In the short run, women are still being assaulted, and some of those assaults result in pregnancy. A pregnancy that cannot be aborted at a military facility because the military healthcare system denies coverage of abortion care, even in cases of rape or incest. This is grossly unfair.
True, abortion becomes an option if the mother’s life is endangered, she foots the bill herself, or seeks care outside the military system. But U.S. servicewomen remain the only federal workers denied coverage in cases of rape. Even federal inmates can get abortions. It is horrible enough to be sexually assaulted; when that assault results in an unwanted pregnancy, it begins the trauma anew.
Most rape victims are junior enlisted women who cannot afford an abortion in the civilian sector. Enlisted earn less pay, and often come from families who cannot afford to help them. If they are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, they cannot get an abortion in country and must return to the United States, if they can convince their commands to let them go. Then they must pay for the procedure itself. The policies are stacked against women who are raped and become pregnant.
It’s a shameful policy. But you can stand with servicewomen here, and encourage Congress to pass a bill that would at least give servicewomen the option of abortion in cases of rape and incest. It’s far from perfect — and of course the implication is that abortion is ok if it’s not a woman’s “fault” she got pregnant — but it’s better than nothing.
pretty sad when prisoners are treated better than soldiers
This is just another example of how we make a lot of noise about honoring our military but fail to follow through in any concrete way.
One question.
Is getting pregnant while deployed treated the same way as self-inflicted wounds ?
Pregnancy usually requires two people, so I don’t think it’s exactly “self-inflicted.” Nor is it a wound.
Jill, I think that may have been a rather douchey reference to UCMJ statutes that impose punishments if a person takes actions that would remove themselves from serving aka malingering
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm115.htm
I’ve read about servicewomen who a)wanted to get an abortion, but were unable to for the above reasons, e.g. not being able to get it through the military, unable to get leave to have it done at home, etc, who are then treated like shit for the great sin of being pregnant. (Which is a whole ‘nother can of vicious, ugly, worms)
It is so manifestly fucked up that there isn’t language to do it justice.
I’ve read about servicewomen who wanted to get an abortion, but were unable to for the above reasons, e.g. not being able to get it through the military, unable to get leave to have it done at home, etc, and who were then treated like shit for the great sin of being pregnant. (Which is a whole ‘nother can of vicious, ugly, worms)
It is so manifestly fucked up that there isn’t language to do it justice.
I would count an unwanted pregnancy resulting from rape as a “wound”, but certainly not as a self-inflicted wound. And that means that US servicewomen are going untreated when wounded.
Add in the fact that I’m fairly sure that adultery is still ILLEGAL under the UCMJ, and it’s just a shitstorm of misogyny. Oh, got raped and you’re married/your attacker’s married and your commander doesn’t believe you and won’t do anything about it? Oh, you’re pregnant? Well, obviously you’re an adulterer who needs to be court martialled AND you don’t get an abortion if you want one.
Actually I was just curious how your military treats cases like that, since cases like that weren’t an issue before (for obvious reasons).
Before what?
Shit like this and the abhorrent treatment of rape victims in the military in general make me inclined to despise the military in all of its forms.
I guess they mean before there was women in the military.
I don’t get the talk about self inflicted wounds or millandering or whatever it’s called. The military these days is like a job right (unless there’s like a world war and it’s the draft and things). So why can’t a soldier just quit and then get out? Why would they bother with self inflicted wounds?
Peace Corps volunteers are treated similarly. Their medical coverage covers everything but the kitchen sink, oh yeah, and abortion. Women are expected to cover that expense themselves. How, on a poverty-level stipend, I do not know.
Pregnancy as “malingering” or a way to get out of the service could be an issue. That does however imply consensual sex and so is not exactly on topic of the OP which was about rape.
As far as I can tell, the army no longer punishes soldiers for getting pregnant, but there have been rules doing exactly that.
I don’t think there has ever been a war in which there have not been women serving. Secretly or overtly, legally or not, in roles that are meant to be more protected and in ones that are not. Women have played roles in the U.S. military forces from the start. Policies have changed a great deal over time, though.
Matlun, your comment presumes a world where women who are raped are A) believed and B) understood not to have been at fault.
Neither of which are remotely true even OUTSIDE of the armed forces.
The other inferrence – that women get pregnant for manipulative reasons feeds into a whole other slew of misogynist ish.
Given the OP, your assertion that the army no longer punishes women for getting pregnant is absolutely absurd.
@Irishup
I read the question I answered as being about someone getting pregnant as a way to get out of service, which would be a planned pregnancy. Ergo, it would imply consensual sex. Reading back I see that this was not explicit in the original question.
I do not think we have any disagreement here.
Is your argument that any rule that punished pregnancy would also punish rape victims who are not believed, and would be a bad idea? If so, we agree. (Though I would say punishing accidental pregnancies would be bad even without considering the rape cases)
Also: Saying that this could happen is by no means misogynistic. Since people have been known to for example seriously self injure to get a medical discharge, some women getting pregnant would not seem far fetched. Being in a war zone will drive people to do a lot of things.
So I was discussing this with my dad and stepmother (the latter who I share a poor relationship with) and my stepmother said: “of course the military does that. Abortion is wrong in the eyes of the church and the military doesn’t want to look bad for the public. And besides, people get raped everywhere, when immigrants are sent back to their country they get raped all the time. Rape happens everywhere. But I understand why the military would want to get involved with that church stuff with abortion.”
I point out that prisoners are able to receive an abortion in the case of incest and rape and she said “Well, they committed crimes! They are prisoners. They are already seen as bad people.”
This comment has me fuming, but instead of getting in a a bad verbal argument with her, I decided to post this here to hear what you all think.
This may be x-posted on other blogs that I frequent I can get their input too.
@Cici: I guess that there is a some truth in at least the first paragraph. The military do not want to “look bad”, so they do not cover abortion for political reasons. (Though whether the politicians in charge should be seen as part of “the military” is a bit dubious).
The more interesting analysis would be regarding the second part: Why is the situation different for the military than all other federal workers and even prisoners?
I would like to hear some theories from those with a better understanding of US politics than myself on that point. What makes the military special in this case?
I think this is an interesting question separate from the larger discussion on why US politics are so massively screwed up when it comes to abortion.