Should soldier Moms be deployed away from babies?

U.S. Army Spc. Alexis Hutchinson was supposed to deploy to Afghanistan as a cook but she had no one to care for her infant son. She was told to her 10-month-old would go to foster care!!! So she refused to deploy as scheduled.

Single parents must file a child care plan with the Army and Hutchinson had one. Her mother was supposed to care for her infant when she deployed. However, her mother was caring for three other family members and didn’t feel she was up to caring for the baby. (As mothers, we can relate to how difficult and time consuming caring for a 10-month old is!)

Angelique Hughes, the soldier’s mother, said they told her daughter’s commanders they needed more time to find another family member or close friend to help Hughes care for the boy, but Hutchinson was ordered to deploy on schedule.

Kevin Larson, a spokesman for Hunter Army Airfield, said he didn’t know what Hutchinson was told by her commanders, but he said the Army would not deploy a single parent who had nobody to care for his or her child.

He said officials planned to keep Hutchinson in Georgia as investigators gathered facts about the case.

“Spc. Hutchinson’s deployment is halted,” Larson said. “There will be no deployment while this situation is ongoing.”

I hope that common sense will prevail in this case. This mother needs to be allowed to serve here in the States until she can find appropriate care for her child that doesn’t involves relinquishing her baby to foster care!

I’m not sure how feasible it is, but I personally don’t think mothers with small children should be separated at all from their babies and should be allowed to serve domestically. I believe irreparable harm can be caused by a long-term separation from the child’s mother.

I absolutely would not leave my child for even a day with someone I didn’t completely know or trust much less hand your baby over to strangers for a year!

Was Hutchinson right to refuse to deploy until she can find appropriate child care? Should mothers be deployed abroad when they have small children at home? At what age would it be appropriate to send a mother away from her child?

Should Dads have different rules? Is it any easier for a father to separate from his child? Are they needed less by the child than the mother?

255 comments Add your comment

Reader

November 16th, 2009
8:55 pm

Ummm…where’s the baby daddy?

nita

November 16th, 2009
8:56 pm

If you join, you know the risks, having a baby does not exempt men. Women wanted equal rights, women have to pay the cost.

Trey

November 16th, 2009
9:00 pm

If she joined the military she should have to deploy if they tell her to. It does not matter if she wants to deploy or not. It is the military not just a job as some people who join seem to think. No one should be exempt from deployments, that is the military. I am currently deployed as we speak.

Jason

November 16th, 2009
9:04 pm

Agreed! As bad as I hate it, that is what she signed up to do.

TnGelding

November 16th, 2009
9:05 pm

She was right. She thought she had someone, but that turned out not to be the case. She should be given leave to find someone and if unable to should be discharged. Traditionally it has been the mother’s role to stay home and care for a child, but if a single father had the same problem it should be handled the same way. This is only one of the problems created by the all-volunteer force. Married people with children used to be shunned by the armed forces because of this and the extra expenses of a family man, and the added grief when they don’t come home alive.

Hi Hoe, hi Hoe, it's off to war you go!

November 16th, 2009
9:07 pm

Who WOULDNT join the military if they knew they wouldn’t get deployed… It’s the easiest job in the world when you’re in the US. If she doesn’t want to go to war, she needs to return every cent the military has spent on her training and every cent of pay and benefits she has received. Good luck!

Rita

November 16th, 2009
9:13 pm

Very scary to think that our military is so weak and politically correct it allows situations like the terrorist attack at Fort Hood and unmarried women soldiers to make their rules.

truth

November 16th, 2009
9:15 pm

This country is backwards! They’ll lock this woman up for wanting to take care her kid, but they won’t do anything to those who get an abortion.

truth

November 16th, 2009
9:16 pm

I wouldn’t want to fight in a unjust war!

Jay

November 16th, 2009
9:22 pm

Ship her off on the next plane… Can you seen a male soldier saying hey im gona have a baby I can’t go. If her plan was to have her mom take the baby and she can’t, Then make a new plan, and maybe that plan is Kid goes to foster care.

mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack the LIAR Obama

November 16th, 2009
9:25 pm

If you going to let females enlist, then treat them the same.

mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack the LIAR Obama

November 16th, 2009
9:28 pm

Remember this from the LIAR in Chief? – Quote: “I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war….You can take that to the bank!”

Patti

November 16th, 2009
9:28 pm

This is the problem with being a “Single” parent. Where is the baby’s Daddy? This type of behavior just perpetuates itself. This is probably the first of many children she will have out of wedlock.

OldCorps

November 16th, 2009
9:28 pm

Of course they should. What is the point in joining otherwise? It’s commendable that she wants to serve her country, but if she’s undeployable, she should seek a discharge so that her billet can be filled with someone who is able to deploy. It also is questionable that she waited until it was time to deploy to let it be known. This is a constant, major issue with the military that is not addressed, for fear of labeling and career-ending inquiries. It’s particularly difficult for sailors to get a shore detail for a year or so to save a marriage or take care of other family issues, because they are mostly filled with single and/or expectant mothers. Technically, she should be subjected to a court martial for missing a movement, but she’ll likely have some elected official step in and help her with a discharge, thus perpetuating the incidence.

Theresa

November 16th, 2009
9:29 pm

She joined the military, this is what she was trained for.

Mark

November 16th, 2009
9:30 pm

She is showing cowardice in the face of the enemy. She enlisted, She swore an oath to protect and defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic. This oath means you put your country first, even before your family. Anything less constitutes dereliction of duty and treason and in earlier times you would be brought before a court-martial and possibly face a dishonorable discharge during peace time, or straight to the firing squad in times of war which if you have not forgotten, presently exists.

Dick Chaney

November 16th, 2009
9:35 pm

At lease she’s not a CHICKEN HAWK like me.

Liz

November 16th, 2009
9:37 pm

She has an obligation to the Army. She had the option of getting discharged if she had the baby while in the Army, she should have exercised it.

Gail

November 16th, 2009
9:40 pm

There should not be different rules for men and women. I am sure they are all told they may be deployed when they sign up for service. I also agree with “Reader.” Where is the baby’s father, and why can’t he take care of his child? While I do agree that I wouldn’t want to be away from my 10 mo old for such a long time, I wouldn’t have a job where that was a possibility. Once I had kids I changed jobs so I didn’t have to travel, although my husband traveled quite a bit.

Bawney Fwank

November 16th, 2009
9:40 pm

To be fair and equal – YES!
The babydaddy should take care of the baby while the solder goes to fulfill her sworn duty or she should be courtmartialed, serve time at Ft. Levenworth and dishonorably discharged!

mitzymy

November 16th, 2009
9:43 pm

When I was 18, and a recent grad from high school, I wanted to join the army. I had a son, and they told me I could still go in, but I had to sign him off to someone because if anything happened to him, I would not be able to just leave and come home. It was like letting someone else adopt him, cutting my ties. I could not do that so I didn’t join, and I am glad. That was a long time ago, and the rule should still stand. You take on this risk. And why is she having children if she is not married?

Warrior Knowledge

November 16th, 2009
9:47 pm

She signed the contract. She took the oath. She knows the rules. She goes, or she faces court martial under the appropriate charges.

If single parents in the military are common then the programs set up for families should be set up to help with this too. I know for a fact that they do have programs set up for the families of the deployed.

Jarhead

November 16th, 2009
9:51 pm

I thought it was “An Army of One” not “Two” ??

James

November 16th, 2009
9:52 pm

I sympethize with all single parents. However, if you are going to cash that check from the tax payers twice a month, you must fullfill you obligations. Put her out with a general discharge without criminal prosecution. Anything else is a further waste of money.

thetruthalwayswins

November 16th, 2009
9:55 pm

she did not get drafted, she enlisted willingly. and she also got pregnant willingly knowing that she was serving in wartime. there are assuredly other family members who can take care of the baby…but to ask them to do it would ruin the game she is playing with the US Army. this looks like a last ditch effort to avoid deployment, and unfortunately this soldier is using her own baby and mother as pawns. ship her out.

Rasheed Willis

November 16th, 2009
9:57 pm

All you white folk need to leave this sista alone. We just keep on keepin on. We Praise Obama!

Obama is my black president who is saving the world!!!

David C

November 16th, 2009
10:00 pm

Hey Rasheed..you got that mortgage paid yet?

Rasheed Willis

November 16th, 2009
10:03 pm

David you a racist. Obama helps me with my rent. We didn’t get the head start the whities got.

Rasheed Willis

November 16th, 2009
10:04 pm

Obama will rule da world for the 1-0.

ms obvious

November 16th, 2009
10:07 pm

heck yes she was right in not going! Some feminist my hate me for saying this, but I really don’t think mothers, especially single mothers should even be allowed in the military. If you want to serve your country as a woman, that is all well and good, but not as a mama. If your a mom, your number one priority is your children, not fighting (or serving in anyway) in a foreign war. The same goes for single dad’s too. Someone has to take care of the kids! I’ve actually heard of both parents being enlisted and both being deployed at the same time. People need to think these things through! I’m glad she didn’t go!

WM

November 16th, 2009
10:09 pm

She could’ve chosen what many women who serve and get pregnant choose – to get out. You can get a medical discharge for pregnancy.

Mag

November 16th, 2009
10:15 pm

Ummm…last time I checked military was voluntary, so if she did not want to be deployed she should not have signed up. It’s sad and my heart goes out to her being a single mom, but you sign up for a job you do what your boss says…It’s life!! I agree people need to think things through, but you need to think things through beforehand…..At this point though honestly it is probably not best to send her because she won’t be focused and would probably do a terrible job. If I was deployed and this women was deployed to my area screaming, kicking, and fighting the military, I would not want her watcing my back!

chip

November 16th, 2009
10:16 pm

There are days I don’t want to go to work…my boss isn’t willing to let me decide when and where I want to work…if she did I would work from home in my pj’s….my taxes help pay for this girl’s salary and benefits…and while I am glad I am not in her place…if she isn’t going she needs to find a good job and pay back the taxpayers for all the benefits she has recieved as a solider….

Lilathe

November 16th, 2009
10:23 pm

Ship her out. She enlisted. She wants/wanted equal rights. Ship her or court martial her. That is from a mother about another mother. What causes pregnancy isn’t rocket science. Single? In the military? Likely to be shipped out? Then big DUH ….. don’t be doing that which causes the babies…… >>>>>DUH>>>>>

I so understand

November 16th, 2009
10:29 pm

Attention everyone…it’s not that she doesn’t want to go, she doesn’t want to leave her infant in the care of someone she doesn’t know. She had her mother as a backup plan but it didn’t work out. For all the ppl who are trash talking, let this happen to you. No one wants their child in foster care. Are you ppl for real??? I like it how ppl are bold in blogs but would dare not say this in her face. @Patti he that has not sinned cast the first stone. You can’t throw rocks living in a glass house!!!!!

Terrell

November 16th, 2009
10:34 pm

She should be able to stay until she can find the necessary care for the child. Oh Trey, with all due respect, the military is a job and should be treated as such. It’s easy to say country first but when you’re faced with putting your country first or your family it’s a lot tougher than what you may want to admit.

What’s really sad here RITA is that people like you are so quick to talk about you must do what the military tells you and if you do they will take care of you. This isn’t always the case. My fahter served this country and when he retired they renigged on his pension because after he received it he had a physical and they concluded he had an injury and was given a medical discharge.

For all you “MEN” if you dare call yourselves that have the audacity to say she should be deployed now and not ensuring the best care for her child, you are really full of it. The 1st relationship a child has is with their biological mother. Those 9 months aren’t easy.

It’s sad that the majority of you are just thinking about yourself. Chip, to compare how you feel to this situation is very sickening and sad on your part. Nobody say she won’t deploy it’s just isn’t until she can give her child proper care. I guess you would be ready to go off to war and leave your child unattended for am I right?

Mag, last time I checked having a job is voluntary. Too many men and women are dead because of this war and children are left parentless. Are any of you willing to take these kids in because a foster home shouldn’t be an option, and if it is you should be ashamed.

Lulu

November 16th, 2009
10:35 pm

Give her the option of repaying the money she has drawn from the taxpayers for her salary, clothing, medical care (and child’s), meals, transportation and other incidentals. Certainly a mother with no child care should NOT be forced to put it in foster care. Certainly taxpayers should be reimbursed for the money squandered on a job not done.

nita

November 16th, 2009
10:37 pm

Any single male of female should be put on notice, being a new mother/father does not exempt you from duty. It is what it is. Some people need to grow up and stop being rude. No one asked you to judge this girls character. In fact nobody on this blog knows this girl personally so comment about the situation and not morality because most of us are guilty of being immoral at some point in our lives. Just because your immoral act is your secret does not give you the right to throw stones. She should be deployed because she signed on the dotted line and took the oath.

Terrell

November 16th, 2009
10:38 pm

Patti you are so hillarious and it’s sad you would even say that. So go ahead and enlist…oh what’s that?… You don’t want too?…Then shut up!

Terrell

November 16th, 2009
10:40 pm

I want people on here to realize that she didn’t say she wouldn’t deploy she just won’t deploy until proper care is given to her child.

Terrell

November 16th, 2009
10:42 pm

After reading some of the comments I am just wondering are these the same “Americans” I’m helping to protect? Are the hours I’m putting in for TACOM to help the warfighter to protect you in vain? I hope not.

JG

November 16th, 2009
11:14 pm

Your first obligation is ALWAYS to your children! Your obligation to your country comes second! Give her chance to provide care for her child, then she can serve without regret or losing her child to Child Protective Services. Her job is to 1st protect her child and then protect the country.

JG

November 16th, 2009
11:16 pm

Oh….Amen Terrell!!! You said it!

Halsey

November 16th, 2009
11:20 pm

Why is it ok to deploy fathers, but not mothers? Equality of the sexes, right? A person should not take on a military job that carries the possibility of deployment if they aren’t going to accept the responsibility.

SEK

November 16th, 2009
11:25 pm

I wish that we could go back to when MEN COULD BE MEN and fight our wars, and WOMEN COULD BE WOMEN and stay home. Women’s lib ruined this country. This young lady had no business enlisting in the first place. Women who enlist aren’t looking for equal rights or adventure–they’re looking for lots of available sex. And the wussification of America (ie: emasculated, lets-cater-to women’s rights- men) have allowed this to happen. And yes I am a woman. Under 30.

Randy

November 16th, 2009
11:26 pm

This is a classic example of someone who does not want to go there.I cannot blame her for that, however while in you have to go where they send you.I think they ought to give her an honorable discharge since she has been in since 2007.I do think she should be immediately discharged since she cannot fullfill her contract.

Randy

November 16th, 2009
11:27 pm

Retired ARMY

DJC

November 16th, 2009
11:30 pm

Enter your comments here JG your are wrong. when you join the milatary you take an oath to support and defend this country. anyway…. since the fed. gov. in their infinite wisdom allowed females into the armed services .They should have a program where in a case like this the parent could put the in Child Care Program while the parent is deployed .they could deduct part of their pay to pay for this program

Halsey

November 16th, 2009
11:31 pm

Yeah, back when WOMEN COULD BE WOMEN! and not vote, or work, or hold leadership positions, or do anything about an abusive husband, and so on. Back in the good ole days that get romanticized by people who want to de-evolve society.

Amy

November 16th, 2009
11:34 pm

I’m sure she didn’t refuse the paychecks that the tax payers have been sending to her. So much for Obama’s campaign rhetoric to bring the troops home. I’m sure that’s what she was counting on.