Army Sends Infant to Protective Services, Mom to Afghanistan
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.
Hutchinson has been threatened with a court martial if she does not agree to deploy to Afghanistan on Sunday, Nov. 15. She has been attempting to find someone to take care of her child, Kamani, while she is deployed overseas, but to no avail.
According to the family care plan of the U.S. Army, Hutchinson was allowed to fly to California and leave her son with her mother, Angelique Hughes of Oakland.
However, after a week of caring for the child, Hughes realized she was unable to care for Kamani along with her other duties of caring for a daughter with special needs, her ailing mother, and an ailing sister.
In late October, Angelique Hughes told Hutchinson and her commander that she would be unable to care for Kamani after all. The Army then gave Hutchinson an extension of time to allow her to find someone else to care for Kamani. Meanwhile, Hughes brought Kamani back to Georgia to be with his mother.
However, only a few days before Hutchinson’s original deployment date, she was told by the Army she would not get the time extension after all, and would have to deploy, despite not having found anyone to care for her child.
Faced with this choice, Hutchinson chose not to show up for her plane to Afghanistan. The military arrested her and placed her child in the county foster care system.
Currently, Hutchinson is scheduled to fly to Afghanistan on Sunday for a special court martial, where she then faces up to one year in jail.
Hutchinson’s civilian lawyer, Rai Sue Sussman, told IPS, "The core issue is that they are asking her to make an inhumane choice. She did not have a complete family care plan, meaning she did not find someone to provide long-term care for her child. She’s required to have a complete family care plan, and was told she’d have an extension, but then they changed it on her."
Asked why she believes the military revoked Hutchinson’s extension, Sussman responded, "I think they didn’t believe her that she was unable to find someone to care for her infant. They think she’s just trying to get out of her deployment. But she’s just trying to find someone she can trust to take care of her baby."
Hutchinson’s mother has flown to Georgia to retrieve the baby, but is overwhelmed and does not feel able to provide long-term care for the child.
According to Sussman, the soldier needs more time to find someone to care for her infant, but does not as yet have friends or family able to do so.
Sussman says Hutchinson told her, "It is outrageous that they would deploy a single mother without a complete and current family care plan. I would like to find someone I trust who can take care of my son, but I cannot force my family to do this. They are dealing with their own health issues."
Sussman told IPS that the Army’s JAG attorney, Captain Ed Whitford, "told me they thought her chain of command thought she was trying to get out of her deployment by using her child as an excuse."
Major Gallagher, of Hutchinson’s unit, also told Sussman that he did not believe it was a real family crisis, and that Hutchinson’s "mother should have been able to take care of the baby."
In addition, according to Sussman, a First Sergeant Gephart "told me he thought she [Hutchinson] was pulling her family care plan stuff to get out of her deployment."
"To me it sounds completely bogus," Sussman told IPS, "I think what they are actually going to do is have her spend her year deployment in Afghanistan, then court martial her back here upon her return. This would do irreparable harm to her child. I think they are doing this to punish her, because they think she is lying."
Sussman explained that she believes the best possible outcome is for the Army to either give Hutchinson the extension they had said she would receive so that she can find someone to care for her infant, or barring this, to simply discharge her so she can take care of her child.
Nevertheless, Hutchinson is simply asking for the time extension to complete her family care plan, and not to be discharged.
"I’m outraged by this," Sussman told IPS, "I’ve never gone to the media with a military client, but this situation is just completely over the top."
(Inter Press Service)
Read more by Dahr Jamail
- Army Underreporting Suicides, Says GI Advocacy Group – November 17th, 2009
- ‘War Comes Home’ with Ft. Hood Shootings – November 6th, 2009
- US Soldier: ‘There’s No Way I’m Going to Deploy to Afghanistan’ – May 26th, 2009
- Culture of Unpunished Sexual Assault in Military – April 30th, 2009
- Iraq in Fragments – April 13th, 2009
Druthers
November 14th, 2009 at 9:02 am
The army that is constantly touting itself as virtious is violating the most basic human values.; splitting a child from its mother so as to deploy her to a war zone. Creating by its own actions what is probably going to be a troubled child and willfully planning to imprison the mother either before or after her return while drapping themselves in the American flag because they have no idea what it is to take care of a child or to be a Grandmother ("who should be able to take care of the child") already over-burdened by care for other family members. All THEY have to do is give or transmit ORDERS.
These white Amlerican military males are from the bottom of the barrel and I pity their wives and children. No wonder the world is in such a horrific state with robotic people like them making decisions.
How low will the army stoop for cannon fodder? This is an outrage. The army should be ashamed and sanction those responsible!
paulBass
November 14th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
"I think what they are actually going to do is have her spend her year deployment in Afghanistan, then court martial her back here upon her return."
honor and justice
just remember in fifteen years when this kid goes on a shooting spree after joining the military, its a tragic act of terrorism against the pure and noble armed forces of the united states
damocles
November 14th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
It seems that the purge of Muslims from the US military is beginning. The military is eating its own.
Strider55
November 14th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
No mention of how long Hutchinson has been in the Army. Did she have the baby before or after enlistment? Back in the mid-1980s the DOD implemented a policy that barred single parents from joining the military at all. Of course, that would mean even fewer potential bullet-stoppers, which is probably why it was dropped. The best solution for everyone in this instance would be a hardship discharge for the unfortunate young woman.
BTW, under that old directive single parents already in uniform were officially "grandfathered," but were unofficially pressured to leave. My unit CO at the time was a single father who retired a year or so later, and he openly stated that he left due to his family status.. No doubt his superiors told him he would never see another promotion and his future assignments would be progressively worse.
ebquillen
November 14th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
The whole situation is terrible but you have to ask why there should be single mother in the army in the first place. I certainly don't feel any safer having her there, it's a complete waste of taxpayer money, and it certainly doesn't do the army or the poor woman any good except that it provides her will a steady job. Whether one likes what is going on in Iraq or Afghanistan or not (I certainly don't), a soldier has to be ready and available to deploy anywhere and at any time. If you can't do that, you should leave the service.
paulBass
November 14th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
I believe the current policy is that if you "sign up" while pregnant, you automatically enroll your baby
Chris Bieber
November 15th, 2009 at 12:52 am
Govt Schools….supporting the Govt…no surprise.
conditioned Americans supporting the Government takeover of education and the increasing militarization of our society and police…
(CLENCHED) hand in hand……
Bipartisan warmongering and servility…..a future Global Spartan Peace Army with satellites and laserguns and LADR's….and WOMAN COMBAT TROOPS!!!!!
Exhibit A Your Honor….woman in the military……result.
All of this is sooooooooooooo BiPartisan…..and Consitutional
Jane Doe
November 16th, 2009 at 12:52 am
I know quite a few single mothers who have lost their jobs. The military is the last resort, which I think is deliberate because I think our dumbed down educational system is deliberate — the elite want cannon fodder. So I can't blame this mother.
Pregnancy happens, otherwise none of us would be here.
The miitary could have put her behind a desk to serve out the rest of her commitment. This is just plain cruel and stupid, but then that kind of encapsulates US foreign and domestic policy.
Jaime
November 15th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
I have never seen such a barbaric act of callousness, and this is the country that calls itself beacon of liberty and democracy. Thanks God I live in a part of the world where, despite its shortcomings, the humane aspect has not been lost. Somehow I think that eventually all the evil deeds the US has committed all over the world, with the acquiescence of its citizenry, is coming back in the way of authoritarianism, militarism and even corruption. Did you think that you could march all over the globe, kill people, destroy homes and all of this go unpunished?
nemo
November 16th, 2009 at 5:44 am
SO? You will do as you are told. You think your so classless and free but your still fu-king peasants as far as I can see.
Bubba
November 16th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Based on this article, none of us know whether SPC Hutchinson was playing the system for personal gain to avoid combat-zone deployment or whether the Army screwed up.
Regardless, SPC Hutchinson had a responsibility to report for duty per her orders. Assuming SPC Hutchinson had nowhere else to turn, why didn’t she report for duty with her child by her side? This would have allowed her to meet her responsibility to fulfill her orders and would have forced the Army to make its next move.
JWR
November 16th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
We have no business being the world's 'policeman', or advancing the business interests of the global corporations that run the world.
Having said that, I have little sympathy for this woman.
She chose to join the army.
She chose to get pregnant.
She failed to find someone to take care of her (bastard?) child.
Women, especially, need to realize that the Arny (or Navy or Air Force) is not a "job opportunity" or an affirmative-action "opportunity for growth". It is an uncaring, impersonal machine (contrary to all the ads on TV) and it often eats it's young.
I have seen too many women join up, find the lifestyle too harsh or too demanding then become pregnant (or in the old days become 'lesbians') to avoid filling the terms of their employment contracts.
Don't worry too much about her. She'll find another way to weasel out of doing her contractually-obligated 'duty'. She will probably just put in face time and force another soldier to do her work for her or maybe get another GI killed through her shirking.
Let's move on to real issues.
Support our troops. Bring them home.
James W. Ritter
Major, USAF (Retired)
Jaime
November 16th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Nemo, have you forgotten the origins of your country? Extremely humble and peasant, which is not something to feel ashamed of. You guys are like the poor relations who struck it rich and now are full of gas. Wealth does not provide style nor sophistication. Sorry. Instead of insulting, you should reflect on the things that you support. Why don't you ask your congressmen to start defending the interests of the US and not of a foreign country (Israel) for a change? And while they are at it, they should also stop allowing the Executive carry out torture, rendition, indefinite detention, and other crimes.
frrapper
November 16th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
How about a medical discharge!
liberranter
November 16th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Ditto!
jSinSaTx
November 16th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Libertarians hold contracts sacrosanct except the ones individuals sign with the military. Those contracts apparently hold no weight. She as a military member is expected to have these issues sorted out so that these situations do not occur. You simply do not refuse to show up for work or a deployment. I doubt many posting on this board would have any issue with a private corporation firing her for failure to attend a meeting because of this issue. The UCMJ (in this case Article 86 Failure to Go) is a known contractual obligation.
I have no sympathy for her.
Centurion37
November 17th, 2009 at 12:02 am
Congress is constitutionally mandated to establish and maintain the armed services. They represent us; and we made a huge error in the 1970s by alowing the recruitment of women for combat, all in the guise of equal rights and political correctness.
Now we pay the price, time and time again.
Any nation whose men send their women to fight their wars is destined for the dumpster of history!
given up
November 17th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Where is the father of this child? I really like the fact that the entire article and all of these comments have not even mentioned the father. I guess that is our culture now. Why are these people even fighting over there? Please someone tell me what in the hell is the point for those soldiers to fight these people over there to "protect our freedom" when we just destroy ourselves over here?
gene
November 17th, 2009 at 12:52 am
So she should have just left her baby on a doorstep and deployed. But they think she is lying, have they talked with her friends and family. I was arrested for stealing my own motorhome, being a single father they took my children to social services. I was charged with not having someone to care for my kids except social services refused to release them to there grandparents. Even after the charges were dropped when they found out it was my motorhome. It took me 7 months of fighting in court to get my kids back. I had one social worker fired and arrested for lieing in his reports. Our whole government is out of control and needs to be replaced with people who dont make over 100k a year and know how to balance a budget. God Bless her and her child. Gene
jSinSaTx
November 17th, 2009 at 4:38 am
No, she should have taken preparation seriously and analyzed her mother's situation. She should have managed her life a bit better. She shouldn't expect her unit and service to suffer for her poor planning and decisions. She shouldn't expect to have collected a paycheck and benefits for all this time and then not fulfill her side of the contract which is to go when called upon. I'm all for not letting a whole slew of people into the armed forces, but since we let them in they need to perform. After all, there check clears every month.
Jerry Edison
November 17th, 2009 at 6:01 am
I don't dispute that this lady was a total idiot for signing up for the military in the first place. Someone mentioned libertarians and contract law.
Well first of all this is a coercive relationship that our government establishes with the people. Libertarians recognize *voluntary* contracts, not coercive ones.
Second of all it's obvious that the reason why military servitude is different from regular jobs is because the government just plain doesn't want to pay people what they are worth. If the government was willing to pay people $100,000-200,000 a year for deployment into a combat zone (starting pay for enlistment) you'd probably have a hard time holding back all the people who would want to go.
But they don't want pay people that much, do they? Instead the government wants to pay millions and even billions of dollars for overpriced and overly complicated weapon systems that half the time end up canceled early in their production cycle and then force the people in the military to work as slaves. If someone doesn't want to deploy – fine I say. Discharge them and make them pay for some of their training that they received. "We will not write you a positive recommendation, get the hell out, and here's the bill." That would be fair.
What good will putting this lady in prison or killing her (as the evil bastards used to do to people who didn't want to murder their fellow human beings) do for us or her child anyway? Great, now we have to pay for that, and that's all of her productivity lost. Why would you want someone fighting alongside you in battle who doesn't want to be there, anyway? That's the WORST kind of battle buddy you can possibly have. I wouldn't trust them to cover my six for a second.
Let these people go who don't want to fight and let the government start paying people what they're worth if it wants them to do a difficult job. "Patriotism" and "love of one's country" is just a pathetic attempt at justifying slave labor.
H. Clark
November 17th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
I am sure Hutchinson wishes now more than anyone that she had planned better, if indeed the child was planned at all. (As you are a Major I don't need to tell you that military personnel do occasionally have unprotected sex). But all that misses the overarching injustice of this situation. Contractually-obligated 'duty' to ANY organization does not comprise a sacrifice of basic human rights.
H. Clark
November 17th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Actually, Libertarians do not recognize any contract that constitutes a sacrifice of one's basic human rights. And the military is not threatening to "fire" her. They are threatening to take her child and imprison her.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Do you know what it's like to be a single parent in the Army? There could be a number of reasons this soldier is a single parent. Maybe her husband (child's father) died and she was left to take care of this child herself. Personally, I know what she is going through and I feel sorry for her and her unit for being so ignorant to the fact that she still has an obligation to her child. To arrest her and place her child in foster care was extreme. A simple discharge would suffice.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
As a veteran of the Army and a single mother at the time of my enlistment, I understand her situation.My son's father was place in military confinement shortly after I gave birth due to his own misconduct and I was left to raise my son the best I could. I was in the middle of a deployment and had to return home to care for my son because my mother could no longer care for him because of an illness and my unit pulled a similar stunt. I requested additional time to revise my family care plan and then return to finish my deployment. I even tried to get a compassionate reassignment so that I could be closer to my mother and son. No matter what I did, my unit insited that I was merely trying to get out of my deployment. WTH?? I was already in theater and had suggested that I would return after the situation was rectified. No help so I took my dicharge with much disappointment.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
When I was able to revise my family care plan, I decided to reenlist. Needless to say, the same crap happened to me again. I VOLUNTEERED to go to Iraq with a unit that I heard was deploying. My unit was puzzled as to why I would leave their unit to deploy with another unit if I did not have to. I really wanted to deploy, but again,. a few months later LIFE HAPPENED. I had to be with my son and I choose him over the deployment. In resentment, my unit decided to lash out at me by threatening me with Article 15's and punishment. I took everything they dished out at me. In the end, some butthole wearing brass decided my fate and discharged me for a personality disorder rather than a family care plan discharge simply because he had the power to do it.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
I agree Gene. The Army is out of control as well.
Shortly after my discharge, the unit was brought under investigation and several people, including the MAJ who aided in my discharge was relieved of their duties.
The Army has lost it's way with so many corrupt people in command. I am sure if she were a fellow "officer" this would have played out differently. The facts being left out of this story is that the Army is full of politics.
God bless the readers of this comment and may he touch the souls of those who are trying so hard to punish this soldier for doing the right thing. I am praying for this soldier and her unit. God knows the truth and those who are being unjust will be punished accordingly. I hope they can sleep at night knowing that there are good soldiers out there who are proud to serve even as single parents with "bastard" children as the MAJ above so delicately put it.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
You can plan and plan, but the reality of any situation is that things happen. I fault the units in these situations. How is it until now that no one realized that her family care plan was not valid? She should have been counseled on this situation months prior to the deployment and given the correct amount time according the UCMJ to complete her family care plan. After given the correct amount of time, the soldier should have been counseled again and then chaptered under the correct chapter.
What the Army fails to realize it that when making these stipulations for single parents, there is no guarantee that the problem can or will be solved. The Army cannot force you to find just anyone to watch your children. If my plan doesn't work , then there should be an alternate course of action and the Army should be prepared for situations like this. Her word is as good as gold. If she says she can't go because she has no one to care for her child, then discharge her and keep moving. I am sure one less likely to be killed soldier won't hurt the Army.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
And their next move being??? Escorting her child away and forcing her to board the plane. I would have done exactly what she did. There is no win/win situation with the Army; especially, if you have commanders who are buttholes with nothing better to do but harrass their soldiers instead of taking care of them and looking out for their well-being.
I wouldn't want to go to war with anyone who didnt seem to care about me or my family in the least respect. Her commander and the rest of her chain-of-command should have handled this situation better than what they did. Child protective services was unecessary and so was the arrest. She has a valid reason not to deploy and whether they like it or not, there are better ways to deal with this situation. This type of situation is not new or uncommon and instead of simply following the rules, these units want to take the situation into their own hands and make their own rules.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
I agree. There are always alternatives.
Valerie
November 17th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Single mothers are in the Army for the same reasons the other soldiers are there. I agree with you that she should leave because normally that is what would happened; however, the unit has decided to go against the rules and make a big deal out of nothing.
jSinSaTx
November 17th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
And what basic human right is at stake here? What other 'contract' do libertarians ever post ad naseum about on Lewrockwell.com being invalid other than the military one. Does someone of free will not have the right to place themselves in a position you do not approve of? All contracts reduce the freedom to act of the signatures. The terms of the contract are known. She signed them. She took the portions beneficial to her and then is unable or unwilling to perform her side of the contract.
Having your child taken away can occur in other contracted situations. If you do not pick a child up from day care they can be turned over to social services regardless of if you had good reasons for not being there. One can be imprisoned for fraud.
You simply are hostile to the military and do not extend the same contract philosophy to them as you would to others.
jSinSaTx
November 17th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Of course you fault the military. Why would we ever hold an individual responsible for their own actions. The military does constantly engage people on these issues. The Air Force requires you to recertify your plan at several points. People are counseled. The Armed Forces do recognize the problems posed by single parents. However, it is extremely difficult to refuse entry or to boot someone simply for being a single parent. Again… we either have libertarians refusing to acknowledge the contract or we have people who some how believe it is everyone's problem but the individuals. How many more agencies are supposed to exist to manage people who aren't managing themselves?
A simple discharge is a solution, but this woman will receive/has received substantial benefits from her time of service. To just let her go without having to forfeit anything for her failure to fulfill her portion of the contract is perpetuating this type of problem.
jSinSaTx
November 17th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
What is coercive about volunteering for the military? Nothing. There was no draft and she was not forced.
Servitude… under what definition? Conforming to the culture of your organization that you chose to enter is not servitude. Fulfilling your contract is not servitude. I'm sure some professional athletes describe their contracts as servitude also. I would take that about as seriously.
The government does in fact pay that much for the combat zone to mercenary organizations. This is something libertarians frequently like to overlook in their fervor and zealotry to paint the military as they do. The free market provides hundreds of thousands of individuals who have no problems doing anything for the dollar. These companies that have no rules of engagement and are happy to perform for 3x what the service member makes.
There is no relation between weapon system designs and forcing people to serve as slaves. The issue of procurement and this woman's failure to fulfill her contract terms have no relationship to each other.
Discharge is probably what will happen. Unfortunately they probably will not collect on any of the items. She will have collected the pay, the cost of her child, training, GI Bill, VA Loan letter and then failed to perform what she knew going in was a requirement.
Slave labor… not even an intellectually serious position.