It was only true after WWII and only during a time when the draft in in force. Now that the military is all voluntary it does not apply. You can't volunteer for the military and then say "hey, I am a only son so sorry guys I won't be going overseas with you".....
2007-03-08 04:56:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Me 6
·
6⤊
1⤋
Sorry, but the surviving son thing has been mis-construed by most people here. The ONLY standing rule about son's in the military now-a-days is that not all your offspring can be stationed together...that way if one dies, they don't all die (reference: the Sullivan brothers, U.S. Navy). That is also what Saving Private Ryan was about. If we had some special rule about only sons, we wouldn't have enough people for a military force at all! That is also what people are referencing with the vietnam war. Only son was not a reason to avoid draft.....it was a way to come back home if all your brothers were killed in action. Sole surviving male member of a bloodline, however, was a valid draft dodger....but painfully difficult to prove. For instance, I am an only son.....but since I have a male cousin who can carry on our last name....I would have to go.
The rule is very convaluded....but it's purpose is solely to preserve bloodlines.
2007-03-08 05:21:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by NavyChief_EW 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
There NEVER was a law or rule stating your first or only son can't be sent to war. There is a last survivor law, if you can prove your the LAST of a bloodline that can carry on your family name, you can not even join the Military. Quit confusing the movie Saving Private Ryan with rela life, in the movie he was pulled out of the war through an act of kindness, not a law. Your son joined now let him serve his duty and be proud of him.
2007-03-08 05:08:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Here is an excerpt from the selective service website listed below:
"The original law, passed in 1948, exempted the sole surviving son of a family where one or more sons or daughters died as a result of military service. No restriction existed at that time to limit the exemption to peacetime. The provision was intended to protect families which had lost a member in World War II."
I really hope this helps.
2007-03-08 05:11:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by jdhowell762 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
I've heard that myself but in the Vietnam war my 3 cousins from one family were fighting and a man in the community lost 3 sons to the war. I don't know if these men enlisted or were drafted tho. That may make a difference.
2007-03-08 05:01:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mercadies2000 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The movie "Saving Private Ryan" touches on this. During the Nam there were newspaper articles about exempting the sole surviving son so he could carry on the family business or farm. Without knowing the exact rules, I'd say it's a draft rule.
2007-03-08 04:58:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Your only son is being sent to Iraq? There is not draft in the US military so unless he volunteered they can't "send" him per say. If he indeed signed he should have known that there were chances he'd be sent to Iraq. Good luck with all that.
2007-03-08 05:01:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by caliguy_30 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sole surviving son is the rule, that's what "Saving Private Ryan" was about. It sort of died with the all volunteer force. Nobody dragged your son, kicking and screaming from his bed. HE VOLUNTEERED
2007-03-08 04:58:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
Absolutely untrue. In an all-volunteer force, you have to go if you enlist. No backing out, no Watada-ing, no nothing. Sorry, ma'am.
Best of luck to your son.
2007-03-08 04:58:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
Yes, there was a law about it. But you are right, because it is volunteer, anyone can go. it is his choice. If he had been drafted, he could fight about not going.
2007-03-08 05:01:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by ruth4526 7
·
0⤊
1⤋