I've noticed that a big percentage of soldiers who have been killed recently had children on the way and will never get to see them. Shouldn't these guys at least be taken out of harms way? They should all be brought home but I can't they take the expecting fathers off the front lines?
2007-01-02 18:07:07 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Since this is an All Volunteer military I how I don't think you would have too much of an increase in pregnancy in the military and if I was there and the next guy didn't want to be there bad enough to have a baby to get out I wouldn't want him fighting next to me anyway. He couldn't be depended on anyway.
2007-01-02 18:27:06 · update #1
It is sort of a catch-22. Pre deployment is the second 'ripest' time for making babies (post-deployment being the first). If they weren't deploying they likely wouldn't have had the children at that time so their wouldn't be as much of the situation you are describing.
But to answer your question, no. (1) It would lead to massive pregnancies and people not deploying. Yes this would happen because I know females that have gotten pregnant to not deploy. And when the men saw this they begged to be able to get pregnant I know one woman that has 5 kids because she was supposed to deploy every summer for her 6 year enlistment (and this was even between wars). She misssed the first one due to training.
(2) It would be bad for morale. There are already rifts between married and single troops. Married members get more lee-way when it comes to time off, more pay, etc...
(3)We need the bodies out there.
(4)You can't just turn off the military. It is a commitment that the member agreed to fulfill and he is obligated and expected to fulfill it.
2007-01-02 20:40:35 · answer #1 · answered by Wig 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, you should really take all that into consideration when you sign up for the military. I live on a military base and you would be surprised of what goes on. There are alot of women who purposely get pregnant to get out of going to Iraq or wherever, but little do they know, eventually you WILL have to go. So you're hurting yourself more by doing that. Being in the military is a very serious matter; especially where families are concerned. It is very hard on the spouses and children. It can either make you stonger or go the other way. But it still is a job to do and being away from your family is part of that job and that all goes with it.
2007-01-02 19:15:23 · answer #2 · answered by Nancy D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It would be nice if they could be home to help their wives, but in today's reality, many woman are raising kids by themselves because dad's are absent from homes for many reasons other than just their jobs. Because the fathers cannot be there, it is important for the families and friends of the military wives to pick up the slack and help out. My son is in the Marines. He is unmarried at this time, but if he chooses to marry and has to be away doing his job, I will be there to support his wife, and I know that my daughter and other sons feel the same way. A soldier needs to know that there is support on the home-front so that he can continue to function well at his job.
2007-01-02 20:43:06 · answer #3 · answered by runningviolin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. This is not because I do not think "expecting" fathers should see their children, but because this would become an easy way to shirk ones military duty. How many soldiers would be going home to their neighbor's kids because their wife slept with another guy just to bring her hubbie home? Or how many pregancies would we see from soldier's going on leave?
I also feel the same about women soliders. There was a problem at the begining of the war with female soldiers becoming pregnent and being shipped home. But, I would have them right back on the frontline as soon as they delivered.
2007-01-02 18:15:03 · answer #4 · answered by Mr Mojo Risin 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well - regardless of your view on the war, I think that has to be a military decision. If the people of the USA believe that the soldiers are defending their freedoms, then frankly having a child at home makes that even more important. Of course your leaders must make reasonable choices and if there is a surplus of men then by all means let the most deserving go home - but right now I don't think that's the case.
Frankly - either they should be there or they shouldn't - each of us has his or her own view on that, but if they *should* be there then they are soldiers - period.
2007-01-02 18:31:44 · answer #5 · answered by lozatron 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That question is a loaded one. Why just pull expecting fathers off the front line? Why not all? You can not say that hey your wife is gonna have a baby so you can go somewhere else. It does not work that way. No matter where they are over there they are in harms way. I am a military spouse and fear for all. I support them and hope we bring them all home safe.
2007-01-02 18:10:56 · answer #6 · answered by Erica S 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, absolutely not.
The Military is not just some job. It is a way of life. Regardless of why someone joins, it is their duty to place the needs of the mission above any personel needs.
Unfortunatley, the concept of selfless service is foreign to many people these days. American culture has slowly become more selfish and materialistic over the years. Civilians have a harder and harder time understanding just what it means to be a Soldier.
2007-01-02 19:36:23 · answer #7 · answered by Geronimo 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Most military wives become preg right before or right after their soldier is deployed. My cousin found out 12 hours before doing his 2nd tour in Iraq they were finally having their first baby after 7 years of trying. He was permitted leave for a few weeks when she was born. Then he came home in September after she was born. He's going back in a year for his 3rd tour.
He knows what he signed up for when he signed up for the Army. His wife knew what she would have to deal with when marrying into the army life.
2007-01-02 18:19:11 · answer #8 · answered by Zabe 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
my only response as an army veteran who was obviously part of the all volunteer army is that army life is for the single soldier, not a family. it is so hard on family life and if you don't have a strong relationship it is bound to fail.
those of you who say "well its a volunteer army" are such piles of shi! ... i say that because you don't have ANY idea of how difficult military life is and as an army veteran and an army wife i do. now how about you check yourself out, look back on your life and your own decisions...ok...how many of them went as you planned accordingly? not many huh? well...people who sign up for the army are just like the rest of you...they sign up hoping for the best and to make life easier for their families i.e. health / dental insurance, steady paycheck and life insurance. i know so many people who have come in from reserves who had come to desperate times and had no other option but to go active duty or people whose jobs were sent overseas by the governments weak foreign policy... i am so sick of that crap excuse that since it is an all volunteer army, all the people who joined the military and became casualty of war or wounded should not have been surprised by it!
2007-01-02 19:22:46 · answer #9 · answered by Jessy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our servicemen and women know what they're signing up for when they enlist. By the time they have spouses and children, they know the military life very well, and know the possibility that they will miss their child's birth is very real.
However, I know several soldiers and Marines who have been gotten leave so they were either home for the birth, or arrived home shortly thereafter.
2007-01-02 18:25:18 · answer #10 · answered by Amy S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋