Should the Army always maintain the same standards for entry or should they fluctuate with requirements?

I think that there might be some wiggle room on height/weight for initial induction, but taking in people with known mental issues should not be waived. High stress jobs dealing with high explosives are no place for the unstable, IMHO.

Firstly, this article is bullshit. It is greatly exaggerating what is actually happening, and insinuating things that will “stir the pot”. If I wasn’t on mobile I would link to the couple articles where the Army responded to this article, and completely refute what it states.

The Army is not lowering any standards. The change is simply the level at which waivers can be approved at. Previously for example if you had an applicant who went to counseling for depression because their parents got divorced, that applicant would technically be disqualfied or would need a waiver from the Deparrment of the Army. Now that waiver can be processed “in-house” at USAREC, and this otherwise qualified person can enlist.

As for the “alcohol and drug abusers”, there have always been waivers for certain things. Weed is becoming much more socially acceptable, and therefore more widely used. Should we continue to disqualify people for having EVER smoked weed? Now we are further restricting the recruitable pool of people. We aren’t talking about drug dealers, or hard drug users.

As for the self-mutilation, nobody with suidcidal tendencies is just going to get in. The new rules allow individual cases to be reviewed on a whole person concept (ie: this person cut themselves when they were younger, but have since grown and are normal responsible adults now, who additionally have been cleared by a psychologist).

If anything the Army is making it harder to get people in. We have not been able to enlist High School Seniors who score less than 50 for the past 6 months. (Unless certain circumstances are met and then only so many can enlist). Enlisting/shipping off Green Card holders has gotten stricter. The only thing that is realitively easier are Prior Service people, and there are still rules to them.

I don't think we have a choice. We already face a limited population that even wants to enlist and 10% of that are DQ'd because of lack of general physical fitness. That leaves the option of lowering standards in other areas such as morality and mental fitness (although I question that one with such a large amount of Soldiers that already have issues due to PTSD).

I served with a number of peeps who were told join the army or go to jail - who were wonderful people, allowing those youthful indiscretions can be a good thing, but the serious indiscretions status should stand.

I believe in rules, laws, regulations, and especially standards. There are hundreds of Army regulations written and published for a reason. That being said, there SHOULD be exceptions made, and waivers granted, within moderation.

There is a difference between saying "We are accepting all applicants regardless of previous mental health issues" and "We are accepting WAIVERS for previous mental health issues". Needing a waiver means it is a case-by-case basis. Referencing the article itself: "For all waivers," one memo states, "the burden of proof is on the applicant to provide a clear and meritorious case for why a waiver should be considered."

So clearly, we are still interested in taking in highly qualified applicants. The Army is just increasing the applicant pool to include potential applicants that were previously automatically disqualified without looking into whether their condition was/is serious enough to affect their service. I.e. in the case of childhood trauma... again, referencing the article: 'Taylor said many “meritorious cases” had been found of highly qualified applicants who had been disqualified because of events that had occurred when they were young children.'

I think this is much ado about nothing. Because "Mental health" is a hot button issue, the Army saying it is allowing waivers suddenly becomes a big deal... when really it is something that should be conducted. We should always evaluate potential applicants fully to determine their suitability. That's exactly what the Army is doing: “With the additional data available, Army officials can now consider applicants as a whole person, allowing a series of Army leaders and medical professionals to review the case fully to assess the applicant’s physical limitations or medical conditions and their possible impact upon the applicant's ability to complete training and finish an Army career,” Taylor said. “These waivers are not considered lightly.”

This is a non-issue.

The issue here is that the all-volunteer military cannot sustain itself with strict, non-waivering enlistment standards in this day and age. There is simply not enough target age applicants that are both fully qualified AND have a propensity to enlist.

Here is another article on the subject. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article184253728.html

COL (Join to see) Sir, Standards should never be lowered. A smaller more cohesive and capable unit will outperform a larger unit with issues.

I watched standards change during the Vietnam Era, Cold War, and Wars in Southwest Asia. During Vietnam there was a draft. Most draftees went to the Army, but some to the other Services. The Air Force tried to put limits on the draftees they would accept. This worked for a while, but the DoD mandated each Service would have to accept draftees with lower-than-desired test scores or other capabilities. Each Service subsequently set up remedial math and language classes to bring these service members up to minimum standards. This was one of the early uses of the Services for social engineering.

Fast forward to today with an all-volunteer military. Recruiting for some Services may be down. The Service or DoD then will lower some standards that don't directly impact combat capability to attract more volunteers. Loosening the restriction on tattoos or ethnic dress are examples of how the standards can change. How far a Service can go without adversely impacting its combat capability is a Service call.

Welcome to Vietnam era recruiting. Start drafting again, and the forces will have the quality they need. Soldiers, sailors, and chairman should not have to worry about someone flipping out and shooting or stabbing them. When you are in combat, it's bad enough that the bad guys are trying to kill you.