I really don't have much time to explain, she called an hour ago asking for advice but I couldn't help her...her departure date is aug 15 and she has been training with her unit for the last two months at ft dix. This was not an intentional move
2007-07-31 03:00:01 · 17 answers · asked by Mr. H 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
They cant legally give her a article 15 for being pregnant just because shes is due to go to Iraq. She cant be deployed while be prego so she will be on rear duty when they deploy. Now if they where given a order no contact then she can be charge for disobeying a direct order. But sh#t happens and if she got prego and if there wasnt a no contact order put out then they cant legaly charge her. becase they cant tell if she did it on purpose or if it as just bad timing.
2007-07-31 03:14:17 · answer #1 · answered by US soldier 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
she will not deploy to Iraq while she is pregnant. However, if they determine that she got pregnant within the last 2 months(ie when she reported to Dix for training) she's getting an Article 15 because she violated orders by getting pregnant after being informed of a deployment.
Even if you are the father, she still disobeyed. doesn't matter whether this was planned or not, it will still be looked upon as shirking her responsibilities and she should have known better. She is letting down her command by forcing them to either be a man short, or replacing her with someone who has not been fully briefed/trained.
2007-07-31 04:50:13 · answer #2 · answered by Mrsjvb 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You can't get an article 15 simply for being pregnant. And I mobilized two times through Fort Dix and there was never a no contact order issued. So something else is going on that she is not telling you, or you are not telling us.
As far as being pregnant, I have a hard time believing that they would send her to Iraq knowing that she was pregnant. I could see them sending her somewhere else or keeping her at Fort Dix until she's ready to give birth. Again, I don't think we are getting the benifit of all the details.
2007-07-31 03:59:44 · answer #3 · answered by Judge Dredd 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The only thing I can think of with the article 15 is if she was pregnant and did not inform her CO until now. Even if she thought she might be pregnant, it was her duty to report that to her CO before these final stages of preperation began. Also, I would think that before this stage of deployment, she would have been required to take a physical and a pregnancy test...is it possible she lied or tried to falsify results of that? In any case, she will not be deploying. The article 15 could lead to being discharged depending on the reasons behind it. I am hoping this is a mix up and they meant letter of reprimand.
2007-07-31 06:51:17 · answer #4 · answered by Annie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well yeah I agree with almost everyone else. When did she get pregnant? She should of known better and should of taken a pregnancy test before going to Dix.
I don't think we are getting all of the story here either.
I know that they WILL NOT deploy her while she is pregnant.
2007-07-31 18:30:07 · answer #5 · answered by ckamk1995 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ok. Let's start at the beginning. What is she being charged for? Being pregnant? Going to Iraq? Refusing to deploy?
Being pregnant will prevent her from deploying. She will not be authorized to wear the web gear, or the flak vest. She would also have to be redeployed to give birth. Plus convalescent leave.
If she is just at the beginning of her pregnancy, she needs to go on sick call, see the proper doctors, and get the proper profile. The military will NOT take her word for it, they want documentation.
2007-07-31 03:09:38 · answer #6 · answered by My world 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Chill and read
I doubt anyone who is pregnant is going to go over there. It is probably just the procedure they have to follow.
"Mast," "Article 15," and "office hours" are procedures whereby the commanding officer or officer in charge may:
* Make inquiry into the facts surrounding minor offenses allegedly committed by a member of his command;
* afford the accused a hearing as to such offenses; and
* dispose of such charges by dismissing the charges, imposing punishment under the provisions of Art. 15, UCMJ, or referring the case to a court-martial.
What "mast," "Article 15," and "office hours" are not:
* They are not a trial, as the term "nonjudicial" implies;
* a conviction; and
* an acquittal if a determination is made not to impose punishment.
2007-07-31 03:15:34 · answer #7 · answered by FOA 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Did she say what she did to earn the Article 15?
My guess is that she got pregnant after being mobilized. Typically - 'No Contact' (an order forbidding sexual contact) orders are given to all mobilized service members when mobilized in order to ensure that there are no people saying "I'm pregnant" right when you are boarding the airplane to go to a war zone.
2007-07-31 03:08:35 · answer #8 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 10⤊ 0⤋
They will not send her if she is pregnant. They may send her a few weeks after the baby is born........if they need her still. She can be charged with an AR-15, whether or not it was a planned pregnancy. Her command probably see's it as her way of getting out of the deployment.
2007-07-31 03:09:40 · answer #9 · answered by moochie86 1 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Contact your Congressman, Senator & the General of her Branch. You must call them, and Write to them and email them. If that don't work contact your local news channels for a possible story and your local news paper editor. Just bring the situation to light. I wouldn't go out and try to make the Military a bad thing because they are not. Your goal is to try to clear your wife, not go on some quest to bad mouth the military as that will most likley back fire. As it should. You might not get this done prior to her leaving, but it migt get her home sooner
2007-07-31 03:20:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋