Would it be wrong for MARSOC to put a restriction on a female saying she cannot get pregnant for X amount of time while in MARSOC?

Gentlemen,

Are you going to tell men they can't tear a tendon, break a leg, or suffer a groin, testicular, urethral, prostate, corpora cavernosa, or corpus spongiosum injury?

Pregnancy is not necessarily an elective outcome. Are you going to ask a woman to terminate an unintended pregnancy?

Warmest Regards, Sandy

I would think that if a female was going to join MARSOC or any other Special Operations unit, she would go in knowing what the OPTEMPO is like, what demands are placed on the operators and what she might have to give up. And I would think if she decided to have a child, she would come to that decision after looking at everything within her life including her role as an operator so I don't think this would need to be control by the military. The female operator will be smart enough to understand what she is getting herself into.

To me it seems reasonable to ask females not to get pregnant and to remove them from the unit if they do. I base this on the fact that the Army Rangers maintain a high-level of unit readiness and major injuries, such as the ones described by LT Annala, will see a soldier removed from regiment and sent to another unit.

Tactfully explaining to a female prior the do's and dont's should not be considered a bad idea. Tour family comes first so if they know it could be a slight chance that they'd want to have a child then they should keep that in mind. When you say your going to place the mission first then you should know what your getting yourself into and having children should be an after thought for the time being.

No Sir, it would not be wrong. I have my own opinion on females being in an Infantry MOS but I also have to realistically believe that any female Soldier/Marine who is dedicated enough to be in SF or MARSOC isn't going to jeopardize her career , her fellow team mates or the mission by getting pregnant. I am confident that a Soldier or Marine of that caliber would decide on the right time and place for that to happen.

Many of the folks here may not go as far back as I do, but back when I enlisted the policy was simple, if the woman got pregnant she was discharged with a general. Then as the feminist movement continued the policy was cancelled.

So because of all the specialized training required for MARSOC, I see absolutely no problem requiring a woman to sign a legal document stating that for a given period of time say 3 years that she will NOT get pregnant, and if she does she will be discharged. People today should be smart enough to ensure they don't get pregnant.

My compliments LT on an excellent question! Its easy to come up with arguments on both sides. If you make a career choice sometimes sacrifices need to be made. I'd be hard pressed to believe that men who choose a SPECOPS career don't have to wrestle with decisions about marriage and family. If women choose that career path they would be faced with the same decisions. Generally, it takes 2 to decide on having a baby, so if the woman has selected that career path, hopefully its a joint decision on if and when to have children. Hopefully it would be understood that the career comes first so that something of this nature doesn't have to be mandated.

I would wonder if mandatory birth control would be considered as a standard precaution? Something along the lines of Depo-Provera, which would then need to be maintained throughout deployment or situation. I would think that this would be considered along the same lines as any other preventative pre-deployment medical procedure/inoculation, assuming of course that requirement is stipulated up front, well spelled out and agreed to.

Fiscally speaking ...HELL NO it should NOT be allowed.

Now I am not sure on how the pipeline for MARSOC is. If I was to use the SF training model of SFAS/Q-Course/Team time/Staff time. IF I was in charge of writing the manual. If a female Soldier in the pipeline became pregnant I would hold an inquiry board. Depending on how long thru the pipeline if I would do a dissmissal from the course. With a 90% chance of the dismissal happening. Same thing if this Soldier was in their inital team time (say first 3 years after graduating from Q-course) You finish Q-course then come up pregnant in the first 3 months.....good bye go back to the the regular army, re-apply for SF in 24 months. You come back from deployment, been on a team for 2-3 years....take some time off go work on staff.

I feel if the army spends the money on you to train you for 1-2 years you owe it to the army to contribute back, for a similar amount of time. Its a break in the trust that the army would place to spend all that money on you to train you etc.

Now this is a tricky question. All Soldiers join the military knowing the possibility of deployment and being stationed overseas. Female Soldiers join knowing there are times they must (should) take or use some form of contraceptive. At the same time there will always be the Soldiers who change there mind at the last minute. I am not digging on female Soldiers there are male Soldiers that do this as well (in a different way obviously.) I know that some times accidents happen and some times unwanted pregnancy's happen with contraceptives. However the pullout method is not an accident. I do know female Soldiers who have purposely gotten pregnant so they did not deploy, I can see one accident however the 2nd time she should be discharged. Same with a male Soldier I know one who was caught bragging that he had a friend brake his arm with a baseball bat so he did not have to deploy. Which reminds me of another question "Should a Soldier who claims Conscientious objector be discharged instead of kept overseas/in the military wasting tax payers dollars."

No, I do not believe it is wrong because when they get pregnant, they are put in a Limited Duty status. It's hard to plan an operation if you don't have qualified personnel to carry out the mission.

Good discussion. I remember when a pregnancy was called instant discharge.

The fact that this is even a question is the problem.

The Marine Corps already completed a study which showed conclusively that women in infantry roles is detrimental to the unit. That isn't debatable. The SECNAV ignored the study. As for getting pregnant, I've seen that used too many times as a way to get out of a deployment. It wouldn't hurt to put restrictions in place but that won't happen because it's not "fair"

First, they have to meet the training stardards to get into the unit. She they become pregnant, then they would be released and reassigned to another unit, non- SPEC OPS.

Hopefully when DOD and Congress and whoever decided it was time to incorporate women into combat arms and special warfare units, this was a factor they considered (using common sense of course, so it's doubtful).

As I've said in other posts, any female who does meet the training standards should be afforded the opportunity to serve in Special Ops. One thing we all know, the mental and physical challenges are going to to be so much greater on females.

The Army is allowing Females to go thru Ranger School, however, if they pass, they will not be assigned to the Ranger Regiment. That assignment possibility will be looked at sometime in 2016. My feeling is, they will continue to attend Ranger School, but will not be assigned to the Regiment. I do feel there are places in Special Ops for females, however the Ranger Regiment is NOT one of them.

Well, if there are any women in MARSOC, it's because they lowered the physical standards, or ignored them (like Ranger School did). In which case, who cares? The inmates are already running the asylum, and the military has become a massive welfare and vocational training program instead of a war-fighting organization.

The whole key to RAPID deployment is that team members are trained and ready to jump to the call. I don't mean to be sexist, but if your pregnant and can't afford to do the job you qualified to do then you shouldn't hold a spot of a field operator. The Marines should never consider lowering or making exceptions to the rules that have brought us the best warriors ever. Do it right or stand aside.

To me this is common sense.. There SHOULD be a mandate.. A woman wants to be MARSOC or any other specop and they need to have known limitations including restrictions on getting pregnant.

Personally, I think it would be wrong--and open up a huge issue within Congress. The issue you state is not unique to MarSoc--it's common to any unit that deploys, and especially small teams (EOD, HUMINT, Civil Affairs, etc.). Any policy should address a team members ability to deploy and function as a member of a team (whether they break a leg, have a child with special needs that cannot be left alone, or become pregnant). If they cannot perform the duties--but are still qualified--they should be reassigned/replaced until they are able to carry on their duties.