# Considering joining reserves but I have some medical and ethics concerns



## GleepGlop (20 Oct 2011)

Firstly I am looking at the reserves because they "don't deploy overseas / deployment overseas is voluntary". I have some ethical issues with that; enough said. However does this imply that there could be compulsory deployment within Canada, say at a G20 summit or something like that? I want to join to help people rather than hurt people and I don't want to be put into situations where I will be required to hurt anyone I don't agree with hurting.
Secondly I have some chronic injuries in my back and knees and ankles. I know I could pass the fitness test, but how accommodating is the army to people with back problems and problems running even if they can technically pass these tests? 
Another problem of mine is that I am one of those people that will faint if I have to stand in one spot for too long. Vasovagal syncope or something. 
Can anyone shed any light on how these issues would work out for me?
Thanks!


----------



## the 48th regulator (20 Oct 2011)

GleepGlop said:
			
		

> Firstly I am looking at the reserves because they "don't deploy overseas / deployment overseas is voluntary". I have some ethical issues with that; enough said. However does this imply that there could be compulsory deployment within Canada, say at a G20 summit or something like that? I want to join to help people rather than hurt people and I don't want to be put into situations where I will be required to hurt anyone I don't agree with hurting.
> Secondly I have some chronic injuries in my back and knees and ankles. I know I could pass the fitness test, but how accommodating is the army to people with back problems and problems running even if they can technically pass these tests?
> Another problem of mine is that I am one of those people that will faint if I have to stand in one spot for too long. Vasovagal syncope or something.
> Can anyone shed any light on how these issues would work out for me?
> Thanks!




I am going to be candid; Don't bother applying.

These may be some useful areas where you can enjoy your dreams;

http://www.cuso.ca/?setlang=/

http://www.projects-abroad.ca/?gclid=CO2im4CW-KsCFZAAQAodlWOXLQ

http://www.crossculturalsolutions.org/about/ccs-or-peace-corps?siteID=Google_peace_corps&_kk=5846eba7-7e80-42a5-9062-592e55e9afed&_kt=7551197106&gclid=CPD1hqiW-KsCFYO8Kgod3lA_pQ


----------



## aesop081 (20 Oct 2011)

GleepGlop said:
			
		

> Can anyone shed any light on how these issues would work out for me?



Not well. Your post reads like an example of who we are not looking for.


----------



## Journeyman (20 Oct 2011)

GleepGlop said:
			
		

> Firstly I am looking at the reserves because they "don't deploy overseas / deployment overseas is voluntary". I have some ethical issues with that; enough said.


Not remotely enough said. Maybe you should try a further explanation (before the inevitable dog-pile gets this thread locked)


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Oct 2011)

The military is designed to hurt people. Helping people is a great added bonus (icestorm, floods, evacuations), but you can't pick and choose.

The military really sounds like something that isn't for you. If anything you would spend your whole timing arguing your point of view and trying to defend it, as noble as wanting to simply help people may be.  I've met a bunch of guys like you, good people

The military may not be for you but the good news is that there are tons of organizations out there that will let you help people WAY more effectively in the context you're looking for.  The reserves aren't forced to deploy (mind you they could be) but from speaking out of experience your time in the reserves would suck because the guys who see themselves as hardcore snake eating tough guys would single you out and harass you the whole time until you quit. Not very professional but it's the way it is.

Beyond that joining the military with chronic back problems is a horrible idea. Not only would you make your condition much worse but you would also possibly be making the military make special exceptions for you. Treat you different from the start.   But probably they would just look at your condition and say no thanks- after a lot of time and effort on your part to get in.

You're pretty smart to recognize what you want and what you don't want- take that energy and put it to good use.


----------



## Allgunzblazing (20 Oct 2011)

Hello GleepGlop, 

As far as deployment (oversees) is concerned - reservists can be compulsorily deployed too, but this requires an act to be passed by Parliament first. This was told to my wife by a recruiter when she was applying. So, there does exist the possibility of being sent oversees against your will. 

I don't think anyone joins the military to "hurt" others. People have their own reasons, but I'm sure this is certainly not one of them. If someone he hell bent on harming others, he or she would rather become a gangster. 

Being a member of the CF, you will get ample opportunity of helping people. Sometimes, this might involve engaging with criminals or extremists. But then, wouldn't the world be a better place if such people are brought to justice? 

This is just my opinion. I am not a soldier as yet.


----------



## FlyingDutchman (20 Oct 2011)

You could try to be a Chaplain.  They are, if memory serves, noncombatants.  Are there reserve Chaplains?


----------



## Journeyman (20 Oct 2011)

FlyingDutchman said:
			
		

> You could try to be a Chaplain.



Without even addressing this person's ability to show Pastoral compassion to war-fighters, whose ethics he apparently finds abhorrent, do you believe Chaplains are precluded from DAG'ing green, given GleeGlop's history of "chronic injuries in my back and knees and ankles....problems running....fainting"?

Do you believe that time/money/effort should be expended having a fit, motivated, army-compassionate Padre-applicant competing against someone who, quite apparently, does not belong here?


----------



## FlyingDutchman (20 Oct 2011)

I am only offering a suggestion where he could serve in a noncombat role.  I agree that he (she?) probably does not belong in the military, but I also think he should be aware that there is at least one option if he really wants to serve.


----------



## cupper (20 Oct 2011)

FlyingDutchman said:
			
		

> You could try to be a Chaplain.  They are, if memory serves, noncombatants.  Are there reserve Chaplains?



Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't a chaplain need to have either a degree in theology, or be ordained as a minister or priest?


----------



## FlyingDutchman (20 Oct 2011)

cupper said:
			
		

> Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't a chaplain need to have either a degree in theology, or be ordained as a minister or priest?





> To become a Chaplain, the minimum requirements are the following: you must be ordained or mandated by a nationally registered faith group and have a Bachelor of Theology and a Masters degree in Pastoral Theology (or equivalent) if you studied in the province of Quebec or St-Paul’s University in Ottawa. For all other applicants, the Bachelors of Arts and a Masters of Divinity degree (or equivalent).
> 
> Applicants must provide evidence in support of their application from their local ecclesiastical authority. They must receive support from a representative of the Interfaith Committee on Canadian Military Chaplaincy (ICCMC), the endorsement of the ICCMC and be selected by the Chaplain General. The ICCMC expects applicants to have at least 2 years of experience in a civilian ministry. Applicants must meet Canadian Forces medical standards and successfully complete a Canadian Forces and Branch selection process that includes tests, interviews and approval by an acceptance board.
> 
> The Direct Entry Officer is the usual plan of entry into the Chaplaincy. Since the recruitment process is complex and involves both the Canadian Forces and ecclesiastical authorities, applicants will receive guidance from the Chaplain General’s office in all aspects of the process.


There you go.

Gleep, I do not have high hopes for your ability to join, mostly due to your medical problems, and bit of your ethical issues.  I will say it never hurts to try though.  Talk to an actual recruiter, see what they say.


----------



## PJGary (20 Oct 2011)

I am having a really hard time figuring out _why_ you want to join in the first place given all of the problems? Maybe expanding on that will help the others here (including myself) understand you.

_If this isn't a troll.  _


----------



## medicineman (20 Oct 2011)

Even Padres need to be fit enough to keep up with the folks they're there to serve - if your back or knees are busted up, you might have some issues with some of those aspects, especially load bearing marching, ambling around uneven ground, sitting for long periods of time, having your discs squished in the back of a vehicle bouncing all over Hell's half acre, bouncing around in a ship at sea, etc ad nauseum.

I think you should either rethink why you'd want to join the military and/or rectify your medical issues before carrying on with an application.  The role of the CF is to project the will of the Canadian government, using wahtever force required, where ever it is deemed to be needed...the other stuff is a sideline because they're supposed to be ready to respond quickly, getting resources to where they're needed and in an organized fashion as quickly and efficiently as possible.  

Personally, you sound like the type that should go work for CUSO or The Red Cross.

 :2c:

MM

Edited for spelling oopie.


----------



## Sig_Des (21 Oct 2011)

GleepGlop said:
			
		

> I want to join to help people rather than hurt people and I don't want to be put into situations where I will be required to hurt anyone I don't agree with hurting.



Just out of curiosity, who _would_ you agree with hurting?

Either way, You seem to be giving yourself all the reasons you need to not join the Canadian Forces.



> Firstly I am looking at the reserves because they "don't deploy overseas / deployment overseas is voluntary". I have some ethical issues with that; enough said. However does this imply that there could be compulsory deployment within Canada, say at a G20 summit or something like that? I want to join to help people rather than hurt people and I don't want to be put into situations where I will be required to hurt anyone I don't agree with hurting.



While the event of being forcibly deployed is incredibly unlikely, the fact that you would choose to join the reserves for mainly this reason will catch you no amount of grief, possibly ridicule, and at best disconnection with your peers. In the event that you were mobilized, you would still have to face the situation. You will definitely be required to do things you don't want to do, whether you deploy or not. And "enough said" isn't going to be enough when you're interviewed. This alone however doesn't close the Reserves to you. I personally don't want someone like you working with me, I don't believe the Forces would be a good fit for you, but it still doesn't preclude you.

This probably would:


> I have some chronic injuries in my back and knees and ankles. I know I could pass the fitness test, but how accommodating is the army to people with back problems and problems running even if they can technically pass these tests?



If you can pass the test fine. You will have to pass the test annually. In between taking the test, you will still have to run and march. However, being a known issue would cause problems in the medical. And I'll fill you in on a little secret; The suspensions and seating in military vehicles aren't generally predisposed to passenger comfort.



> Another problem of mine is that I am one of those people that will faint if I have to stand in one spot for too long. Vasovagal syncope or something.



This one's a doozy. You will be required to stand in position without moving for long periods of time.

Personally, I would suggest you go volunteer somewhere if you want to help people.


----------



## cphansen (21 Oct 2011)

With all respect, I think you're considering joining the wrong army.

I seriously think you should be considering joining the Salvation Army. They do an incredible amount of good, are there early at disasters. There is a lot more to the SallyAnn than the Christmas kettles and their band. They provide food, shelter and clothing for people like fire victims.

They're good people and the organization is one that's earned many people's respect. Your health issues would definitely exclude you from the CA but the SallyAnn has different standards and work you can do will be found for you.

However remember the SallyAnn does not pay it's members although there are some permament;y hired staff who get paid


----------



## vonGarvin (21 Oct 2011)

GleepGlop said:
			
		

> Firstly I am looking at the reserves because they "don't deploy overseas / deployment overseas is voluntary". I have some ethical issues with that; enough said. However does this imply that there could be compulsory deployment within Canada, say at a G20 summit or something like that? I want to join to help people rather than hurt people and I don't want to be put into situations where I will be required to hurt anyone I don't agree with hurting.
> Secondly I have some chronic injuries in my back and knees and ankles. I know I could pass the fitness test, but how accommodating is the army to people with back problems and problems running even if they can technically pass these tests?
> Another problem of mine is that I am one of those people that will faint if I have to stand in one spot for too long. Vasovagal syncope or something.
> Can anyone shed any light on how these issues would work out for me?
> Thanks!


Do us all a favour.  Serve your nation by donating blood or something, don't bother joining Her Majesty's Canadian Armed Forces.  After all, killing is what we do.  It's not all we do, but there's a reason we have rifles.  And machine guns.  And tanks.  And howitzers.  And so on.


----------



## HItorMiss (21 Oct 2011)

I will be very candid,

In my 12 year career I have never done a humanitarian mission, I have never handed out water or food or blankets. I have had one mission on each of my deployments and that was the protection of the lawful civilian population, my fellow military members and myself. To achieve that mission I had to use violence on many occasions and I am more then ok with that.

You seem bright, join an NGO (Non Governmental Organization) and do good things for people who could use it. Myself and fellow CF members will be there to protect you so that you can do that.


----------



## GleepGlop (21 Oct 2011)

Thanks all for your responses and suggestions: I will continue to consider my options carefully!


----------



## Brutus (21 Oct 2011)

'If you take the Queen's Shilling, you do the Queen's bidding.'

Joining the Reserves with a moral objection to deployment is, in my opinion, fraudulent, immoral, and dillutes the effectiveness of our military. There are many organizations listed by others that are more in line with your personality, and I strongly encourage you to look into those. Please do not join the CF.


----------



## Pusser (21 Oct 2011)

I have to take issue with the concept of "hurting" people.  The CF does not exist to hurt people.  That is not one of our objectives.  HOWEVER, we understand that in order to carry out our mission, we may have to hurt someone.  This is generally, because said person is trying to stop us and we have to use force, including deadly force, in order to achieve our objective.  Another way of putting it would be to say that perhaps our objective is to capture and take control of a village somewhere.  If we have to kill people in order to do this (probably because they're trying to stop us because their objective opposes ours), then that is what happens.  On the other hand, if the village surrenders without a shot being fired, we're OK with that too.  We don't go around indescriminitely "hurting" people as an objective unto itself.

Helen Tasker (Jamie Lee Curtis):  "Have you ever killed anyone?"

Harry Tasker (Arnold Schwarzenegger):  "Yes, but they were all bad."


----------



## mariomike (21 Oct 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Helen Tasker (Jamie Lee Curtis):  "Have you ever killed anyone?"
> 
> Harry Tasker (Arnold Schwarzenegger):  "Yes, but they were all bad."



1944:
"Do you think you can kill?", one of the members ( a psychiatrist ) of the draft board asked.
"I don't know about strangers, but friends, yes." 
Oscar Levant.
umpkin: ( Didn't see the smiley. )


----------



## marshall sl (21 Oct 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> I have to take issue with the concept of "hurting" people.  The CF does not exist to hurt people.  That is not one of our objectives.  HOWEVER, we understand that in order to carry out our mission, we may have to hurt someone.  This is generally, because said person is trying to stop us and we have to use force, including deadly force, in order to achieve our objective.  Another way of putting it would be to say that perhaps our objective is to capture and take control of a village somewhere.  If we have to kill people in order to do this (probably because they're trying to stop us because their objective opposes ours), then that is what happens.  On the other hand, if the village surrenders without a shot being fired, we're OK with that too.  We don't go around indiscriminately "hurting" people as an objective unto itself.



Really?  This sound familiar?"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."  Gen Hillier


----------



## yoman (21 Oct 2011)

marshall sl said:
			
		

> Really?  This sound familiar?"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is *to be able to kill people* (emphasis added)."  Gen Hillier



If we were to accomplish all of our objectives without ever having to resort to violence (not likely) would we not be as successful as if we had to use force? 

I do like that quote though.


----------



## Michael OLeary (21 Oct 2011)

marshall sl said:
			
		

> Really?  This sound familiar?"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."  Gen Hillier



Never confuse soundbites with complete factual analysis.


----------



## medicineman (21 Oct 2011)

I think the operative words there are " ...our job is TO BE ABLE  to kill people" - killing folks in and of itself isn't our raison d'etre, it's simply one of several means at our disposal to achieve the missions set out for us by the government.  

MM


----------



## GAP (21 Oct 2011)

I think the young padwan has got the message by now, a variety of similiar points are being made......this thread should be wrapped up....


----------



## the 48th regulator (21 Oct 2011)

Locked.

We don't need the post and run threads about ethics.

dileas

tess

milnet.ca stafff


----------

