# Pregnant US soldiers overseas



## Jarnhamar (15 Mar 2006)

Stemming from an argument over whether females being deployed to Iraq have high increased pregnancy rates I had some questions. (Not about the pregnancy rates mind you)

What is the US military outlook on fraternization among their soldiers while deployed?

I know in Canada it's zero tolerance.  Soldiers won't 'mix it up' with locals and married couples deployed together will not either.
The dutch army, soldiers are ordered not to fraternize with locals however they can fraternize amongst their fellow soldiers.

What is the rule for the American military? Is frat illegal?

As well, assumingfrat while deployed IS illegal, if a female soldier becomes pregnant while deployed (not before) would disciplinary action be taken? Some kind of charge.   Are pregnant female soldiers immediately returned home? Or would they stay for a while, say up until 4 or 5 or 6 months of their pregnancy?


----------



## scoutfinch (15 Mar 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> As well, assumingfrat while deployed IS illegal, if a female soldier becomes pregnant while deployed (not before) would disciplinary action be taken? Some kind of charge.   Are pregnant female soldiers immediately returned home? Or would they stay for a while, say up until 4 or 5 or 6 months of their pregnancy?



Re disciplinary charges:  You know what they say about it taking two to tango... presumably there would be more than one person charged in the event of a deployment pregnancy (in the event the other party were identified)!


----------



## PteGDD (15 Mar 2006)

Don't quote me, but I'm pretty sure that the female would be returned home after less then 1 month.  Carrying around a 6-month-old baby is like a permantent rucksack on the front of you, especially in combat boots.  If a pregnant soldier was to be KIA, it would be two lives not one.  Also the combat stress the female would sustain would be too much on top of the normal stresses of carrying a baby.  That can be dangerous in some situations.  

Summary, pregnant women go home... but after how many weeks/days?

PteG


----------



## scoutfinch (15 Mar 2006)

PteGDD said:
			
		

> Don't quote me, but I'm pretty sure that the female would be returned home after less then 1 month.  Carrying around a 6-month-old baby is like a permantent rucksack on the front of you, especially in combat boots.  If a pregnant soldier was to be KIA, it would be two lives not one.  Also the combat stress the female would sustain would be too much on top of the normal stresses of carrying a baby.  That can be dangerous in some situations.
> 
> Summary, pregnant women go home... but after how many weeks/days?
> 
> PteG



Worse case scenario:  imagine the public/ political fallout should a pregnant soldier be taken captive.


----------



## geo (15 Mar 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> Stemming from an argument over whether females being deployed to Iraq have high increased pregnancy rates I had some questions. (Not about the pregnancy rates mind you)
> I know in Canada it's zero tolerance.  Soldiers won't 'mix it up' with locals and married couples deployed together will not either.


From what I remember.... the zero tolerance rule applies to the Kabul/Kandahar deployment. The rule did not get applied while in Golan, Bosnia or Haiti......


----------



## Armymedic (15 Mar 2006)

It was applied in Bosnia. Later rotos, in particular.


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> What is the rule for the American military? Is frat illegal?



edited to add: Deleted post after I received the official information via email from S_Baker.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Mar 2006)

> You are also not allowed to chat or be social with members outside of your rate during working hours.



Rank or rate?
Not being able to chat with someone or be social outside of your rank seems a little silly and archaic to me.


I figure the frat rule is like the 2 drinks a night limit.   The minute you make a rule like that people will go out of their way to break it. I prefer treating adults like adults and if their activities effect their jobs, punt them home.


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> Rank or rate?
> Not being able to chat with someone or be social outside of your rank seems a little silly and archaic to me.



My bad...meant rank, not rate(trade for those that don't know).

Now, they don't enforce it all that much, but you are not "supposed" to chat with anyone outside of your rank.


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

From the Conduct Guidelines



> You will not post any material which is knowingly false.





> We've had a few instances lately where opinion and rumour have been presented as hard evidence. Unfortunately in many cases, the information is flat out wrong.
> 
> Due to the anonymous nature of these forums, it can be hard to tell if information is coming from someone in a position to know or just someone who "has a friend whose uncle served with the Botswana Defence Force in the 70's."
> 
> ...


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

S_Baker said:
			
		

> Springroll, I am not trying to bust your chops, but I have never ever heard of what your above posts implies.
> 
> Your source of information is?  If you don't know there are several US Army Officers and enlisted soldiers, airmen, marines, and seamen that check this board out.  I am one of them, I have been a company commander, Asst S-3, XO,  and I won't hesitate to call your post above bullshitt!
> 
> ...



I am going by what my husband and I were told by a USN Commander, our landlord, when we were posted down to NAS Whidbey Island in 2001, 
along with what other members of the USNavy were told, and my husband's orientation meeting when we was first posted down there.

If you would like the commander's name, feel free to PM me.
btw, the link isn't working for me.


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

S_Baker said:
			
		

> If anyone wants a copy of the DA Pam, (i sent a copy to springroll)



Thank you for that. 
I did receive it and a reply has been sent back.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Mar 2006)

PWOP entered the lexicon in the 1940s when women were first admitted to the service; it was considered in the same category as AWOL - and stood for Pregnant With Out Permission.  Is the term still used?


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

I recall from my SHARP training the video about the girl who got choked at her supervisor who told her "Don't get kncoked up or you'll miss out on promotions"  It was not the right ting to say. So I am thinking an official acronym like that would be taboo.

Or did you mean in the American side, Michael?


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> I recall from my SHARP training the video about the girl who got choked at her supervisor who told her "Don't get kncoked up or you'll miss out on promotions"  It was not the right ting to say. So I am thinking an official acronym like that would be taboo.
> 
> Or did you mean in the American side, Michael?



There's a taboo against the word "pregnant"?  I remember Lucille Ball couldn't say it on television in the 1950s.  And it is exactly what we're talking about here - PWOP is an unplanned pregnancy.  I can understand the human rights concerns involved, which is why I ask if the term is still in use.  It used to be.


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

I did not mean there was a taboo against the word "pregnant"  I meant the taboo being about discussing pregnancy relating to soemone's career, meaning bad for yours if you do  ;D


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> I did not mean there was a taboo against the word "pregnant"  I meant the taboo being about discussing pregnancy relating to soemone's career, meaning bad for yours if you do  ;D



Career is one thing, and we've enshrined a woman's right to have a family without adversely affecting that.  Well and good. But getting pregnant by illegal fraternization while on deployment (or by legal fraternization to avoid a deployment?) is another matter, no?


----------



## scoutfinch (16 Mar 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Career is one thing, and we've enshrined a woman's right to have a family without adversely affecting that.  Well and good. But getting pregnant by illegal fraternization while on deployment (or by legal fraternization to avoid a deployment?) is another matter, no?



Have no fear, *pregnancy* has not become a bad word.  The legal issue is not one of *discussing* pregnancy in relation to employment but in actively discriminating against an employee because of a pregnancy.  

Obviously, this is an entirely different legal issue from a pregnancy arising during a deployment with a bar against fraternization.


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

I did find this in the document that S_Baker sent to me. 
It does sum up a bit of what I was saying, as far as fraternization(relations) between the ranks:


> *2-10. Officer—enlisted soldier (Dating)*
> a. Situation. Prior to 2 March 1999, CW2 Baker, a single female, met SSG Young, a
> single male, at an off-post bar. They started dating. On the second date, each
> found that the other was in the military and stationed at Fort B. CW2 Baker was in
> ...



I also found this in the same document:



> 2-11. Officer—enlisted (Social)
> a. What impact does the new policy (AR 600-20, para 4-14c) on officer-enlisted relationships
> have on attending events at the installation community club, such as
> “right-arm nights”? Will an enlisted soldier get into trouble for talking to someone
> ...



These exerpts were taken from: 
US Department of the Army 
Pamphlet 600-35
Relationships Between Soldiers of Different Rank


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Career is one thing, and we've enshrined a woman's right to have a family without adversely affecting that.  Well and good. But getting pregnant by illegal fraternization while on deployment (or by legal fraternization to avoid a deployment?) is another matter, no?



You've identified two different situations. Illegal fraternization and getting pregnant to avoid deploiyment. I don't see how getting pregnant by illegal fraternization carries any weight for a charge with it. Wether the fraternization is legal or not the results can be the same.

Getting pregnant to avid deployment - what would the charge be? Self inflicted injury? Dereliction of duty? I am not making fun, I just don't know how one would make a charge out of it and go on to prove it.


----------



## TCBF (16 Mar 2006)

http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/daod/5019/1_e.asp

Above is the link to the DAOD on Personal Relationships and Fraternization, which replaced CFAO 19-38 in 2004.  In it we have:

"Fraternization means any relationship between a CF member and a person from an enemy or belligerent force, or a CF member and a local inhabitant within a theatre of operations where CF members are deployed. (fraternisation)"
...

"Personal relationship means an emotional, romantic, sexual or family relationship, including marriage or a common-law partnership or civil union, between two CF members, or a CF member and a DND employee or contractor, or member of an allied force. (relations personnelles)"
...

"Fraternization can have detrimental effects on unit operation effectiveness due to potential threats to the security, morale, cohesion and discipline of a unit. Task force commanders shall issue orders and guidance on fraternization appropriate to the situation in their area of operations."
...

"If a personal relationship has a negative effect on the security, cohesion, discipline or morale of a unit, the personal relationship is considered adverse for the purpose of this DAOD.

Administrative action shall be taken to separate CF members who are involved in an adverse personal relationship.

If an adverse personal relationship cannot be changed within the applicable unit/sub-unit for the CF members in a supervisor/subordinate relationship, the CF members shall be separated by attached posting, posting, change in work assignments or other action.

Such a separation is not punitive in nature, nor shall there be a negative stigma or career implication towards the CF members."

Edit: Replaced Link.


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

Springroll, it sums up frat between Officers and Enlisted pers.


----------



## scoutfinch (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> You've identified two different situations. Illegal fraternization and getting pregnant to avoid deploiyment. I don't see how getting pregnant by illegal fraternization carries any weight for a charge with it. Wether the fraternization is legal or not the results can be the same.
> 
> Getting pregnant to avid deployment - what would the charge be? Self inflicted injury? Dereliction of duty? I am not making fun, I just don't know how one would make a charge out of it and go on to prove it.



I stand to be corrected but I do not think there is a requirement to prove intent for a charge of self-inflicted injury.(Note:  I am a civilian lawyer NOT AJAG -- My only knowlwedge on this point is a personal recollection of an individual be charged with a self inflicted injury for laying out tanning on the roof of the Jr. Ranks Barracks at CFB Toronto and getting a vicious sunburn).  The point being, I don't think you would have to prove that the soldier *got* pregnant to avoid deployment.  Getting pregnant would be enough... in a hypothetical world.  I suspect the political fallout of a charge of Self Inflicted Injury on a pregnant soldier would be blistering. 

With respect to fraternization, let's not forget that it takes two to.... well, fraternize! ;D


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> Springroll, it sums up frat between Officers and Enlisted pers.



CW2 = Chief Warrant Officer(WO-2)
SSG = Staff Sergeant (E-6)

Both are still enlisted personel.


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

The fraternization doesn't bother me, it seems rather cut and dried what is and isn't when it comes to that.

What has got me scratching my head is: What would you charge a woman for in that situation and how would you make it stick?

I could see this becoming very embarrassing for somebody. What, do you tell all women who are about to deploy that they may not have sex until after they are in theatre? Do you force them to take birth control? That doesn't always work...

I think we've opened up something pretty big here. Where's a good JAG lawyer when you need one?



			
				Springroll said:
			
		

> CW2 = Chief Warrant Officer(WO-2)
> SSG = Staff Sergeant (E-6)
> 
> Both are still enlisted personel.



Springroll, You had better do a search before yapping off next time, you've been warned already.

http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/insignias/officers.html



> Warrant officers hold warrants from their service secretary and are specialists and experts in certain military technologies or capabilities. The lowest ranking warrant officers serve under a warrant, but they receive commissions from the president upon promotion to chief warrant officer 2. These commissioned warrant officers are direct representatives of the president of the United States. They derive their authority from the same source as commissioned officers but remain specialists, in contrast to commissioned officers, who are generalists. There are no warrant officers in the Air Force.



Hmmmm, someone was talking out of their arse.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> I could see this becoming very embarrassing for somebody. What, do you tell all women who are about to deploy that they may not have sex until after they are in theatre? Do you force them to take birth control? That doesn't always work...



Tell them that getting pregnant while on deployment is forbidden.  How they deal with it is their problem, no? Where is the problem? We're already identified that fraternization even with one's spouse is not permitted on deployment.  Guess the only problem arises if they take their leave with their spouse.

Used to be you needed permission to marry, or have a child.  That's obviously changed. *shrugs*


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

When they get pregnant just before deploying. That was one of the matters up for discussion, no? Wether trying to avoid deployment or not was an issue and how to discipline that person.


----------



## scoutfinch (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> What has got me scratching my head is: What would you charge a woman for in that situation and how would you make it stick?
> 
> I could see this becoming very embarrassing for somebody. What, do you tell all women who are about to deploy that they may not have sex until after they are in theatre? Do you force them to take birth control? That doesn't always work...
> 
> Springroll, my bad, missed that one.



To be clear, are we talking about sex in theatre or sex before one gets to theatre (resulting in a pre-deployment pregnancy)?

I keep harkening back to this point but if a soldier gets pregnant in theatre, there is a pretty good change that another soldier has also broken the 'no sex in theatre' rule... while the evidence may be gender specific, the offending act certainly isn't.  

The no sex before theatre is more problematic for obvious reason.


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

It is the no sex before deployment that has me wondering. If a woman, who knows of a pending deployment, gets pregnant will there be any recourse? What would that be? Can the CF really expect to charge a woman for getting pregnant, deployment pending or not?


----------



## Pea (16 Mar 2006)

Scott said:
			
		

> When they get pregnant just before deploying. That was one of the matters up for discussion, no? Wether trying to avoid deployment or not was an issue and how to discipline that person.



This I would think would be really touche. Birth Control is about 99% effective. If I am taking birth control and am having sex with my spouse before a deployment, and I become pregnant, should I really be disciplined? I have taken the normal steps to prevent this have I not?


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Mar 2006)

I didn't want to touch the whole get pregnant to avoid deployment issue. How can you judge whether someone got pregnant on purpose? 

I'm sure that come deployment time there is an increase in pregnancies. Lack of integrity? Maybe, but it's human nature. Guys will try and get out of deployment too albeit in a different manner. Some "pre deployment" pregnancies will be accidental, some will be planned. 

My question was about women *already* in theater.  If they are told frat is illegal and a pregnancy is the result of an obvious case of frat, ie woman has been deployed 4 months and she's 1 month pregnant, would said female (and perhaps her male partner in crime) be charged with what disobeying an order- no frat.

I don't see why she or they shouldn't be.  Not only is it disobeying an order but it's creating an administrative burden due to the soldier having to be sent home and replaced.


----------



## Scott (16 Mar 2006)

Card_11 said:
			
		

> This I would think would be really touche. Birth Control is about 99% effective. If I am taking birth control and am having sex with my spouse before a deployment, and I become pregnant, should I really be disciplined? I have taken the normal steps to prevent this have I not?



I agree with you. I was just looking for some debate on the matter from someone who either had experience with this or knew the regs enough to offer an opinion on what would happen. I think it would be pretty archaic to discipline a woman for doing what is natural with her significant other and getting pregnant.

In theatre, different story. Ghost, I don't know if she or her partner would be charged but they both damn well should be. They disobeyed an order - cut and dried.

And back to before deploying - no you sure can't say for sure if someone got pregnant to avoid the trip. I guess in the same way you can't tell that a rolled ankle was to avoid leaving. I guess this is one of those things that will always be argued.


----------



## scoutfinch (16 Mar 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> I didn't want to touch the whole get pregnant to avoid deployment issue. How can you judge whether someone got pregnant on purpose?
> 
> I'm sure that come deployment time there is an increase in pregnancies. Lack of integrity? Maybe, but it's human nature. Guys will try and get out of deployment too albeit in a different manner. Some "pre deployment" pregnancies will be accidental, some will be planned.
> 
> ...



If that is the case, getting pregnant is not the offense, it is the result of the offending act.  The offense would be fraternization or breaching the 'no sex in theatre' rule. 

 If the charge is disobeying a lawful command, anyone doing co-ed pushups has contravened the order, I would think.  Not just the woman, pregnant or otherwise.  

Just my .02


----------



## muffin (16 Mar 2006)

Card_11 said:
			
		

> This I would think would be really touche. Birth Control is about 99% effective.



I can agree with this here - I was taking the pill when I became pregnant with my first child - I was not deployed, but was on course. Basically - I was told if I could not complete all the requirements of the course I would be sent home. Lucky for me - I was almost done and was able to finish. I was pulled off a few subsequent courses though - and that was expected. 

I agree that it would be very difficult to prove a woman became pregnant to avoid deployment/training/or anything else for that matter. 

I agree with Ghost778 - I think the pregnancy idea is clouding the main idea a little... if there is a NO FRAT policy - and a women becomes pregnant - then it is obvious that she fraternised with someone. However I don't think you would say "Can you charge her for being pregnant", but "Would you charge her with frat". To me it is no different than if you walked in on the act iself - chain of command becomes aware and administrative action is carried on accordingly.

Trying to get the father though, could prove to be quite difficult. 

I also think it would depend on when it happened - I worked with a girl once who became pregnant on HLTA and didn't tell anyone until she got home. When I was pregnant in the military (and please medics - if it is changed or I am wrong - correct me) I was told that the army would not consider me pregnant until I was over 12 weeks. After that time my medcat and eveything changed. 

If the woman was near the end of the deployment and didn't say anything, and someone did the math when she got home, could she still be charged with frat? 

.... it is all so very complex...

muffin


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Mar 2006)

That being said, could/would Command order you to have an abortion if you were  critical to the mission?


----------



## beach_bum (16 Mar 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> That being said, could/would Command order you to have an abortion if you were  critical to the mission?



I highly doubt that one would ever be possible.  I don't see how.  Could you just imagine the uproar?  I'm all for freedom of choice...but, my beliefs would never allow that.


----------



## Gunner (16 Mar 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> That being said, could/would Command order you to have an abortion if you were  critical to the mission?


 :rofl:

Couldn't you just imagine if there was any truth to that at all....


----------



## TCBF (17 Mar 2006)

"That being said, could/would Command order you to have an abortion if you were  critical to the mission?"

- Nowadays, the biggest uproar would be if they ordered someone NOT to have an abortion.


----------

