Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Army Sends Infant to Protective Services, Mom to Afghanistan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 06:48 PM
Original message
Army Sends Infant to Protective Services, Mom to Afghanistan
ugh...are we still living in America?...its like something the SS would do.




Army Sends Infant to Protective Services, Mom to Afghanistan

November 15, 2009


Ventura, California - US Army Specialist Alexis Hutchinson, a single mother, is being threatened with a military court-martial if she does not agree to deploy to Afghanistan, despite having been told she would be granted extra time to find someone to care for her 11-month-old son while she is overseas.

Hutchinson, of Oakland, California, is currently being confined at Hunter Army Airfield near Savannah, Georgia, after being arrested. Her son was placed into a county foster care system.

Hutchinson has been threatened with a court martial if she does not agree to deploy to Afghanistan on Sunday, Nov. 15. She has been attempting to find someone to take care of her child, Kamani, while she is deployed overseas, but to no avail.

....Faced with this choice, Hutchinson chose not to show up for her plane to Afghanistan. The military arrested her and placed her child in the county foster care system...more

www.opednews.com/articles/Army-Sends-Infant-to-Prote-by-Dahr-Jamail-091115-383.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Absent without leave - there may be more to the story
Supposedly the soldier refused to go through the appropriate channels and would not have been sent over seas without finding appropriate child care. However, she was afraid to show up as required and take her chances on the military granting her leave so instead she went absent without leave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Uh, no
Edited on Tue Nov-17-09 06:58 PM by rollingrock
she did go through the appropriate channels. the army heard her story and even granted her an extension to find someone to care for her child, but then revoked the extension for no reason.

edit: her choice was; go AWOL or leave her infant child behind alone to fend for itself. according to you and the army, she should have done the latter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qazplm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. no she should have showed up for duty
and then brought her baby and said I still have no one to take care of her.

There are always higher ups to complain to. Your choice is not to simply not show up without having exhausted all avenues first.

We don't know all the facts and jumping to the Army sucks is a bit premature. I spent quite awhile as a military defense attorney. Sometimes, there is more to the story and it ain't always anti-Army and pro-accused.

I don't know what happened, but I do know it would be unusual for a Soldier in her situation not to be chaptered (aka let go) in this situation, which leads me to believe that, rightly or wrongly we do not know, the chain of command did not believe her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. That's stupid
the army already granted her an extension, so she didn't have to show up.

its not her fault the army revoked that extension. that's their screw up, not hers.

it wouldn't have made a difference if she showed up with her daughter anyway. they would have simply arrested her and took her kid away! they act like the Gestapo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qazplm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #11
18. i see logic and reason
have no dog in this hunt for you, the army sucks and that's all you want to hear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PuraVidaDreamin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. This demands presidential leadership!
What a disgrace this military is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
4. The people running the Army are incompetent ASSES
Despite repeated complaints and an investigation they let a batshit crazy fundie stay in and eventually kill 13 people then they arrest a mom, take away her kid and expects her to fly off to Afghanistan.

We're talking about the Army not UHAUL. :mad: The Army I knew yesterday is not the Army I know today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I'm surprised they haven't reinstated the draft yet
they have resorted to such draconian measures to keep this war and bloodshed going, that would be the next logical step.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
branders seine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. "She's just a peasant."
"Big deal," say our rulers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Obamanaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. Much discussion at some of these earlier threads
Edited on Tue Nov-17-09 07:40 PM by Obamanaut
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_Lawyer09 Donating Member (690 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
9. Like me and several other vets spent hours attempting to explain:
There is more than meets the eye, and one side of the story is being missrepresented. I'm not going to waste more hrs. attempting to set anybody straight on this, but check out the latest story when you get a chance. She's not being sent to Afghanistan, and won't unless she has a valid family care plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. You speak only for yourself, not most vets here.
You are distinctly out of step with most veterans here at DU, who aren't gung ho, and don't spew the military line every time they post on military topics.

The military is notorious for having officers who abuse their position and soldiers who suffer because of it. This soldier's only problem may be some self righteous, Bible Thumping career officer who doesn't like her being a single mother.

You don't know, but you're always going to lap up whatever the military spews.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. As I said, you're an apologist.
Edited on Wed Nov-18-09 09:05 AM by TexasObserver
And you think the Army is right when it forces a baby into foster care to send its mother to war.

Stop dodging your bad history here. You wrote it, now you're stuck with it.

You quote regs, as if regs compel the army to act. The army does what it wants to do, and doesn't give a damn about regs, when that doesn't fit its needs.

We already had all the discussions you and I need to have. You religously defend the Army from a 21 year old mother and her baby. You're a real piece of ... work.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_Lawyer09 Donating Member (690 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. The Army happens to be in compliance with the AR 635-200
The Army will not deploy the mother without a valid family care plan. She is not confined as the first article indicated, nor is her child currently in foster care. Finally, the Army is not sending her to Afghanistan for a court martial. Myself and the others whom attempted to rationally and patiently explain this to yourself and others, not only apparently wasted our time. Because one overriding fact is increasingly clear: You don't want to consider facts, you'd rather have them entirely wrong, as long as the errors allow to rail against what you don't like. If you just want to be a naysayer and defy facts, you're no better than Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. The first article was quoting from her attorney, who in large part wanted to drum up public outcry and sway opinion, wherein she obviously was successful. Go bury your head in the sand, or pound it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. You're consistent. You can't see the forest for the trees.
The army ignores any reg it wants to ignore, when it serves the army's needs, and enforces them when it serves their needs. The reg is immaterial, because it isn't regs that make the Army lie about Tillman or Lynch. They do so because lying is part of the army's way of life.

Behind this event is some petty major or colonel who thinks it is his job to teach this single mother a lesson.

You know what you can do with your regs, don't you, boot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
10. Joining the military is not like taking a job at Target
She was in the military before she had the baby, and she knew what the consequences were. It sucks, but single Moms should not be able to negate their contracts by having a baby..

She needs to accept the court-martial, and go on with her life.

There are many Moms in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Women fought for the right to be equal to men in the military, and this stuff gives them all a black-eye.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Nope..she would have spent part of the previous 20 months
making arrangements for deployment, and failing that, taken her lumps and court martial if it came to that. the US military is not a social Services Organization

I fully understand her reluctance to go, but the military did not force her to be a single mother with no friends, family. no doubt she used military medical benefits for her prenatal care and for the delivery and for any other medical expenses. She just needs to honor her contract, or leave under whatever circumstances she has to..

It sucks, but she was not tricked , nor is she being unjustly punished..

She went to the media, to crank up the volume & attract sympathy to her plight, but she only has two choices here..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
qazplm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. so let me get this straight
and why is it just a woman, there are more than a few single dads in the military too...but single parents get out but married parents have to go...and you think that's fair?

Do you really think she would have literally "left the child to fend for itself?"

Can you not post drivel?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_Lawyer09 Donating Member (690 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. You need to get your facts straight
If you want to deal with facts then read the most recent article, which explains the misstatements of the previous. If you want to incoherently babble about assumptions and journalistic sensationalism without getting your ducks in a row, by all means to it. Just don't critize those whom are dealing with the facts and realities as they pretain to this situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #14
25. "this is a long-time commitment we're talking about, not a weekend babysitting job"
and she should have THOUGHT OF THAT before she squeezed it out.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
21. At the very least, more stories like this thankfully dissuade others from joining
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-18-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
24. SS would do?
Godwin's law, look it up.

It sucks but she signed on the line. She should accept her court-martial and get on with her life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC