Should enlisted be allowed to date officers in another unit?

Sounds like some failed leadership in spite of the rules. Do we create policies to prevent leaders from failing or do we hold them accountable?

At the time it was legal, or quasi legal.

Why? They are in different units.

Then why punish those that can handle it maturely and without problem. Fraternisation happens when enlisted and officers attend the same church. I have been in many officers houses for Bible studies and yet I handled it pridessionally. In Biblw study they were Bob or Dave...in public Capt or Major so and so. If one person in a dual military family hoes to OTS...we don't make them divorce.

SMSgt Tony Barnes - Because you can't decide after the fact that it had an undue influence on promotion or something similar. I agree there are those who can separate it but it also isn't the same to have people dating and being friends. Which is why frat typically hasn't been pursued the same in all cases.

SMSgt Tony Barnes - Because every time it isn't just about this time. It is also about the next time. The exception/waiver granted this time will be cited as justification next time for a waiver next time.

So should we have policies that penalise those who can show the maturity...or should those that can't be dealt with on s case by case basis?

In that case, yes, it would be seen as a penalty, but how or what can be done to determine the appropriate maturity level on a case-by-case basis? In my experience, even the most mature couples act immature when the honeymoon is over. I still think that people can find relationships outside the work place or even within their own corps.

It's more than the involved couple. It's about perception. They can do nothing wrong, and the perception of wrongdoing would still ruin their units.

SMSgt Tony Barnes - Plenty of things fuel attraction. Taboo is already known to be a huge contributor to attraction in a wide variety of subjects. For example, drinking was more fun what I wasn't supposed to be doing it. Once I reached drinking age, it was rather boring.

As for the benefit of not allowing such dating, we all know that the makeup of units isn't set in stone. Today, you're in different units. Tomorrow, you're in the same unit. Then comes the unpleasantness of them having to decide whether or not they're going to breakup or sneak around & hope that they don't get caught.

In my opinion, allowing this will cause more problems, while solving none. I foresee no positive results of allowing this.

I just believe in letting leaders be leaders. When a problem arises...deal with it...don't put moratoriums on dating practices when off duty.

I'm not sure what branch you served in or what time period, so I'll say this:

Depending on the mission of your branch of service, it may not be an issue. The basic doctrine of the Army is KISS, especially when it comes to matters that could potentially effect the effectiveness of Army units. You never have to worry about when & how to deal with arising problems in this area, when you simply outlaw it & make it punishable. Therefore, for any situation that arises in a problematic manner, the remedy is obvious. I'll end this comment with common wisdom about all Army regulations. For every idiot rule, there's at least one idiot that made it necessary.

SGT Apollo Sharpe - I got out of the service in 1977. I only had 3 women serve either in my unit or for me. There were problems with all three but I would like to mention #3 briefly. I got a call from the Bn CO that I was to transfer one of my cooks from my BCT company to a certain other company in the brigade. I was getting a female cook to replace him. I, of course, inquired why. To make a long story short the female cook and her company commander were found in the back of his van going at it hot and heavy in the post hospital parking lot at 1am in the morning. the 2 bad things I saw from having to do this. I had to transfer a soldier I did not what to transfer(I considered him being punished) and #2; I made the 1SG accompany this female anytime she had to come into my office just to protect myself from who knows what.

Finally! :-). Thanks for reply.

No person stays in the same unit forever. If an enlisted and officer (in the same branch) are dating there is a chance that at some point the officer may be placed in a leadership position over the enlisted member creating a conflict of interest.
The Department of the Army published DA PAM 600-35 outlining what improper relationships consists of; I may not agree with everything but I took an oath to uphold these regulations or risk UCMJ (and so does every other individual with a contract).
There are some gray areas and exception to policies. And yes, there are currently married couples that are enlisted/officer that are making it work. The policy was written in the best interest of the military considering the impact and leadership authority that officers have over enlisted.
Most of the time it doesn't matter; no one is running around checking on what happens outside of uniform.

MAJ (Join to see) - Let's us perspective. What are the actual odds this couple would be in the same chain of command? I know a LtCol and Msgt that served in the same unit but in different functional areas. It happens more than you know.

I had a First Sergeant and a Company Commander that were married in the same Battalion. They were ok as the officer was an OCS graduate and their marriage predates the commissioning (they were both master sergeants before he commissioned). The likelihood of being in the same unit increases as they would be enrolled in the Army Couples program and put on the same installation. The more senior you get the more you are involved in the affairs of other units, especially in a support career field. If we did not have the rules we have now, this would be impossible to manage from a command and HR perspective, one more dimension of personnel mismatches not appreciated by the USR slotting constraints. If this policy was not in place it could make it impossible to move people around, not knowing where the current/past relationships are/were. With current strength management, it is hard enough getting the right people to the right positions at the right time.