She enlisted for 2 or 4 years and had a 8 year total obligation. Almost enlistment contracts are written this way. She did get out normally.
She is not in the wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
She has zero pension. Her husband does not have to quit his job to take care of the kids. The military will have to figure a way to accommodate the kids. There is daycare on most bases. Maybe she can serve stateside.
I am kind-of thinking she is not in the wrong, also, unless I hear something drastic to change my mind.
An 8 year total obligation means exactly that. She is being called back within her 8 years of obligation. Get it? God, you folks sound as squishy as tadpoles.
What's wrong is a first enlistment 8 year contract. It's stupid and it's insane. For second enlistments where career is the objective? Sure! To an 18 or 20 year old who has never been in the military? No it's a bad deal for both the service member and the military in general. Return all first term enlistments to 4/2 or 3/3 and no more until after the three year active duty mark is reached where most military career decisions {re-up or leave at EAOS} are usually beginning to be made. The military has in several ways created this problem looking at short term gians and not long term problems.
In short all an 8 year enlistment amounts to is avoiding the over 10 year old issue of raising needed End Troop Strength Levels Active Duty in all branches.