they say the policy exacerbates a shortage of medical specialists in the military when they are needed the most.
Late last year Army officials acknowledged in a congressional hearing that they are seeing shortfalls in key medical specialties.
"What advantage is the military getting by firing brain surgeons at the very time our wounded soldiers aren't receiving the medical care they need?" said Aaron Belkin, associate professor of political science at the University of California at Santa Barbara.
Overall, the number of discharges has gone down in recent years.
"When we're at war, commanders know that gay personnel are just as important as any other personnel," said Nathaniel Frank, senior research fellow at the Center. He said that in some instances commanders knew someone in their unit was gay but ignored it.
The overall discharges peaked in 2000 and 2001, on the heels of the 1999 murder of Pfc. Barry Winchell, who was bludgeoned to death by a fellow soldier at Fort Campbell, Ky., who believed Winchell was gay. About one-sixth of the discharges in 2001 were at that base.
Officials did not provide estimates on the cost of a military education or one for medical personnel. However, according to the private American Medical Student Association, average annual tuition and fees at public and private U.S. medical schools in 2002 were $14,577 and $30,960, respectively.
Early last year the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, estimated it cost the Pentagon nearly $200 million to recruit and train replacements for the nearly 9,500 troops that had to leave the military because of the policy. The losses included hundreds of highly skilled troops, including translators, between 1994 through 2003.
Opponents of the policy are backing legislation in the House sponsored by Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., that would repeal the law. But that bill -- with 107 co-sponsors -- is considered a longshot in the Republican-controlled House
you can't bring sexual relationships [male or female] into a combat unit without affecting performance [ie. causing deaths]
Cool, so can we all come over and ogle you undressing? I mean, you are secure in your femininity aren't you?
The above is rhetorical, but do you get the point?
And what happens when a heterosexual Captain falls in love with a female Sergeant? How is that any different?
Big difference between lesbians and homosexual men. It's not a fair comparison. Neither is the insinuation that you are somehow more hetero than a man who objects to his workplace turning into a bathhouse (which is what will happen if you give them the opportunity).
The reason we always got in the navy in the 70's was that you were succeptable to espionage blackmail. That means, that since the gay lifestyle is a voilation of the UCMJ, you could be coerced into spying in order to keep your secret in order to not be discharged. Also, on board ship, there was 30 guys living in a berthing compartment that was approx. 25' by 40'. Imagine, if you would, 2 women living in that close of quarters with 28 men.
(I suspect that many among these numbers got free education and training at taxpayer's expense and then "told" to end their obligation.)
my thought too. also people "telling" to get out of going to war.
The people fornicating are not those you have to depend on for life or death within your platoon or company. Of course it is wrong. The issue here is group moral and your ability to fight and not have your mind clouded with emotion and sexual passion towards another in your own company. Never has been good...never will.
Yes. It happens all the time. The military isn't WalMart. They have their own laws and rules. I was reprimanded for holding hands with my wife in public once. I was also counselled for helping her carry groceries home when we didn't have a car because I was carrying her umbrella and it wasn't black.
The military discourages any intimate public display (kissing, holding hands, etc.) even if you are doing it with your own spouse.
I've known of dozens of cases where careers ruined for having "inappropriate" relations. (i.e., sleeping with someone who is not your spouse).
If soldiers lives depend on it, then our national security depends on it by extension and our ability to remain free. That is why I am so passionate about it.
Right on. I served aboard ship (two, matter of fact) in the "old days" (early 60s) when those people were Sec. 8 out and glad of it. That cannot be tolerated in such close quarters or ANYWHERE in the military. Discrimination? YOU BET! If you don't fit the criteria, you don't serve just like any profession with certain criteria or qualifications, go find something else.
You are about as conservative as a San Fran Fruitcake. I have been around the military for many years and it will be a cold day in Hades before faggotry is accepted in the military.
My Dad, who was a Lt. in the USN during World War II in the PTO, indicated to me before he passed away a couple of years ago that people of this orientation in the USN had a prospentiy during World War II to fall over board. He said he did not condone or promote it...but it was the way things were.
Because, dear lady, if the perverts insists on being "in your face" about it, I, for one, prefer to "waste" the cost of their training, after lying to get into training in the first place, knowing full well that there is a "don't ask don't tell" policy.
Far as I know, the military does not have "pervert detectors".
charge them for their education. They knew the rules when they went in, got a free edumacation, then outed themselves to get out of the military.
make them pay
Yes, for heaven's sake, it's against the rules.
Don't you remember that female pilot who was thrown out back in the 90s because of her affair with another (married) soldier? The press just ate up the spin that she was discharged "just because she fell in love". Sickening. Yes, I really want a ditz who can't control herself or her inferiors to be an officer.
There was a GENERAL that was discharged recently for an extramarital affair.
The only double standard is the one the gays are hoping to achieve.
I feel that posters here are piling onto you in ways that are out of line -- I disagree with you, but think you deserve more respect as a military wife.
Personally, I'd point out that the USMCJ item above doesn't say anything about "homosexuals" being bounced from the military -- it focuses exclusively on the actual behavior itself. Arguing about whether "homosexuals" should or shouldn't be in the military cedes a key point to liberals from the get-go -- who says that "homosexual" as a distinct, unique entity actually exist?
I believe that affliction carried on into the seventies while I was active as well.
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.