US Seeks To Imprison Single Mother

[Care4all]

No.. it is your ill-informed opinion that it is not the case...

It is the informed opinion of her commanders that this is indeed the case... it is also pretty obvious to those who have actually served in the military and not just posed that they have

She knew for MONTHS about her pending deployment and it is HER responsibility, not the military's responsibility, to have the verified and proper plans in place for the care of her child...

As asked again and again.. is she to be given extension after extension for her own dereliction of duty, her non-compliance with regulations, and her disobeying orders??

I saw this type of scam played more times than I cared to remember during Desert Shield/Storm and Somalia

She sent her child to her mother one month before deployment but you keep ignoring that and act like she did nothing to prepare for deployment. Then you keep repeating the mantra about extensions.

SHE WAS NEVER GIVEN AN EXTENSION AFTER SHE LEARNED THE CARE PLAN FELL THROUGH!!!

You keep ignoring that because for whatever reason you hate this soldier. Also, what do you think you are accomplishing by repeatedly accusing me of lying about my service? Going by what I've seen from you there is no doubt you are the kind of person who I don't give a shit if you believe me or not. All you are doing is embarrassing yourself.

YOU keep ignoring that she is REQUIRED to have a BACK-UP plan!!!

where does it say that? dave posted the requirement, i didn't see that she was required to have a back up plan?

 

[CurveLight]

if i ever had a child, i would not leave it with strangers, giving them power of attorney over my child. maybe some mothers would feel comfortable with this, but i would not.

Here's some info I had not read before:

"She informed Specialist Hutchinson, who informed her
command, and she was given an extension to try to find someone else.
However, shortly before she deployed, she was told that she would not get
that extension after all, and that she would need to find someone to care
for her child within 24 hours, and she needed to be on the plane."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120608132


So she was given an extension then it was reversed so she never did receive an extension.

 

[DiamondDave]

She sent her child to her mother one month before deployment but you keep ignoring that and act like she did nothing to prepare for deployment. Then you keep repeating the mantra about extensions.

SHE WAS NEVER GIVEN AN EXTENSION AFTER SHE LEARNED THE CARE PLAN FELL THROUGH!!!

You keep ignoring that because for whatever reason you hate this soldier. Also, what do you think you are accomplishing by repeatedly accusing me of lying about my service? Going by what I've seen from you there is no doubt you are the kind of person who I don't give a shit if you believe me or not. All you are doing is embarrassing yourself.

YOU keep ignoring that she is REQUIRED to have a BACK-UP plan!!!

where does it say that? dave posted the requirement, i didn't see that she was required to have a back up plan?

In the regulations for the form.... I had to, my ex had to, and all the soldier parents I was stationed with had to... it is why it is referred to as a comprehensive care plan.... including short term, long term, in even to of death, will and death, etc.. with a caregiver THAT MUST meet the specific requirements as need to provide care.. and this must be signed and the regulations must be met.. each of the possible the caregivers assigned must also sign and be briefed on all of the specific requirements... the backup is required in case of emergency, for we cannot having soldiers coming home for every personal issue....

Care.. do not forget I HAD to do this... and have even a more comprehensive plan since I was in a dual military marriage with a child, as an active duty enlistee in our US Army... I can try and dig up the old forms I had and get the specific form #s, and hopefully the revisions have not changed a lot since my ETS date in 96

Now.. lest we forget even if this was messed up again somehow.. this soldier was then also presented options (military charities, etc) by the Army after she messed up her family care plan for the SECOND time... and she refused.... now if you look at the logical progression of what is transpiring.. it is quite evident what is going on here.. and evidently, quite evident to the Courts Martial, as she has been charged today... and rightfully so

 

[DiamondDave]

if i ever had a child, i would not leave it with strangers, giving them power of attorney over my child. maybe some mothers would feel comfortable with this, but i would not.

Here's some info I had not read before:

"She informed Specialist Hutchinson, who informed her
command, and she was given an extension to try to find someone else.
However, shortly before she deployed, she was told that she would not get
that extension after all, and that she would need to find someone to care
for her child within 24 hours, and she needed to be on the plane."
Army Mom Refuses To Deploy : NPR


So she was given an extension then it was reversed so she never did receive an extension.

She had MONTHS to prepare for the deployment.. she did indeed receive the original extension but not when asked in November... the extension was in August/September, as stated by the military.. if I were you, I would not inherently believe the attorney PAID to defend her who is telling the story only in the defendant's words....

Oh.. and if you did not see, she was given other options even after she fouled up her FCP that close to deployment... she refused, which is a no-go...

Regardless.. she is charged now.. luckily for her, only with AWOL, missing a movement, dereliction of duty and insubordinate conduct toward a non-commissioned officer... personally, I would have liked to have seen her charged with the proper charge of desertion

 

[CurveLight]

if i ever had a child, i would not leave it with strangers, giving them power of attorney over my child. maybe some mothers would feel comfortable with this, but i would not.

Here's some info I had not read before:

"She informed Specialist Hutchinson, who informed her
command, and she was given an extension to try to find someone else.
However, shortly before she deployed, she was told that she would not get
that extension after all, and that she would need to find someone to care
for her child within 24 hours, and she needed to be on the plane."
Army Mom Refuses To Deploy : NPR


So she was given an extension then it was reversed so she never did receive an extension.

She had MONTHS to prepare for the deployment.. she did indeed receive the original extension but not when asked in November... the extension was in August/September, as stated by the military.. if I were you, I would not inherently believe the attorney PAID to defend her who is telling the story only in the defendant's words....

Oh.. and if you did not see, she was given other options even after she fouled up her FCP that close to deployment... she refused, which is a no-go...

Regardless.. she is charged now.. luckily for her, only with AWOL, missing a movement, dereliction of duty and insubordinate conduct toward a non-commissioned officer... personally, I would have liked to have seen her charged with the proper charge of desertion

So now you are accusing her attorney of being dishonest. I'm seeing a pattern here. You accuse me of lying, you accuse the soldier of lying, and you accuse her attorney of lying. You have absolutely no reason to accuse so many people of lying other than you don't like what they have to say. You are one sad individual.

Btw, please quote us the text from AR 600-20 about the required back up plan. We don't give a **** what paperwork you had to fill out about FOURTEEN YEARS ago.

 

[CurveLight]

This part from the CNN article backs up what her attorney said:

"On the eve of her unit's departure, Hutchinson was ordered to be on the plane."

Her attorney stated she was given an extension but then was told she had 24 hours to find a caregiver. The "eve of her unit's departure" is the same time frame of 24 hours and of course anyone who has been deployed knows full well you are not ordered on the eve of the departure date.

Also, here is the link to the Regulations. I look forward to seeing it quoted where a back up plan was ordered. Oh, that's the other thing we don't see in the CNN article or the OP article. Notice the spokesperson never said anything about a back up plan. If I recall, the source of that claim is diamonddave but at last check he has yet to provide that evidence. So basically, ColdFusion jumped on DD's dead end train and was taken for a ride.
http://www.usapa.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_20.pdf

 

[DiamondDave]

Here's some info I had not read before:

"She informed Specialist Hutchinson, who informed her
command, and she was given an extension to try to find someone else.
However, shortly before she deployed, she was told that she would not get
that extension after all, and that she would need to find someone to care
for her child within 24 hours, and she needed to be on the plane."
Army Mom Refuses To Deploy : NPR


So she was given an extension then it was reversed so she never did receive an extension.

She had MONTHS to prepare for the deployment.. she did indeed receive the original extension but not when asked in November... the extension was in August/September, as stated by the military.. if I were you, I would not inherently believe the attorney PAID to defend her who is telling the story only in the defendant's words....

Oh.. and if you did not see, she was given other options even after she fouled up her FCP that close to deployment... she refused, which is a no-go...

Regardless.. she is charged now.. luckily for her, only with AWOL, missing a movement, dereliction of duty and insubordinate conduct toward a non-commissioned officer... personally, I would have liked to have seen her charged with the proper charge of desertion

So now you are accusing her attorney of being dishonest. I'm seeing a pattern here. You accuse me of lying, you accuse the soldier of lying, and you accuse her attorney of lying. You have absolutely no reason to accuse so many people of lying other than you don't like what they have to say. You are one sad individual.

Btw, please quote us the text from AR 600-20 about the required back up plan. We don't give a **** what paperwork you had to fill out about FOURTEEN YEARS ago.

What is her attorney PAID to do??? She is going to state her case to get the client off.... What else do you think the lawyer is going to say??


As for your AR... seems that this 2005 form has the Army covered pretty well in this case... the soldier had more than 30 days from notification of deployment to ensure and verify the validity of the care to be given

Note also that within the forms to be filled out, you have the long term guardian and the short term guardian in case of emergency.. this is used to ensure backup for all situations... This is why you do not have a form where the short terms and the long term guardians are indeed the same.... the temporary or emergency guardian is used for EXACTLY that.. The form is slightly different from what we had in the 90's, but here it indeed is
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/dcs/docs/DA Form 5305 Family Care Plan.pdf

Her punishments are also laid out along with her signing that she understands that any plan failing to meet the policy will result in disciplinary action and/or separation...

 

[DiamondDave]

Oh.. and let us not forget.. that spelled out in said form:

"If arrangements for the care of my family members fail to work, I am not automatically excused from prescribed duties"

"I have made and will maintain arrangements for the care of my family members during all of the following:"

"If I fail to maintain a Family Care Plan or provide false information regarding my plan, I am subject to separation, administrative action, or disciplinary action under UCMJ"

And lest we forget that with her long term guardian mysteriously being unable to provide after having this explained before and the guardian signing, the Army STILL afforded this soldier with options with charities and organizations.. this was refused by the soldier...

 

[CurveLight]

She had MONTHS to prepare for the deployment.. she did indeed receive the original extension but not when asked in November... the extension was in August/September, as stated by the military.. if I were you, I would not inherently believe the attorney PAID to defend her who is telling the story only in the defendant's words....

Oh.. and if you did not see, she was given other options even after she fouled up her FCP that close to deployment... she refused, which is a no-go...

Regardless.. she is charged now.. luckily for her, only with AWOL, missing a movement, dereliction of duty and insubordinate conduct toward a non-commissioned officer... personally, I would have liked to have seen her charged with the proper charge of desertion

So now you are accusing her attorney of being dishonest. I'm seeing a pattern here. You accuse me of lying, you accuse the soldier of lying, and you accuse her attorney of lying. You have absolutely no reason to accuse so many people of lying other than you don't like what they have to say. You are one sad individual.

Btw, please quote us the text from AR 600-20 about the required back up plan. We don't give a **** what paperwork you had to fill out about FOURTEEN YEARS ago.

What is her attorney PAID to do??? She is going to state her case to get the client off.... What else do you think the lawyer is going to say??


As for your AR... seems that this 2005 form has the Army covered pretty well in this case... the soldier had more than 30 days from notification of deployment to ensure and verify the validity of the care to be given

Note also that within the forms to be filled out, you have the long term guardian and the short term guardian in case of emergency.. this is used to ensure backup for all situations... This is why you do not have a form where the short terms and the long term guardians are indeed the same.... the temporary or emergency guardian is used for EXACTLY that.. The form is slightly different from what we had in the 90's, but here it indeed is
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/dcs/docs/DA Form 5305 Family Care Plan.pdf

Her punishments are also laid out along with her signing that she understands that any plan failing to meet the policy will result in disciplinary action and/or separation...

Thank you for clarifying the "required back up plan" is really just a DiamondDave Production and not part of the AR 600-20. That is why we don't see the military complaining she didn't have a back up plan as you falsely claimed is required. She abided by the AR and sent her son to California a month before deployment.

My question for ColdFusion is this: what made you decide to trust DD on this since you clearly stated you always disagree? If anything this showed even more why you shouldn't trust him.

 

[rightwinger]

Normally, I would support a mother in a case like this.
However, Hutchinson made a commitment to defend her country. For her to get pregnant as a single soldier show great irresponsibility. This seems to be an out for many female soldiers. They sign up, receive training and benefits and then when it comes time to deploy...they turn up pregnant.

 

[beowolfe]

If she can't deploy...why is she still in the military. Especially the Army.

-TSO

They won't let her out......not yet anyway.

 

[beowolfe]

1) the kid was 10 months old at the time of deployment.
2) the parent of a small child is obliged to have on file with the military authorities a plan for child care in the even of deployments. This woman did have a plan, but the person who was supposed to take care of the kid backed out at the last minute. Poor planning on her part should not be a problem for other folks.

I think she should have had a better plan for childcare, like she was supposed to.

The army did giver her another option (Foster care) which she refused.

so, would you put your kids in foster care to satisfy your employer's demands?

 

[beowolfe]

The military tries to help where possible to take care of their own WHEN YOU PLAY BY THE RULES.. this woman did not play by the rules....

Neither did her superiors. They told her that if she showed up to be deployed and had her child with her, the child would be put into foster care. Army HQ says that would not have happened. So, she played by the 99% of the rules and her superiors played by 0% if you belive Army HQ.

And you have to remember, these are young people in the Army who barely understand what rights they have despite their being in the military.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

So now you are accusing her attorney of being dishonest. I'm seeing a pattern here. You accuse me of lying, you accuse the soldier of lying, and you accuse her attorney of lying. You have absolutely no reason to accuse so many people of lying other than you don't like what they have to say. You are one sad individual.

Btw, please quote us the text from AR 600-20 about the required back up plan. We don't give a **** what paperwork you had to fill out about FOURTEEN YEARS ago.

What is her attorney PAID to do??? She is going to state her case to get the client off.... What else do you think the lawyer is going to say??


As for your AR... seems that this 2005 form has the Army covered pretty well in this case... the soldier had more than 30 days from notification of deployment to ensure and verify the validity of the care to be given

Note also that within the forms to be filled out, you have the long term guardian and the short term guardian in case of emergency.. this is used to ensure backup for all situations... This is why you do not have a form where the short terms and the long term guardians are indeed the same.... the temporary or emergency guardian is used for EXACTLY that.. The form is slightly different from what we had in the 90's, but here it indeed is
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/dcs/docs/DA Form 5305 Family Care Plan.pdf

Her punishments are also laid out along with her signing that she understands that any plan failing to meet the policy will result in disciplinary action and/or separation...

Thank you for clarifying the "required back up plan" is really just a DiamondDave Production and not part of the AR 600-20. That is why we don't see the military complaining she didn't have a back up plan as you falsely claimed is required. She abided by the AR and sent her son to California a month before deployment.

My question for ColdFusion is this: what made you decide to trust DD on this since you clearly stated you always disagree? If anything this showed even more why you shouldn't trust him.

Long term AND EMERGENCY care. I think DD has pretty well SHREDDED you with your OWN documents.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

1) the kid was 10 months old at the time of deployment.
2) the parent of a small child is obliged to have on file with the military authorities a plan for child care in the even of deployments. This woman did have a plan, but the person who was supposed to take care of the kid backed out at the last minute. Poor planning on her part should not be a problem for other folks.

I think she should have had a better plan for childcare, like she was supposed to.

The army did giver her another option (Foster care) which she refused.

so, would you put your kids in foster care to satisfy your employer's demands?

She is a member of the MILITARY and she signed a CONTRACT as such. It is CLEAR that she was trying to AVOID DEPLOYMENT nothing more nothing LESS! Her MOTHER, the GRAND MOTHER of the child, AGREED to care for her grandson and SUDDENLY she couldn't do so? If you don't find that suspect then you are VERY VERY gullible.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Hey Curve I asked you before did she inform her SUPERIORS that she was having UNPROTECTED SEX?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

if i ever had a child, i would not leave it with strangers, giving them power of attorney over my child. maybe some mothers would feel comfortable with this, but i would not.

Then don't join the armed forces.

I'd bet everything you own she wasn't conscripted.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I had a soldier, a mother of a 5-year old, who refused deployment ordes, although she had the proper paperwork for her own mother to watch the child. She was court-martialed, rightfully so, in my opinion. If that is the case here, yes, this mother should be treated the same as any other soldier, then, because she refuses to do her duty. Edit: I agree that she should be discharged without prison time. I also add that she should not receive and GI or VA benefits. She forfeited them.

 

[Christopher]

It doesn't matter where the father is. The fact is she has nobody to leave the child with. Do you agree that is Court Martial material? What you call "missing information" looks more like a way to agree with the Court Martial.

I do agree with it. She just didn't show up. As the Army rep said, "the Army would not deploy a single parent with no one to care for her child". She should have shown up at the time she was required to. She would not have been forced onto the aircraft, but "she was afraid". No, she was stupid.

She should be court martialed. She shouldn't serve any time in prison, but she should be kicked out of the service.

-TSO

I agree with that.

 

[CurveLight]

What is her attorney PAID to do??? She is going to state her case to get the client off.... What else do you think the lawyer is going to say??


As for your AR... seems that this 2005 form has the Army covered pretty well in this case... the soldier had more than 30 days from notification of deployment to ensure and verify the validity of the care to be given

Note also that within the forms to be filled out, you have the long term guardian and the short term guardian in case of emergency.. this is used to ensure backup for all situations... This is why you do not have a form where the short terms and the long term guardians are indeed the same.... the temporary or emergency guardian is used for EXACTLY that.. The form is slightly different from what we had in the 90's, but here it indeed is
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/dcs/docs/DA Form 5305 Family Care Plan.pdf

Her punishments are also laid out along with her signing that she understands that any plan failing to meet the policy will result in disciplinary action and/or separation...

Thank you for clarifying the "required back up plan" is really just a DiamondDave Production and not part of the AR 600-20. That is why we don't see the military complaining she didn't have a back up plan as you falsely claimed is required. She abided by the AR and sent her son to California a month before deployment.

My question for ColdFusion is this: what made you decide to trust DD on this since you clearly stated you always disagree? If anything this showed even more why you shouldn't trust him.

Long term AND EMERGENCY care. I think DD has pretty well SHREDDED you with your OWN documents.

You still don't get it. He claimed there was a requirement for a back up plan for her deployment. "Emergency care" is for short term, like if the parent gets into a car accident. "Emergency" care would not cover a 12 month deployment. Her mom backing out is not an emergency. Her getting into a car wreck is an emergency. How can you not see the difference? There is absolutely nothing in the regulations that says it is a requirement Hutchinson should have had a back up for the Deployment. Look at some of the articles....even the military is not criticizing her for not having a back up for Deployment.