Army Sends Infant To Protective Services, Mom To Afghanistan Options

[Robotspyder]

VENTURA, California - U.S. 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. (IMG:http://talkback.lancasteronline.com/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)


http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/11/13-7

Yikes!
Having babies while enlisted, really bad timing if you ask me!!

[area man]

Need to do a little Googling on this. You will see that she is NOT under arrest or confinement, NOT being court martialed, and NOT separated from her son. As I suspected, this was not the whole story. Having served in the military and witnessing these situations, this is not how the military handles them. She also has a history of misconduct in the Army. It appears she is trying to get out earlier troubles.

[reese]

Oh brother. (IMG:http://talkback.lancasteronline.com/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

She got arrested because she was AWOL. She's not even under arrest now, from what I read.

I have two questions:

1. Why does a single mother join the Army to begin with? What part of "You may be deployed" did she not get?

2. If she was already in the Army and then got pregnant, 1)Why? Didn't she understand the concept of BC; and 2) You play you pay. Since she decided to carry the baby to term, it became her problem, not the Army's. Buck up, soldier.

People are making this sound like this woman was drafted and is being ripped from her child against her will to go fight. She chose to join the Army. She chose to have sex. She chose to carry the pregnancy to term. Now she needs to deal with the consequences of those choices.

[Awakening]

Why should something as inconsequential as a new life get in the way of killing brown people. Obviously it's far more important that she kill the babies of mothers in Afghanistan than raise her own. I'm sure the state can do a much better job than the mother ever could. Given a choice we should always chose death over life, right? (for the slower readers this post is sarcasm)

[reese]

Why should something as inconsequential as a new life get in the way of killing brown people. Obviously it's far more important that she kill the babies of mothers in Afghanistan than raise her own. I'm sure the state can do a much better job than the mother ever could. Given a choice we should always chose death over life, right? (for the slower readers this post is sarcasm)

It's not sarcasm. You really believe your own dreck.

[A1]

Where's daddy?

[oh geez]

Need to do a little Googling on this. You will see that she is NOT under arrest or confinement, NOT being court martialed, and NOT separated from her son. As I suspected, this was not the whole story. Having served in the military and witnessing these situations, this is not how the military handles them. She also has a history of misconduct in the Army. It appears she is trying to get out earlier troubles.

thanks for finding out 'the rest of the story'.
I was wondering if the baby-daddy were still alive since he wasn't mentioned in maybe helping the mom.