The Long Way Home

by Scott, Jessica

  All my little girl needed was some time. Through working with her teacher, truly a gift that year, we managed to get through it. The teacher sent home notes or emails and I reinforced what was going on in school. And my little girl did it. I am so freakin proud of her for getting through that. I know thousands of military kids go through stuff like that every year but you know what? Those aren’t my kids. Mine was the one I was worried about.

  So this year, getting to be here to walk her into her classroom this morning was a very big deal for us. And for her too. She was all smiles, and very excited to go. There was only one girl in her class from last year (I admit to being disappointed that she didn’t end up in class with her best friend from last year but she’ll be okay) and I love her teacher. But thinking back on last year and remembering how upset I was that I missed it makes the coming year so much more special. Missing her first day of school was by far one of the worst days I had over there. And being here for it this year was so precious. My little one, however, remains grumpy that she’s not starting school this year but she’ll be okay. Of that, I’m certain.

  For us military moms and dads, there is so much over the last decade that we’ve missed out on. Some moms have deployed only once and have been fortunate to be there for their kids. Other moms have deployed back to back since 2001 or 2004 and haven’t caught a break. And neither have the dads. It’s tough to maintain a sense of family when one half of the family is gone every other year. But this is what we do. It’s part of the sacrifice that we make when we raised our right hand and either commissioned or enlisted or in some cases, both.

  So don’t pity us. Don’t act like military moms are victims of some male misogyny when we have to deploy away from our families. Don’t hold up women who deliberately shirked their duties as soldiers as some kind of martyr for military moms. We’re here because we want to be here and we do our jobs, just like everyone else.

  It’s just that sometimes, we close the door to our CHU and cry our eyes out because we missed a first day of school, or a birthday, or some other milestone that will only be lived through pictures. It hurts and sometimes, you have to let the hurt out. And then you put it away and get back after it because the soldier to your left and right needs you to have your head in the game.

  And it makes those milestones that you are home for just that much more special.

  Response to Vogue Magazine Article on Military Moms

  August 24, 2010

  EVERY SO OFTEN, AN article comes at you from a unique place. I don’t subscribe to Vogue magazine. There is nothing in its four hundred plus pages of advertising that I find even remotely interesting. It doesn’t draw my attention in the checkout counter at the grocery store. True, there are often some good articles buried within the bulimic looking mannequins who are supposed to be icons of fashion but I really couldn’t be bothered to hunt for them every month amid mass advertisements for mascara or Prada. Not that I don’t like those things. I do. I just don’t read about them on a regular basis. I suppose that Vogue is for women what Playboy is for men. We really are reading it for the articles. No, really.

  But when my agent emailed me and told me about an article on soldier mothers, of course I went out and bought it. This thing weighs a ton and true to the few copies I’ve read over the years, mostly on overseas flights, there were a ton of advertisements. But the article that caught my attention was “Bye Bye, Baby” by Elizabeth Rubin and I’ve got a few comments on it (really, did you expect anything less?).

  First, the author repeats the media truism that Alexis Hutchinson is a poor, exploited victim of an Army that simply doesn’t care about family life. If you remember, Hutchinson was arrested and charged with missing movement, dereliction of duty, absent without leave, and insubordinate conduct. Note that none of these charges was her failure to have a family care plan. She was ultimately separated from the military in lieu of court martial and, according to the press release issued by Fort Stewart, admitted to lying about her family care plan. So was she really a victim of the evil Army attacking a poor single mom or was she trying to avoid doing her duty? Only she knows but the Army’s investigation reveals that the case is not as the media presented it to be.

  The reason I take issue with the media portrayal of Hutchinson’s case is that it is completely and utterly misleading the public on the realities of mothers in the military. When single mothers enlist, they must voluntarily give up custody of their children to someone else. When a female soldier becomes pregnant, she must have a valid family care plan ninety days prior to the scheduled birth of her child and knows that she is required to fulfill her obligations as a soldier. Every single mother on active duty knows that it is not a question of if she will have to leave her children, but when. And still we serve. In fact, there has been no mass exodus of women leaving the military due to pregnancy since the wars began. According to the Defense Manpower Center statistics, since 2001, the numbers for pregnancy separations have remained relatively steady: on average around 1500 a year.

  There are significantly more men separated for a variety of other reasons every year. And yes, that includes percentages as well. The Army doesn’t just randomly court martial people for no reason and not having a family care plan is not a court-martialable offense. Dereliction of duty, however, is.

  The second issue that I have with Rubin’s article is that she incorrectly states that the Army only gives four months of nondeployable time after the birth of a child when in fact, the Army policy is six months. Is this still woefully inadequate for the mother of a newborn? Absolutely. But if you’re going to write an article about how terrible the Army is to new mothers, it’s important to at least practice some Google-fu beforehand and make sure the facts are accurate.

  The third thing that actually has me the most irate about the Vogue article is the statement, highlighted in a call-out box that says “Not even the Soviets, the Israelis, or the Iraqi Baathist have sent mothers of infants and toddlers to the front lines like we do.”

  First off, comparing the Israeli Army to the Soviets and the Baathists is offensive in too many ways to count. The Israeli Army is often held up as a paragon of coed combat when in fact, women are not in the infantry there any more than they are in the infantry in our own Army. But stating that our Army is somehow “exploiting the blanket mandatory deployment because we need bodies to feed the global military machine” clearly shows the author’s bias against our military and our current wars. Comparing our Army to the Soviets and the Baathist is a cheap tactic that not only undermines every single value the Army holds up as a virtue, it also devalues the soldiers who make up this great Army and who are willing to guard the gates so that you can go about your business buying shoes or purses and ignoring the capitalist reality that buying said purse has on the world around you.

  There are, however, facts in Rubin’s article that I agree with. We don’t know the long-term impact on the children of their mothers being gone and the evidence that is starting to be gathered suggests that some children will have long-term challenges while others will be fine. And I can also relate to the experiences of one of the mothers in her article, when she says she’s short on patience and has difficulty reintegrating. I do believe that mothers have a harder time coming home than fathers do because our role in our families is different. Not better, not worse. Different. Rubin’s article also does a brilliant job of depicting how mothers deal with combat situations and how they relate to those experiences in war when they come home.

  There are entire academic papers, both within the military and without, that argue about the role of women and mothers in the military. Arguing that the six month nondeployable status is too little ignores the operational needs of the war fighting units that have been on back-to-back-to-back deployments since 2001. Women in the military are expected to do their jobs, just like our male counter parts. That is equality.

  Arguing that new moms should get a longer nondeployable period is great for mothers and
for retaining some of these young women in the force. We need good soldiers on Rear Detachment so leaving some of these leaders back to care for their children and ensure that the soldiers left in the rear have good leadership is one argument for giving new mothers longer nondeployable time. But we have the luxury of having this debate now as the war winds down. We did not have this luxury two or three or four years ago at the height of Iraq and, as Afghanistan heats back up, we must never forget that our soldiers are still at war and that must be our focus.

  At the end of it all, Rubin uses these women’s stories to paint a picture of a failed or failing conflict in Afghanistan. She starts the article talking about military moms but ends it talking about American resolve. I don’t believe she was being malicious in her article, but I do believe she used the soldiers’ stories to serve her own agenda, just as any reporter or writer does.

  I simply abhor the fact that she once more held Hutchinson up as the poster-child for military moms when there are thousands and thousands of us who do our duty and still try to be good moms. I abhor the fact that she compares our Army to the Soviets and the Baathists, as if somehow implying that our Army is forcing mothers to choose this life and is sending them to the front lines with a gun to the back of their head.

  Mothers on active duty have a choice to serve or not. No one forces them to raise their right hand and when the Army pays for the birth of your child, gives that child healthcare, and pays you to help put a roof over that child’s head, all the Army asks is for you to do your part. It is all we all do. The Army is not a welfare state. We have rules that clearly lay out what we as mothers must do to serve.

  So please, stop acting like we’re exploited victims of the evil male Army. Accept that we are here because we choose to be here, with all that entails for our families. We are responsible for our choices, just as our male counterparts are. That is what feminism is about: the power to choose our paths through this world, just as any man can choose his path.

  Prepping for Command

  2010

  On 15 Years in Service and Becoming a Captain

  August 25, 2010

  TODAY, FIFTEEN YEARS AGO, I stood in the parking lot of my high school and kissed my family goodbye, heading to the Portland, Maine MEPs station to enlist in the Army. Getting to August 25 was a challenge for me. The Army hadn’t wanted the little fat girl so I’d had to get in shape to be able to do this. So I did and I headed out, enlisting as a little Private E2 with a little tiny pair of mosquito wings pinned on my collar.

  Fifteen years later, I’m no longer a private, and I feel like I’m a lifetime away from that eager kid who joined the Army because she didn’t know what she wanted to be when she grew up. Tomorrow morning, my former brigade commander, my husband, and my daughters will promote me to captain. Fifteen years ago, if you’d told me I was going to someday be a captain, let alone married with two kids and happy about all that, I’d have asked you what you were smoking.

  I don’t think any of us really know where life is going to take us. When I was a kid, I always laughed when people told me their plans. I’m going to college to study this or that. Or I want to do this when I grow up. I really had no idea about any of that. I really did sign up just because I figured it couldn’t hurt, what’s the worst that could happen. But over the years, I’ve learned and I’ve grown and there are certain retired CSMs still around to kick me in my ass and remind me of when I was a smart-mouthed private. Turns out, that smart-mouthed private was just as smart-mouthed as a lieutenant. But I never said I was good at making friends and influencing others.

  All that is changing tomorrow. Not so much with pinning on captain—though, I’ve got to say, I am happy to finally be getting rid of the lieutenant bar that lets people assume I’m stupid. On the other hand, I’ve gotten used to being called LT. Or XO. When I first commissioned, I had real problems being called ma’am. You’ve got to remember, I spent twelve years enlisted, almost eleven of them as an NCO. You never call an NCO ma’am or sir. Ever. So that was a big mental leap for me in my transition to becoming an officer and setting aside some of my NCO tendencies. Tomorrow, another one comes.

  Because tomorrow isn’t just about becoming a captain and pinning those shiny railroad tracks onto my Stetson. A few weeks after that, I become a commander and the looming responsibility and the potential for screwing up of epic proportions is weighing on me. I realize that as the commander, I’m responsible for everything my soldiers do and don’t do. I owe them the very best that I can give them, nothing less than 100%. I owe them the training and the leadership that will take us through the next deployment. That is my responsibility and it’s not one that I’m taking lightly. I’ve watched over the last few months how my husband has changed since becoming a first sergeant. The responsibility is heavy but I read somewhere that great responsibility gravitates to the shoulders that can carry it. I don’t know if that’s true in my case, but I’m going to do my best to make it so.

  The charge to lead soldiers is not an easy one. It is not one that someone is born to. At least, not most of us. Most of us are grown and trained and developed. All captains don’t get a shot at command. I’m fortunate to have a battalion commander who thinks I’ve got what it takes. I won’t let her down, but more importantly, I won’t let my soldiers down.

  Because at the end of the day, it’s about our soldiers, not about me or what I wear on my chest. It’s about them. How can I make a difference in their lives and make the Army a better place? The day I stop believing that is the day I need to retire.

  Censorship or Inappropriate Material?

  August 29, 2010

  FOR THOSE OF YOU who missed it, Humble, Texas is at the center of a censorship controversy. A library event was planned with several well-known, bestselling young adult authors, including Ellen Hopkins, whose books deal with some hard-edged subjects like drug abuse, rape and teen prostitution.

  Disclaimer: I write this post not having read any of her books but also stating that Crank, one of the books at the heart of the controversy, is on its way to me from Amazon.

  A middle-school librarian found out that Hopkins was on the list of invitees and sent her objections to the superintendent who promptly disinvited Hopkins. The fallout was dramatic across the blogosphere with some weighing in supporting Hopkins and some supporting the school. Several authors dropped out in support of Hopkins.

  Looking at the subject matter of Hopkins’s books, I would argue that they are appropriate for some teens and not others. As a parent and as a prospective young adult author, I’m reading her book to find out what the deal is as well as whether or not I would be comfortable letting my kid read it (understanding that it will be many years down the road before that becomes appropriate subject matter for my daughters).

  I applaud Hopkins for writing her books because she is absolutely correct that pretending that drug abuse, sexual abuse, rape and teen prostitution are non-issues only sends kids dealing with these issues into the dark. Shining a light on these matters is not done lightly.

  Hopkins candidly says on her website that her own daughter was addicted to meth and she wrote Crank as a way of exploring what might have driven her daughter to use. I can’t imagine anything more troubling to write, more heart-wrenching to put on paper and I think the fact that she wrote this book is huge in a society where everyone pretends that it’s not my kid.

  That said, I also believe that the school district could have handled this better. They could have very easily had a group of authors who write young adult novels geared toward older kids. They easily could have told parents that she was coming and let the parents make the decision about whether or not to let their kids buy her book. After all, it is not the school board’s job to raise my children; it is mine and the fact that the superintendent took it upon himself to remove Hopkins from the program—supposedly without reading any of her books—means that no real debate is going to occur about whether this author is causing harm or promoting discuss
ion about one of our society’s shameful secrets.

  It is my job as a parent to decide what is appropriate for my kid to read. There are nonfiction books in my house (on religion, for example) that I would not feel comfortable letting my daughters read when they’re thirteen (the youngest target audience of YA books), but wouldn’t have issue with once they’re older. Just because its Young Adult doesn’t necessarily mean it’s appropriate for all teens at all ages.

  There is nothing wrong with telling a middle-school aged kid that Hopkins’s book is probably not right for her. But telling all kids that and the school making the decision for me? No. We have to raise our kids to think for themselves and to make decisions without us. We are there to guide them in a world that would use them up and throw them away without a second glance. Pretending that there are no bad things out there does our kids a disservice and sends them out among the wolves unprepared.

  I can’t say whether or not I would let my daughters read Hopkins’s book when they’re older. I’ll let you know after I read Crank. I do, however, take another lesson from this whole debacle. As an author who is currently working on a book for teens, I realize that I have an obligation to deal honestly with the issues but also to tread carefully the lines between gratuitous sex or violence or drug use and confronting a very real problem. This book is geared toward other people’s children. I hope that their parents will read with their kids and discuss rather than censor.

  Because censorship by government or any ruling body merely makes sheep of the masses and I think we have enough of that problem already.