U.S. Army charges single mom who refused deployment
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Millions in global aid for Iraq remain unspent
( 1 )
-
U.N. Security Council blames Syrian gov't for Houla killings
( 5 )
-
U.S. drones kill 5 militants in Pakistan
( 9 )
-
NATO has fight on its hands in Afghanistan - Panetta
( 6 )
-
Iran may rethink 20% enrichment: spokesman
( 2 )
-
- 秘書及び業務サポート
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥4.0M / Year
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
Order by Time Order by Popularity
26 Comments
Login to comment
0
Suzu1
Of course it was. The other mom (Pagan)acted like an adult, showed up at the deployment and explained her problem. If Hutchinson had shown up, she wouldn't have had to deploy and she wouldn't be facing the problems she is now.
0
YuriOtani
Well the Americans are getting tough with their troops. The economy is bad so replacing her is no problem and treating her poorly sends a signal to the troops. Iron discipline and no latitude for individual cases reminds be of another governments in history. Wonder if the Americans will start to shoot deserters next?
0
goddog
She should have showed up with the baby in her arms.
0
Altria
If she doesn't want to go, she doesn't want to go. Don't be dicks.
0
Wolfpack
If she doesn't want to go, she shouldn't have voluntarily joined the military.
0
Molenir
Exactly. Shouldn't have joined the military, shouldn't have gotten pregnant. Should have gotten married when she decided to have the kid. Lots of should haves and shouldn't haves could have averted this situation.
0
ronaldk
I don't think it is unreasonable to expect her employer (the Army) to reassign her to a position in the States where she can still be productive and take care of her baby. This type of rigidity makes the Army look bad and will hurt recruiting. People get pregnant and have babies, deal with it.
0
Molenir
Nonsense. If you want to get pregnant and have babies, don't join the military. When you join the military, you agree to go where they send you. Your problems, are your problems. You know what they require of you, you're told up front when you join, if you can't hack it, don't take the job.
0
USNinJapan2
ronaldk
The military, the Army obviously included, will work with single parents to enable them to both serve and care for their children, but that's done with prior coordination. Spc Hutchinson, who knew well in advance that she is in a deployable status, was required to have a child care plan in place in the event that she would receive orders to deploy. She failed to do this. If she really could not find a way for someone (family, friends) to care for her child in her absence then this fact needed to be communicated to her chain of command long before her scheduled day of departure. The time to let the Army know that your mother can't take care of your baby for you after all is not on the day that you're to fly out of the country. There's a lot of info missing in this article, but based on the fact that she was scheduled to be on the flight it's a pretty safe assumption that her chain of command was not aware of her childcare issue and that they naturally expected her to deploy as scheduled without issue. Possibilities are: 1) She never had a solid child care plan to begin with, or 2) She did have a registered plan which was for her mother to care for the baby, but it fell apart at the last minute and instead of letting her leadership know of the critical problem just didn't show up for the flight. Either way she acted irresponsibly and can't complain if the Army holds her accountable. Like someone already said, she should have literally shown up at the flight with her baby if it really was that last minute and if she really had no other way of contacting her chain of command in advance via any other method of communication.
0
dontknockit
There is not one word here about her "not wanting to go". What it says is that she has no one to take care of her baby.
Sure, it all might just be an excuse well prepared in advance. But if the mother of the soldier refuses to take the baby despite that being the plan submitted to the military, then the military should be focused on the mother of the soldier for her refusal and the soldier herself for not relaying the information. Or, they should have asked for a plan B.
But filing criminal charges against the soldier is stupid. If they are so desperate for soldiers that they have to take single moms, then they need to accomodate them. Somebody has to take care of the baby. Its not optional.
0
sharky1
Obviously we don't have the full story in this article, but at any rate, she chose her parental duties over military duties because her child care plan fell through...I think she made the right choice...
0
USNinJapan2
dontknockit
We do accomodate them but not because we are forced to recruit and accept single volunteers as you suggest. The majority of single mothers (and fathers) in the military are not parents when they join. Most of them marry after joining, have children, and get divorced thereby becoming single parents. Think about it, the vast majority of military recruits fall into the 17-20 age group. The percentage of single parents in this pool volunteering for military service is very low. The services do do everthing they can to enable single parents to serve and be parents, but the single parents have to do their fare share in making this possible. In this case it wasn't the Army's responsibility to find longterm child care for Spc Hutchinson's baby, it was hers.
0
dontknockit
Well, I suppose I could have said "Keep single mom soldiers" but does it matter? If they were not so desperate for soldiers they would not consider sending a single mom to do a FUBAR mission in a FUBAR country, let alone try to prosecute her for not going in light of her reasons for not going. It all underscores the desperation of the military.
Anyway, as you say, it all might have fallen apart at the last minute. Its even possible that mom called from Cali. at the time she was supposed to pick up the baby in Georgia and said "sorry". But again, with any certainty, I can only fault her failure to alert superiors to the situation. I don't think that is worth criminal charges.
0
timorborder
This one could be develop into a PR problem for the US army. Then again, the army is not a 9-5 job and this woman has a duty to follow orders, irrespective of family issues. Indeed, if she was in such dire straights, she should have approached her superiors with her problem rather than failing to appear.
Anyway, the army needs to get its head on and realize that dragging a 21 year old through the military legal system is not going to win it any points in the wider community (from which it recruits). As such, this problem needs to go away quietly, with either a separation from service or a reconsideration of the assignment. Personally speaking, from the army point of view, getting rid of this woman would probably be the better option, because any displays of charity might be used by other soldiers to jump on the bandwagon.
0
goddog
Do you know why the department of defense has schools for military with kids? So they can have kids and act like normal people. They did not sign a paper saying they will not have kids if they enlist. That would be stupid.
0
adaydream
She should have made plans for such a situation.
She should have shown up plenty of time before deployment with child in arm. At least you made it to deployment. Missing a movement is a big deal.
Prediction - She'll get a Summary Court-Martial, prison - suspended, reduced in rank, Other Than Honorable Discharge and sent home. < :-)
0
presto345
I'm getting a little p:ssed by repeatedly reading comments asserting 'she should have/she shouldn't have . . . How about saying something in the line of how the military should have acted or should not have acted. Or the US government shouldn't have invaded this or that country. This is a rare case of a desperate young woman faced with very hard choices she was forced to make without any time to consider them. Filing criminal charges and on top of that announcing it to the world I find repulsive and overkill and shows the military in a very poor light.
0
USNinJapan2
presto345
More realistically, she probably had at least 6-9 months' notice of her upcoming deployment. It's not like she's a National Guard member or Reservist who suddenly got called up and told to deploy with little notice.
0
presto345
Yeah, yeah. I can see what corner this comment is coming from. How about trying to see things through her eyes. How about imagining she had everything figured out. She had someone lined up to take care of her child. In the last minute however that person bailed out and she had no back up (which may be a weak point in the scenario). So what did she do? Her priority was with the child, not cooking chow for the troops in some godforsaken place.
0
adaydream
presto345 some of us are stating what she should have done because we have military experience and know how the military works. 30 years ago this might have been a problem of the military planning, but anymore commanders know who they have. These troops do monthly training to prepare and they are reminded over and over again to prepare to leave on deployment.
This was a problem created and exasperated by her actions. < :-)
0
amerijap
Well, in case of that she could have filed for maternity leave or petition rather than refusing the order. Things would be the different stories.
0
SuperLib
I bet there are quite a few single Moms in the military who are going to watch this story closely. They're the ones who did what they were supposed to do but let's be real....now that the story is in the media this lady will probably get special consideration. I'm guessing that that's not going to sit well with them...
0
YuriOtani
Stories like this really bother me and reinforce the following. When at war a country in order to beat them becomes like them. Japan having fought America is currently a lot like the WWII America both good and bad things. However we are at peace with the rest of the world. America having fought Japan, Germany, Soviet Union and now the Taliban are becoming a lot like them. Politics in the United States has reached toxic levels, the military is becoming more and more draconian by the day with harsher and harsher punishments. The government is becoming more and more powerful day by day. I know it only goes so far but it does lead to questions. I wonder what the US military will do next to its hapless members?
0
ChrisBiggins
YuriOtani; I think you should lokk at your own coun try and itsp apst and present behaviour to its citizens , in military or not.
I think the American war machine is beastly and feel sorry for this poor mum, but to say Japan is at peace with teh rest of the world is your idea of a little jokey wokey, i hope!
0
YuriOtani
ChrisBiggins, no I am saying America is becoming less civil by the day. Americans are not evil but something is changing. Japan is far from perfect but this case worries me. I just can not find the words to express it!
0
amerijap
There you go. Sounds like you're getting track of the fundamental problem deeply rooted in democracy today.
Moderator: Back on topic please.
Back to top