Can a commander force spouses to vet their medical appointments through the FRG?

SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA — Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:11:37 -0400

While a part of our Battalion is gearing to deploy, the unofficial word through the FRG channels is disconcerting....all spouses (rear det. personnel and deployed personnel) will be required to "vet" their medical appointments with the FRG, and not only that, but if they ever need a ride (too sick to drive, car broke, etc.) they can only be driven by another FRG volunteer spouse.

While the driving part makes a little bit of sense for those spouses who are deployed, they can still choose to be driven by a friend, a neighbor, a family member staying with them, etc. So why the "FRG drivers only"? .

What makes no sense is to try to force spouses to have to "check with the FRG" whenever they need a medical appointment. What the F*(K is that about?. Inform the FRG AFTER the appointment is made so the CoC is tracking for deployed soldiers...sure, that makes sense...but having to go through the FRG to even get an appointment? Ridiculous.

Or to prohibit soldiers in rear det. to take their spouses to the doctor whenever they need it? I'm sorry but my wife is still not 100% Cancer free, she has had a heart attack since arriving to this post 8 months ago, and other serious medical conditions that me, as her husband, have both the right and the obligation to be there for her. Not some unknown FRG person, just because a Commander deemed it so.

Last I checked FRG is voluntary for spouses, civilian spouses are NOT bound by UCMJ, civilian spouses DO NOT have a chain of command, and finally civilian spouses do have medical privacy rights, and basic privacy rights.

Any JAG or IG person that cares to offer an opinion on this silliness?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2015 10:17 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:17:52 -0400

It is probably well intentioned to try and stay abreast of issues that might affect Soldiers downrange, but no this is not kosher. Of course your unit can't mandate FRG involvement, and getting into anyone's medical business, much less a family member's, is wrong.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Oct 22 at 2015 10:43 PM

LTC Kevin B. — Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:43:15 -0400

Sounds like someone in a leadership position is overreaching. They can try to enforce this, but they have no enforcement mechanism. You can't punish the family member, and you can't punish the service member for the family member disregarding any guidance mandating things run through the FRG.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 6:34 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 06:34:49 -0400

this is as enforceable as making it mandatory to shave while on leave

Response by CPT Jim Schwebach made Oct 23 at 2015 7:37 AM

CPT Jim Schwebach — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 07:37:35 -0400

Good question. Unfortunately this is the wrong place to ask. I'd bet that there are few, if any, members here who are plugged into the rumor mill in your unit. The people to ask are the Many Rockers of your unit. Many Rockers know what is rumor and what is fact. Many Rockers know all.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 8:33 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 08:33:59 -0400

These "mandates" about your FRG. Go to the FRG leader and ask for clarification. Or, have your spouse go to the FRG leader for clarification. Hell, ask where these mandates can be found in writing. If you or your spouse are told by the FRG leader that these are unofficial and not written down, then there is nothing the FRG can do to enforce these "mandates."

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Oct 23 at 2015 9:37 AM

COL Jean (John) F. B. — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:37:03 -0400

SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA - Sounds like somebody is overstepping their "authority". Nobody can be forced to vet their medical appointments with any non-medical personnel. Sounds to me like someone is trying to do something they think is "good", when it is, in fact, not good.

Before I would go off the deep end on this one, I would verify the truth with my chain of command. If they verify the "requirement", I would take it up with the IG.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 9:58 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:58:03 -0400

Is your spouse a civilian? If the answer is yes, then the commander can't force them to do anything.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Oct 23 at 2015 11:27 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:27:57 -0400

I can understand maybe keeping someone informed, but there is no authority for these actions, period.

Response by SFC Maury Gonzalez made Oct 23 at 2015 1:02 PM

SFC Maury Gonzalez — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:02:48 -0400

HIPPA rules are need to know, the FRG does not warrant an explanation of medical appointments. Any inquiries are subject to fine up to $50,000, even if you claim "I didn't know the rules"

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 23 at 2015 2:12 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 14:12:16 -0400

I am sure that is a HIPPA violation.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 3:45 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:45:29 -0400

A resource for FRG leaders/members and spouses: Army Family Team Building classes. They are a series and cover everything a spouse needs to know about the service, including the ins and outs of the FRG. This type of thing is covered to try to get rid of the 'wearing my Soldier's rank' that happens in FRGs.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2015 8:57 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 Oct 2015 20:57:56 -0400

I originally joined the Army in 1986. From then until now, my understanding is that civilians outrank us. Therefore, we cannot order them to do anything. Giving spouses a hard time is even worse considering what they have to endure and how much work is left for them to do.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Nov 29 at 2015 11:10 AM

SGM Erik Marquez — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 11:10:00 -0500

What was the outcome of this "issue"
Founded or unfounded?

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Nov 29 at 2015 1:29 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:29:11 -0500

It seems to me it is unwarranted command influence which might have unintended impacts, like a wife deciding not to go to the hospital due to the intrusion.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 2:59 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 14:59:27 -0500

Are we sure it's a requirement and not an offer of help?