| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Soldier mom refuses deployment to care for baby |
| 2009-11-17 |
| SAVANNAH, Ga. -- An Army cook and single mom may face criminal charges after she skipped her deployment flight to Afghanistan because, she said, no one was available to care for her infant son while she was overseas. Any new family additions hanging fire also? Spc. Alexis Hutchinson, 21, claims she had no choice but to refuse deployment orders because the only family she had to care for her 10-month-old son -- her mother -- was overwhelmed by the task, already caring for three other relatives with health problems. Her civilian attorney, Rai Sue Sussman, said Monday that one of Hutchinson's superiors told her she would have to deploy anyway and place the child in foster care. "For her it was like, 'I couldn't abandon my child,'" Sussman said. "She was really afraid of what would happen, that if she showed up they would send her to Afghanistan anyway and put her son with child protective services." Hutchinson, who is from Oakland, Calif., remained confined Monday to the boundaries of Hunter Army Airfield in Savannah, 10 days after military police arrested her for skipping her unit's flight. No charges have been filed, but a spokesman for the Army post said commanders were investigating. Per published orders, place of duty - Afghanistan. Soldier not at place of duty - AWOL. No excuses, no exceptions! Kevin Larson, a spokesman for Hunter Army Airfield, said he didn't know what Hutchinson was told by her commanders, but he said the Army would not deploy a single parent who had nobody to care for his or her child. "I don't know what transpired and the investigation will get to the bottom of it," Larson said. "If she would have come to the deployment terminal with her child, there's no question she would not have been deployed." Hutchinson's son, Kamani, was placed into custody overnight with a daycare provider on the Army post after she was arrested and jailed briefly, Larson said. Hutchinson's mother picked up the child a week ago and took him back to her home in California. Hutchinson, who's assigned to the 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division, joined the Army in 2007 and had no previous deployments, Sussman said. She said Hutchinson is no longer in a relationship with the father. No father figure available. How very strange. It's not strange, it's typical in modern western society. Let's not miss the larger point ... The Army requires all single-parent soldiers to submit a care plan for dependent children before they can deploy to a combat zone. Submit and UPDATE as necessary and sign attesting to its validity and accurancy. Hutchinson had such a plan -- her mother, Angelique Hughes, had agreed to care for the boy. Hughes said Monday she kept the boy for about two weeks in October before deciding she couldn't keep him for a full year. Hughes said she's already having to care for her ailing mother and sister, as well as a daughter with special needs. She also runs a daycare center at her home, keeping about 14 children during the day. "This is an infant, and they require 24-hour care," Hughes said. "It was very, very stressful, just too much for me to deal with." Hughes said she returned Kamani to his mother in Georgia a few days before her scheduled deployment Nov. 5. She said they told her daughter's commanders they needed more time to find another family member or close friend to help Hughes care for the boy, but Hutchinson was ordered to deploy on schedule. Ok, I got it.... they "TOLD COMMANDER!" Larson, the Army post spokesman, said officials planned to keep Hutchinson in Georgia as investigators gathered facts about the case. Facts are the soldier is AWOL! Discharge under less than honorable. NEXT! "Spc. Hutchinson's deployment is halted," Larson said. "There will be no deployment while this situation is ongoing." And there will be NO ARMY if this crap is allowed to continue. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
#30
| |
| Posted by: Pappy 2009-11-17 21:32 |
| #29 Indeed, OP, discretional judgements. Thank you and your wife for wise decisions. |
| Posted by: rhodesiafever 2009-11-17 20:57 |
| #28 Leadership and a watchful eye such as yours Old Patriot, produced results and not empty headed responses and subsequent AWOLS. Thank you for taking care of soldiers. I salute you! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-11-17 20:34 |
| #27 I think my 26 years' service gives me the right to state an opinion here, especially since 22 of those was in an NCO supervisory position of one type or another. I've had several (too many) young ladies with small children and no co-provider. It's hard on them, on the children, and on the unit. It's rough building a deployment roster that doesn't discriminate against any member of the unit, but also recognizes the needs of the individual members. My wife and I (and my wife, alone) have stepped in on many occasions to care for the children of those I supervised. Usually it was only for a day or two until family members could arrive and take over. The only person I've had refuse to deploy was a young jack$$$ that I wouldn't recommend for cleaning stables, and it had nothing to do with dependents. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2009-11-17 20:27 |
| #26 What they gonna do, send her to 'nam? Send her to ...Detroit! Hey, how come she can't take the baby with her? Do we have some sort of liberal feel-good law against babies in combat? It's no wonder American kids are turning into soccer playing wussies. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2009-11-17 20:02 |
| #25 Jeager Panda5130 good clean kill thar! LOL! o7z to you buddy - you know kak when you smell it.
| |
| Posted by: .5MT 2009-11-17 17:32 |
| #24 JP, it may not be Besoeker's war as you say, although I think you're wrong about that, at least he supports you, which you didn't do for us. Ever get displaced? I hope you cope half as well when it happens to you. As for the issue, I would opine it's just a life issue, life goes on. What they gonna do, send her to 'nam? |
| Posted by: rhodesiafever 2009-11-17 15:07 |
| #23 "My mother failed me" as well Panda. That's why I've become a blathering old fossil. However comma, I always had my personal affairs in order, I never missed a phueching deployment order! Manifest call! Or a jump command! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-11-17 14:57 |
| #22 Thanks MODs, I was typing someting really unacceptable to this troll when you snip'd it. I dont always agree with B and a good boxing match is really more fun but that was out of line. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2009-11-17 14:53 |
| #21 Twenty-one years old with a baby and a care plan that fell through days before deployment... She probably was not thinking clearly, and a superior telling her the baby would be put in foster care. It's a tribute to the caliber of people who sign up for our military that she didn't hole up somewhere with a gun. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-17 14:52 |
| #20 Jeager Panda5130, it's a shame you had to surround a good point with such unnecessary nastiness. Please do not do that anymore. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-17 14:51 |
| #19 Besoeker you are out of line you kak filled Afrikaaner fossil. This isn't your war, and how good was your Army anyways when YOU LOST! Loser. Sticking to the facts, this sounds like she had the FC Plan in place as required, was ready to deploy and her mom failed her. What she did wrong was she reacted the wrong way, flailing around instead of notifying her CO, First Sgt, Bn SGM and the Chaplain's office as well as the unit/base FRG. Anyone that has really commanded support troops knows there is more to this than made the spin in the papers. There are ARs that govern the steps when an FCP fails. Wait the whole story is out before condemning. Until then step the hell back Boer trash. |
| Posted by: Jeager Panda5130 2009-11-17 14:36 |
| #18 Her chain of command should, in fact, help her out. If they don't they are ALSO violating a family care plan Somehow I KNEW it had to be the chain of command's fault, lol. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-11-17 14:27 |
| #17 Soldier not at place of duty - AWOL. No excuses, no exceptions! Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Deployments can and do get called off up until the day of boarding the plane all the time for reasons less serious than this one. Her chain of command should, in fact, help her out. If they don't they are ALSO violating a family care plan. Nobody can sue the Grandmother for not holding up her end of the bargain and foist anything on the grandmother. Therefore, an alternate plan should be used. Take a chill pill yall. |
| Posted by: GirlThursday 2009-11-17 14:19 |
| #16 Besoeker, Ya I'm wondering that as well. It will flush out, the bad press is the crap I hate. She is either going to take care of it or get thrown out, she is not worth the press. But this crap about being armchair soldiers?? WTF? I would bet we have 100 years of combined service in this thread alone, I got 27 locked out and 6 1/2 of company command alone, could not get it right the first time and had to try two more times to get it right. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2009-11-17 14:17 |
| #15 Armchair soldiers? Yes I guess I qualify for that :). Am curious why she had to outright refuse deployment. And why all the publicity? Even an armchair soldier knows that this is not that uncommon. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-11-17 14:10 |
| #14 Spc. Alexis Hutchinson, 21, claims she had no choice but to refuse deployment Bullshi* All she had to do was request...thru her chain of commmand, a deployment delay until she could get her Family Care situation resolved or she could be discharged. Unattended infants are not generally left lying at the edge of the Tarmac. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-11-17 13:58 |
| #13 agree w/49 Pan. Every deployment I've been on has always included that one last minute incident where someone gets pulled off for something weird or off the wall. I'll reserve judgment until the investigation is done. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2009-11-17 13:48 |
| #12 Comments are from a bunch of arm-chair soldiers. |
| Posted by: Albemarle Clotch1793 2009-11-17 13:38 |
| #11 This is more common than one would think. The only thing out of the ordinary is it made the press. There are a large number of reasons a troop does not deploy and having a family care plan fall apart at the 11th hour is just one. Before we go hammering away at her they really need to look at it. Sounds like she sent the kid to mom as promised. Mom failed her. How many of us could, in a few days find a place for our infant child, for a year. The single parents in the units I had the honor to command worked twice as hard for half the credit. I would ask to see the other soldiers with clingy wives and troubled kids that also did not deploy. Sounds like her case was a last minute issue. She joined to serve, and serve she should, but there is not a commander out that wants to send her back from Afghanistan when the kid is in trouble... |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2009-11-17 13:07 |
| #10 Well, I can see her point. I mean, whodathunk that maybe you might get sent overseas if you join the Army? And chris, grandma took the little guy back to her home in California. As long as she's respecting their rights to speak Spanglish, she could probably keep 30 kids in the house under their laws. |
| Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie 2009-11-17 10:36 |
| #9 "She said Hutchinson is no longer in a relationship with the father." That would be lawyer-speak forÂ…"her baby daddy is no good no how". |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2009-11-17 10:08 |
| #8 I'll bet the talk show circuit is lining up to tell 'her' story (but never the story of the poor smuck who has to replace her) about what a meanie her CO was. Yep, never time for those who truly soldier. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-11-17 10:03 |
| #7 I wonder where Kelly Flynn is now? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-11-17 09:35 |
| #6 Unfortunately in our continuing rush to social egalitarianism, breaking the military rank progression glass ceiling, etc, the services did away with entirely professional Womens service branches. The US Army Womans Army Corps (WAC) freed up the equivalent of 7 divisions of men for combat in WWII. Those services policed their own and had very rigid standards of conduct and professionalism which did NOT recognize the bullshi* that permeates our system today, ie, my p**** hurts I'm on sick call, I'm preggies/have kids so I can't deploy, duh...I'm deployed and now preggies, etc. Having said that, some of the best and most dedicated soldiers I have served with have been female, which only proves the cream will rise to the top in spite of a dysfunctional system. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-11-17 09:26 |
| #5 One of Hasan's victims was a pregnant 21 yo just returning from a tour. I would think the military would require birth control such as the implant while on active duty. |
| Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck5091 2009-11-17 09:19 |
| #4 Sounds about right. I'll bet the talk show circuit is lining up to tell 'her' story (but never the story of the poor smuck who has to replace her) about what a meanie her CO was. What made her think that her mother, already overloaded, would be able to take up a new baby? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-11-17 09:15 |
| #3 I don't beleieve it is legal for the mother too be caring for 3 family memebers plus running a daycare out of her home with 14 additional children under GA state law either. Not unless she has help and I somehow doubt the residence would meet cod of a daycare center. Someone joined up for the benefits and paycheck and didn't think they would ever get sent away from the mainland. |
| Posted by: chris 2009-11-17 09:04 |
| #2 This story is all over Open Salon - lots of leftish wailing about how un-family friendly those dreadful, dreadful military services are. One commenter even began wailing about how the military just shouldn't recruit women. I pointed out how terribly retro that attitude was, and how women had to fight like hell to enlist, then fight to stay in if they got married, or got pregnant. Lots of good fun with this, especially how the story is being framed. |
| Posted by: Sgt. Mom 2009-11-17 08:52 |
| #1 Single parents are suppose to have a family (child) care plan or be separated out of the service. She wanted the pay and benefits, but didn't want the responsibilities. Now someone else has to pull her duty. If it is a determined a critical position, then someone else with little or no notice will have to clean up the mess by being yanked from their stabilization and shipped to join the unit. Screwed that family. As a minimum, she'll be administratively discharged. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-11-17 08:30 |