desert_vixen's lair

 They did print my response to Single Female Soldiers Getting Pregnant Destroys Government Property.

 Part of it, anyway.  (I know, I know, they reserve the right to edit, but ... they sort of pulled my letter's teeth.)

 My letter is under the cut, with the parts printed in the Times in bold.


 

In response to the letter by SSG Lambert (‘Discriminating Against Dads’), I have to say how disappointing it is to see an NCO expressing not only a sexist attitude, but wrong information as well.  Female Soldiers do not get pregnant for “extra uniforms” or “tennis shoes”, and we do not get “months of convalescent leave”.  Female Soldiers get pregnant for the same reason as other women – because they want to have a child, because they have a birth control failure, because they want to. 

As for the “outright ridiculous” claims you make in your letter, perhaps you should check your facts first.  Female Soldiers are issued extra uniforms, but these uniforms are not ours to keep – and they cannot be worn except during pregnancy.  We don’t get issued tennis shoes either, but some women are given a tennis shoe profile to prevent complications from swelling.  The Army does not give female Soldiers “months of convalescent leave” – it is six weeks.  Soldiers may opt to take more leave if approved by their command, but the extra leave is ordinary leave.  Female Soldiers are exempt from the APFT standards for six months after giving birth, but this is to give them time to get back into shape after pregnancy and childbirth.  It is a recovery period, just the same as an injured Soldier would receive.  It is necessary, and I assure you – it is not relaxing.  It is hard work, and it does take time.

The worst part of your letter, however, was the part where you want to discriminate against female Soldiers based on your moral grounds.  The Army does not distinguish between a single female Soldier and a female Soldier who is part of a dual-military marriage – both must receive counseling,  both must have a family care plan, and both must be prepared to deploy.  Your suggestion that single female Soldiers who become pregnant “out of wedlock” should be subject to UCMJ action is discriminatory.  I also wonder whether you would support the same UCMJ action for male Soldiers who impregnate single female Soldiers – after all, it does take two.  Instead, you blame the female Soldier. 

You also mention overhearing female Soldiers say they won’t deploy because they are pregnant.  They will not be deployed while they are pregnant, and for six months afterwards.  This is Army policy.  However, being a mother does not exempt you from deployment.  If these female Soldiers truly believed what they said, the joke will be on them. 

I am a senior NCO and a single mother (through divorce), and I am tired of all female Soldiers having to deal with the negative acts of a few female Soldiers being used against all of us.  “Everyone knows” that one female Soldier who got pregnant to get out of being deployed, but that one Soldier does not represent all of us.  I agree that SPC Hutchinson should either get her family care plan together, or be chaptered from the Army.  I don’t agree that her situation should be used against the rest of us.

Respectfully, SFC Danielle Hart

Fort Huachuca, AZ

DV