Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Army discharging single mom...thoughts?

From the Associated Press

SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) - A single-mom Army soldier based in Georgia is being discharged from the military instead of facing a court-martial after she refused to deploy to Afghanistan, saying she had no one able to care for her infant son.

Spc. Alexis Hutchinson learned she would be spared from a military trial Thursday. Her attorney, Rai Sue Sussman, said the Army cook was excited to hear the news.

However, the administrative discharge Fort Stewart commanders granted does have consequences. Hutchinson is being demoted to private and will lose all military and veterans benefits.

Hutchinson of Oakland, Calif., was arrested in November after she skipped her unit's deployment flight. Hutchinson said she stayed back because her mother backed out of plans to keep her son.

Answer Question

Asked by gdiamante at 5:28 PM on Feb. 11, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 37 (95,167 Credits)
Answers (17)
  • Sorry, she had an obligation to the military that actually is over the child. (As said by many dads that are away from thier kids) How come none of the single Dad's get to do this?
    I think she should force her mom to do it.

    Answer by Anonymous at 5:31 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • She shouldn't be in the military as a single parent. It's not the her mother's job to raise her son. As for dads, the same things goes, IMO. Time for them to be adults and take care of the children they brought into the world.

    Answer by Anonymous at 5:35 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • I am thankful she didn't face a court martial. The military isn't for everyone, now she knows.

    Answer by Anonymous at 5:35 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • This is a happy ending for her child - much better than her getting jailed or shipped overseas !

    Military training is rigorous and confers a lot of life skills & ego strength that the average person does not have, so this mom is in a good position for proceeding into a great life. We know she already has her head on straight to have chosen mothering her child despite the pressures.

    Answer by waldorfmom at 5:35 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • At least she's not getting court martialed.

    Answer by Izsarejman at 5:45 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • I think this is bad. She SHOULD have been court martialed. If I remember the back story correctly she was IN the military for a little while THEN got preg. There was an ENTIRE platoon of people counting on her as part of their TEAM. She enjoyed the perks of military (ins that covered her preg and delivery and wanted the GIBILL) but didnt want to hold up her end of a contract SHE signed! They dont sign you up for the miiltary at gun point in a back alley!! They walk you through EVERYTHING you are signing up for! My step dad was a recruiter at one point. In a the broader scheme of things I would think the feminists would be UP in ARMS over this!! To me this sets equal rights back a few! We WANT equal treatment but then something like THIS comes up and we expected to be different and given exceptions because we are women? KWIM?


    Answer by momof030404 at 5:54 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • given exceptions because we are women?
    Sorry, but I don't quite see this. She wanted someone to care for her child. That is all. She could have hired a nanny, or asked a friend to step up. I know she can't force someone to do it, but surely there was someone who would have helped her. I think this is poor planning on her part. I don't blame her, but being in the military, she really should have planned for this situation to come up. I think it is good for the child's sake that she wasn't put in jail, and I do agree that she should lose her benefits as she did not fulfill her contract.


    Answer by 29again at 6:13 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • I have no sympathy for her. Plenty of other single Moms & DADS figure it out. The least she should have suffered was a dishonorable discharge. Her disregard for her position let a LOT of people down.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 6:20 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • IMO, the second she became a mother, the military was and should be second. If she had someone that was able to care for her baby, sure. If a single dad had to be deployed and there was no mother in the picture to care for the baby and no other close relative that was able/willing, I'd say that he shouldn't have to go either. What are we supposed to do- put kids in foster care so that their parents can serve military obligations?

    The "getting pregnant while in the military" thing... Not so sure THAT is an excusable thing.

    As for women's lib and feminism.. I'm all for it, but women who become mothers are mothers first. Just like men that become fathers are fathers first. If there is another parent in the picture to take responsibility, then they're allowed to be something else first. Otherwise... Not so much.

    Answer by Gruntlings at 6:24 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

  • I am so torn on this. Truthfully, I feel that if we want equal rights we have to be subject to equal punishment. HOWEVER, women aren't treated equally in many aspects that benefit men. GRUMBLE!!! I spin in CIRCLES on this one.

    Answer by urkiddingright at 6:32 PM on Feb. 11, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.