I don't know much about the Army rules, apparently after you're honorably discharged if you have time remaining on your contract you can be recalled. I think this is an issue we should let some of the service and former service members comment on. However, I think it does say something about the state of current enlistment and how the army is stretched. link DAVIDSON, N.C. — When Lisa Pagan reports for duty Sunday, four long years after she was honorably discharged from the Army, she'll arrive with more than her old uniform. She's bringing her kids, too. "I have to bring them with me," she said. "I don't have a choice." Pagan is among thousands of former service members who have left active duty since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, only to later receive orders to return to service. They're not in training, they're not getting a Defense Department salary, but as long as they have time left on their original enlistment contracts, they're on "individual ready reserve" status — eligible to be recalled at any time. Soldiers can appeal, and some have won permission to remain in civilian life. Pagan filed several appeals, arguing that because her husband travels for business, no one else can take care of her kids. All were rejected, leaving Pagan with what she says is a choice between deploying to Iraq and abandoning her family, or refusing her orders and potentially facing charges. Then she hit on the idea of showing up Sunday at Fort Benning, Ga., with her children in tow. "I guess they'll have to contact the highest person at the base, and they'll have to decide from there what to do," Pagan said. "I either report and bring the children with me or don't report and face dishonorable discharge and possibly being arrested. I guess I'll just have to make my case while I'm there." Master Sgt. Keith O'Donnell, an Army spokesman in St. Louis, said the commander at Fort Benning will decide how to handle the situation. "The Army tries to look at the whole picture and they definitely don't want to do anything that jeopardizes the family or jeopardizes the children," O'Donnell said. "At the same time, these are individuals who made obligations and commitments to the country." Of the 25,000 individual ready reserve troops recalled since September 2001, more than 7,500 have been granted deferments or exemptions, O'Donnell said. About 1,000 have failed to report. O'Donnell said most of those cases still are under investigation, while 360 soldiers have been separated from the Army either through "other than honorable" discharges or general discharges. He said Pagan isn't likely to face charges, since none of the individual ready reserve soldiers who have failed to report faced a court-martial. Pagan, who grew up near Camden, N.J., was working in a department store when she made her commitment in September 2002. She learned how to drive a truck, and met her husband Travis while stationed in Hawaii. She had her first child while in uniform, and they left the service in 2005 when their enlistments were up. She always knew there was a chance she could be recalled, but she buried the thought in the back of her mind. "When I enlisted, they said almost nobody gets called back when you're in the IRR," she said. The young family settled outside of Charlotte in the college town of Davidson, where Travis landed a job as a salesman. It required lots of travel, but that was OK — Pagan enjoyed her life as a stay-at-home mom to their son Eric and second child, a daughter named Elizabeth. She opened a child-care center in her home, and started taking classes at nearby Fayetteville State. The orders to return to active duty arrived in December 2007. She told the Army there was no one to take care of her children: Her husband spent most of his time on the road, and they believe quitting his job is a sure path to bankruptcy and foreclosure. Her parents live in New Jersey and her husband's parents live in Texas. Neither are able to help out. The Army wasn't persuaded. Pagan hired attorney Mark Waple, who filed another appeal, which included a letter from Travis Pagan's employer that said bluntly: "In order for Travis to remain an employee, he will be required to travel." In December 2008, her appeal was again rejected. "It's the obligation of commanders to make certain that service members have a valid family care plan and that clearly has not happened in Lisa's case," Waple said. Tom Tarantino, a policy associate with the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, a nonprofit group that helps veterans, said the Army has taken a hard line on many of these cases. "Usually the only way that someone can get out of the deployment or get out of the military due to a family hardship is if they get into a situation where the kids will be put into foster care," Tarantino said. "That's how serious it has to be, and I'm sure what the military is telling her — and I'm not saying that this is exactly the right answer — but the fact that it is inconvenient for her husband's job is not the military's problem. It's very harsh."
Thanks again DUBYA for the lousy mess you left our country in, and it's people in.... May your legacy rot with you....... DD
So...let me get your point right. Somebody gets their honorable discharge early with the understanding that they can be recalled to active duty at any time. When they get recalled pursuant to the agreement they signed, that somehow is the fault of the guy who isn't even President anymore. Apparently, our laws of logic frighten you.
Anyone think that perhaps she would NOT be called back to active duty if we didn't have a BOGUS war going on? No? Didn't think that deeply? Color me, NOT SHOCKED ! DD
If it wasn't Iraq, it would be Afghanistan. Until the terrorists are put down, ther will always be a war to fight...and it won't be bogus
Don't bother trying to explain the logic. There are people who simply ignore the facts and only think their opinions matter. Never mind the fact these people VOLUNTEERED.
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/js/pap/embed.js?frol02n15d8q4e2"></script> DD, watch this Frontline report on Afghanistan. I'm not a Bush fan but I am glad that he did have the cajones to do what was necessary in that front. I'm hoping that it will help you realize how important that war is.
DaDa...if anybody in this thread should be accused of not thinking deeply, it is you. She is going to have to honor the commitment that she made when she took the benefits of military service (college tuition, etc). OF COURSE she didn't think that she'd ever have to make good on it. NOBODY does. To hear this story and blame the whole thing on Bush seems great, as political pileon is easy and does not take considering the entire situation...just the surface and a few sound bites. Perhaps you should just stick to designing slick electronic gizmos.
Honor, commitment. Yes, but facts of the matter is that two children come before one person in the military. Life changes, and you work around situations. Obviously, this person isn't putting on a front. Nor should she be expected to put family making on hiatus until her 4-8 year reserve duty is up. Facts are, as already stated in this article, NOBODY has ever been court martialed in this type of case yet, and I respect her for doing what is right for her children. She served her country already, and though she has a reserve duty that is attatched to almost every single soldier who enlists, life changes. Two young children changes. To maybe make this point more clear, and yes its going to be a bit extreme, what if she were pregnant? Then should she be scolded for her "lack of commitment". Honestly also, to me nobody has the right to question her commitment, since she had the cajones to enlist in a war time era. Much less people who who never served themselves. And yes, this problem is largely due to Bush and his overstretching of our forces. We had no reason to go into Iraq. Not for WMD's, not for the protection of America from terrorist in Iraq. If we did it as a means to rid the country of a dictator who committed crimes against humanity, (which was the only excuse after WMD's and such failed) then I can think of about 20 other countries with just as bad humanitarian abuses as Iraq starting with countries like N Korea, China, Cuba.
Congratulations for articulating an argument that plays right into the hands of the backwards people that don't want women in the military period. Bravo!
LOL, if you read that out of this conversation, then you seriously are backwards. Im speaking on situations in LIFE that change something as insignificant as one more person in the field. So please, feign your anger somewhere else. Explain to me how many tours your ponied up to the military since its such an outrage for this woman to "skip" out. Carry on soldier.
She should not have children then, if she knows she's obligated to re-enlist and it will make her situation hard. Did she ever think this through? Obviously no. She just wants the benefits and not have to take on the commitments.
It's called "stop loss". Every person who enlists in the military commits to eight years of service. If their active duty enlistment ends before those 8 years are up, then they are put on reserve for the remainder of those years. The contract also says: "In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until six (6) months after the war ends, unless the enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States." It's essentially a "backdoor draft". If they can't get enough new recruits to compensate for the loss of manpower, then they prevent soldiers from leaving so they can maintain troop levels. Kind of sucks but it's also kind of necessary if you're fighting a war. Whether the war should be fought or not is a different issue. This has been around since after Vietnam. But it's become a big issue with the War on Terror. They made a movie that came out last year appropriately titled "Stop Loss." Decent flick.
I knew people were getting stop lossed but I didn't know they were doing it to people who have been out for years. Even if you know the policy exists you expect to happen to people who are about to get discharged, not people who've been out for 4 years. She shouldn't be forced to wait until 2010 to have kids because of the possibility of being recalled.
Stop loss happens when a serviceman is already on active duty and has to involuntary stay on active duty pass his or her end of term of service. This usually happens because his\her ETS is right before or in the middle of a deployment. They are usually extended until the end of the deployment. This woman was called up from the Individual Ready Reserve, which all serviceman go into when they leave the military. Military contracts go for 8 years, and most only serve 4 years on active duty, unless they re-enlist, then spend the rest on ready reserve. This woman must have had some critical specialty the military needed to be called up from IRR.
Side note.. Can we stop with this argument already? Afghanistan and Iraq were to different things with no connection. Al Qaeda wasnt there, seeds of terrorism werent there, WMD werent there, just a nuthead dictator who is not unlike many other idiots that run countries all over the world. And yes we wouldve had more in Afghanistan but certainly not the numbers of the two combined and Afghanistan wouldn't be such a problem if we had devoted attention to it in the first place. For the love of god, stop making up this bogus nonsense. It's been debunked a thousand times over.
Your argument is that because she now has children, she should be allowed to opt of her military contract. That is one reason why people did not want women in the military to begin with. If you cannot wrap your mind around that premise, then that is your problem. You don't have to have been in combat to understand that...but nice strawman. She chose to enlist. I didn't. She has the obligation. I don't. That is the best argument you have....really? Wow...you really have no argument then.
The show is about an hour long. You can catch the rest of it here, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warbriefing/view/
