Home » On War » Pregnant Pause: “Thou shall not procreate.”

Pregnant Pause: “Thou shall not procreate.”

By Jamie McIntyre Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009 9:37 pm
Posted in On War

“When babies are outlawed only outlaws will have babies.”

In the U.S. Army, married sex is okay, but conception is not, at least not while deployed in Iraq. An Army commander, Maj. Gen Tony Cuculo, has issued a general order, prohibiting sperm in his sector in Iraq (Multi-division north, from comingling with enemy eggs in any ovaries under his command.

Already seven U.S. soldiers, including three men, have been punished under six-week-old rules making pregnancy a violation of military law in northern Iraq, according to a story in Stars and Stripes.

“The message to my female soldiers is that I need you for the duration,” Cucolo told Stripes in a phone interview late Monday. “Please think before you act.”

Uh.. yeah. So far four women who have become pregnant have been given letters of reprimand, along with two male soldiers. One married guy apparently violated the new military order with a subordinate who was not his wife. He’s in more trouble.

The effect of pregnancy on military readiness was the subject of scholarly paper written by one Army Major Merideth A. Bucher, for the Air Command And Staff College Air University back in 1991.

“As a female soldier I have often felt the pressure to avoid having children for the sake of my career. I have always placed the needs of the Army before my own but someday I too hope to become a parent. And when I do, I hope to find a maternity leave program in place that will support my absence from my unit.”

This was before the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but after Desert Shield/Storm in 1991. In her paper, entitled, “The Impact Of Pregnancy On U.S. Army Readiness”, Maj. Bucher wrote, ” There are three truths that must be stated before progressing further. First, pregnancy is a female issue. There is no bias in this statement, only fact, and women must bear the burdens associated with it. Second, pregnancy is preventable and therefore cannot be compared to the readiness problems caused by long-term illnesses or injuries. Those issues and possible solutions must be addressed separately. Finally, if pregnancy rates are static and relatively predictable, they can be planned for at the Army level.”

So far no other battlefield commander has criminalized impregnation of one’s lawful spouse… but as the legendary Marine Lt. Gen Lewis B. “Chesty” Puller is reputed to have responded when asked by a PFC for permission to marry, ““Son, when the Marine Corps wants you to have a wife, you will be issued one.”

Meanwhile, maybe its time for “SCI,” the strategic condom initiative.

Tags: Cuculo, Pregnancy, Soldiers

« « Tora Bora Hindsight? | It’s Christmas » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

	EnginnerMech December 23rd, 2009 at 4:31 pm Keep in mind, while everyone is in an uproar, this does not prohibit pregnancy in the entire army. This is placing reasonable restrictions upon service members in a theater of combat. For those that have not had the opportunity to serve overseas, it is not a place where it is prudent to be carrying a child. To the feminists, the males are being as justly reprimanded. To the civil rights activists, they joined the military, take time to read the contract they signed and understand that this is well within the bounds of statutory obligation. This article is missing a great number of pertinent facts and I welcome everyone to dig a little deeper and become more aware of the outlined regulation prior to jumping to hasty conclusions.
	Stephen December 23rd, 2009 at 9:35 pm Foe healthy heterosexuals/homosexuals sex is a given, but procreative sex is quite another story for servicemen and women because of their commitment to serve in the armed forces. Nobody twisted their arms to join the armed forces but their arms must be twisted if they fail to follow the codes of behavior expected of them. In any event, there are products in abundance to prevent conception and are easily available.
	John December 23rd, 2009 at 10:52 pm I think the ban on pregnancies should be extended to all first term soldiers regardless of rank as well as soldiers in units who have pending deployments. Strangely enough most of the women in my unit have come up pregnant right before our deployment. This hurts the unit because we lose them to maternity leave and rear detatchments. Female soldiers have a debt to their country and their unit and they should look at motherhood after they’ve fullfilled their initial obligation or after they get out.
	sparky December 23rd, 2009 at 11:52 pm if you have a company half women and it takes all, to make company to be productive—1/2 get pregnant and CAN’T work-and are sent home–the company fails— I agree—NO pregancy allowed—
	GW Titus December 24th, 2009 at 12:53 am All I want to know is where our Soldiers, male or female, find a place to procreate! Last time I looked, everything was wide open (no pun intended) and the only privacy one might have had was the toilet. And for the life of me I cannot imagine wanting or agreeing to ANY KIND of relationship in the Can. Come on, people. You could never want it THAT bad that you would have to fess up to your young’n one of these days . . : “Let me tell you how I met your mother.” Yuck! And ladies! Don’t leave it all to the men! It takes two to tango — even in a war zone. It’s called “taking care of your equipment” — just like your weapons.
	Ted December 24th, 2009 at 1:16 am I agreed with all the comments so far. Who..oa
	Joe December 23rd, 2009 at 10:46 pm Thoroughly agree with the 2 previous comments, as well as the paper written by Major Merideth Bucher. These are soldiers in a combat zone, not college students at a freshman mixer. And the causes of pregnancy, as well how to prevent it, have been well documented since at least last year. (sarcasm off). If you want to have children and stay in the Army, great. Try to do it AFTER you’ve returned home.
	Ruanne December 24th, 2009 at 5:35 am Needs of the mission come first here. I think this commander’s decision will re-open a much needed and belated discussion on maternity in the military in general.
	jeffro December 24th, 2009 at 5:07 am I am in Iraq and we are sending another pregnant soldier home this week.
	Charles Pierce December 24th, 2009 at 12:54 pm The problem is that if a female soldier wishes to get out of combat she arranges to become pregnant. The policy is fair in that it punishes both male and female soldiers. It was issued as a lawful general regulation. I do not see the problem. Do we go back to the old policy that once pregnant you are discharged. Either the young soldiers accept the policy or they leave the service.
	dmedford December 24th, 2009 at 2:57 pm I am a female, disabled veteran, and I think the punishment is reasonable. These female soldiers join knowing what their duties and responsibilities are going to be. Women want to be treated equal, but then go over seas, go crazy with the men, and get pregnant. Every hear of birth control! They get pregnant, then get sent home, only to put pressure on people at home who have to quickly gather their things to run over there and take that female’s spot.
	dmedford December 24th, 2009 at 2:57 pm continue.….It happens way too often and happens a lot to single females.…not married as they would like you to believe. These people are given briefings before they leave for these places about promiscuity and their duties. What about the females that go over there and do their duties their full term and make us proud. Please…no simpathy here. The military is paying for too many single mom’s as it is. Send some of those women’s right’s activists out there to the field to take the place of these young females that can’t keep their legs crossed. Give me a break!!!!! Everyone wants everything to be handed to them when they make the mistakes. Makes me ashamed to be a female some times. Buck up ladies!!!!!! By-the-way, I am married to a military man and I had a child while in the military. I still did my job 24/7 without asking for special treatment. We are bringing up a society of children who believe they should not have to “work” for their “pay”. Where is that old work ethic that we work till we drop. For duty and country!
	OldVet December 24th, 2009 at 1:52 pm Gen. Odierno has caved in to senators and other whiners and revoked MajGen Cucolo’s policy. So much for backing your fellow warriors who are actually fighting the war. Politicians, mothers, do-gooders, etc. have continued to weaken military toughness for many years with no end in sight but the military continues its own self-injury by portraying service as being like other civilian occupations except you wear issued clothing and get college money. Is it too late to remember that real war (and staying ready for it) is not the same as civilian options. Nobody was drafted.
	A different view December 24th, 2009 at 7:43 pm Hmm, well I cannot say that the policy does not have a justified purpose, nor that we all have (and know this upon joining) a duty to serve and responsibility to be in the right shape to serve. However, being pregnant, or any other form of medically qualified job reducing condition, should not be in itself a reason to NJP a service-member. Also we are not fighting an all out war, but rather a sustained fight much like our normal jobs. I find it hard to believe that the units in the North are that overwhelmed as many in Iraq are sitting around due to the security agreement between Iraq and the USA (which significantly reduces the number of combat operations occurring, which in turn reduces all the other requirements a military unit normal has). Just as any other work force has to learn to deal with this condition (pregnancy) so should the military. We are beyond the times of saying you cannot be married, you cannot have a family (be it single parent or otherwise), we need to learn how to lead in these situations and find solutions to the problem not punish our service-members for situations that occur. Society has changed, times have changed, even war has changed, we need to learn to adapt as well or become useless in the evolution.
	confused December 24th, 2009 at 8:20 pm I’m about to deploy into theater again (4th time) and I don’t understand when these folks have time to have these types of relations. Beyond their normal work routines (mine have always been 14-18ish hours daily), studying for quals/education, working out, and sleep; I couldn’t imagine fitting this in. Of course, I am happily married and not looking for it–but still.
	H.G. Holcomb December 25th, 2009 at 7:38 am Having served 30 years as an Infantryman in combat and support units, I saw first hand how the issue of pregnancy affects the funtioning of units. In the Infantry units pregnancy did not affect the manning of the units, but dealing with spousal pregnancies was a minor inconvenience. In the support units where I served the percentage of female soldiers was 20 to 50 percent. Pregnancy of females was a moderate to major readiness issue. Even the best planned pregnancy causes some male soldier(s) to pick up the slack. Soldiers who become pregnant immediately following advanced training and continue to procreate every 12 to 15 months, are welfare soldiers who only join the military to have their family subsidised and are a major readiness detriment. While I surrounded myself with female soldier when possible, due to their intelligence and tremendous work ethic, the readiness detriment of female pregnancy cannot be ignored in the name of political correctness.
	David L G Yoder December 25th, 2009 at 3:26 pm Fox news just reported that the commander has backed off from the punishment for getting pregnant in a combat zone. Makes you wonder who is in charge here. Looks like the same mistakes that were made in RVN are repeating themselves now, polititions (SP) running the war!!
	Bill December 26th, 2009 at 4:41 pm All of this comes with the territory of having mixed the sexes within the miltary. There is a time and a place for everything. Even generals can’t control some things. As far as who’s in charge? Well inthis case it is General Odierno.
	Eddie December 30th, 2009 at 1:35 am At the beginning of the war the army was letting pregnant women separate from the service. Before its first deployment the 1st CAV Division lost a BN’s worth of females to pregnancy and separation. I was working in a shop there as they were doing final pack up and I heard female solders say “I’m going to the club tonight and I’m going to **** everyman their if thats what it takes to get pregnant cause I aint deploying”. The problem is huge. I have read things that basically say that we are averaging about 1000 pregnancies a year in the war zones. The military classifies their redeployment to the states as medical related gynecological problems. I call it malingering.