Should conduct after being awarded a medal be used to take away medals and badges?

LTC (Join to see). As far as an award . . . as long as there is no mistake regarding the facts on which the award was based . . . it should not be taken away . . . it is a historic fact.

With respect to promotions and membership in elite organizations . . . having once held a specific rank or membership is a historic fact . . . but that rank or membership may he revocable.

Warmest Regards, Sandy

LTC Stephen C.

The published policy is only the discovery of facts that would have caused the awarding authorities to not issue the award in the first place. Ie something that they had already done that simply wasn't known at the time. Subsequent conduct cannot erase the meritorious actions.

It can make the person a low-down bastard, but a low-down bastard who once did something good.

I relegate this in my mind to something akin to what the NFL Hall of Fame voters go through prior to electing a former player into the NFL HOF. What these voters are supposed to do is to only take what the player did on the field, and leave any off the field distractions out of the decision. We all know if these voters took off the field actions into consideration, there'd be no players in NFL HOF.
Take for example, Hall of Famer Michael Irvin. On the field, he was an electric player, dynamic, one of the best to ever play wide receiver (hence his election into the HOF). However, his off the field antics showed him to be a not so mature guy, he did drugs and paid for prostitutes, pretty much like a lot of those guys (not everyone). The HOF voters though didn't look at his off the field body of work, and thus he was allowed to be voted it. At the time of his voting in, it was controversial, due to his actions off the field. Today, no one talks about it.
I agree with 1LT Sandy Annala, once that award has been earned, it's the SM's award. That award has become a part of the SM's permanent record. "Off the field" actions should only ever be taken into account during consideration for receiving a current or subsequent award for a different act.

The award is for a specific act, or period of service. Unless that act or period of service is called into question, then revoking the award is wrong.

Let's take a look at some of the types of awards, and use them for comparison.

- Marksmanship awards (Naval Services): Hard to justify removal if they earned them.
- Service and training awards: These include PME, Sea Service, Drill Instructor, Recruiting. Again hard to justify removal unless you can show cause later that the tour wasn't actually successful.
- Campaign and service medals: You either participated or your didn't.
- Service awards: Includes Good Conduct medals. The standards are pretty clear.
- Unit awards: You were either a member of the Unit when it was awarded, or you weren't.


That leaves

- Personal decorations: Let's work under the assumption these are going to be Valor or Non-Valor.

For Valor Awards, the idea of revoking someone of their awards, not related to the specific act is so vile, I cannot put it into words.

Non-Valor Awards are either Impact (specific act) or Service (period). For an Impact, unless it was shown that during commission of the act that earned them the award they did something that would have prevented them being recognized in the first place, the award should be left alone. I believe the regulations already account for that.

For Service, the same general philosophy applies. Unless the period in which they earned an award is questioned (and the specific duties mentioned for the award), there shouldn't be a reason to revoke said award.

Revoking awards is just bad form. It should never be a matter of policy. Always the exception rather than the rule, and the extreme exception at that.

LTC (Join to see), this is a great question, sir. I have two opinions.

Concerning awards: I personally believe that their actions earned them the medals that they wear. Now, if someone fraudently earned a medal, then the award should be amended/rescinded. However, if the award was truly earned, then their actions following the award should have no impact toward a rescission.

Concerning status: I also believe that becoming a member of the special operations community is not easily done. The badge is earned. The SOF community obviously does things differently than the rest of the military, but they also do different things than the rest of the military. The military's top 1% should always carry themselves in a way that the public would respect and understand. Once they stop doing that, then it may be time to take a knee. If the actions are dishonorable enough, then please take the appropriate actions (i.e. UCMJ, court martial, DHD, etc.), but the award of the badge or tab should still be theirs.

Unless it is proven that the awarded medal or elite status is itself in question they should NOT be revoked. If they are still in active service then the UCMJ would decide if the punishment included removal of awards and status.

Back in my airborne days (83-86 & 89-91) if you terminated you jump status voluntarily or by mischief you jump badge was revoked

To me, that's a no brainer! Absolutely NOT!!!

The award was written and approved, leave it alone. Now if a SM screws up, get them for that, but leave previously approved awards alone. If the actions that the SM is getting in trouble for happened at the same time as the award was given, then depending on the situation, I suppose it could be revoked.

I agree with Sandy.

I'll also point out that some things are revocable retroactively (witness Canada's revocation of Russell William's commission after his conviction for sexual assaults and murders).