NCOs
NCOs
Posted on Oct 13, 2020
Where is the line drawn when an NCO is involved, invested or invasive considering soldiers needs?
2.63K
10
12
2
2
0
Soldiers that struggle with suicidal ideology, sexual assault or harassment, or even mentorship? Where is too close from an NCO perspective, spouse perspective, soldier perspective?
Suicide
Sexual Assault
Sexual Harassment
NCOs
Leadership
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
1
1
0
That’s gonna come down to METT-TC. How badly does the soldier need attention, mentorship, or counseling? Extremely hard question to answer without proper insight.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Judgment call on the party of both parties. NCO are required to train, monitor, mentor their troops all the time. Keep in mind many with the problems are either not interested in getting help or afraid of being stigmatized for seeking help. Also keep in mind since neither of us and most in RP are not shrinks, it hard to define the definitions involved. NO good NCO wants to see their troops beset by problems or eat a bullet.
(1)
(0)
SPC Mara Stevenson
I ask this on the basis of some research and on another side of things. My husband is active, I am a veteran and now a spouse. I've seen it from both sides. My husband has been involved invested and e en too close to some soldiers. It is something he has struggled with. From a spouse side, it is a difficult thing to go through and witness. As a soldier it felt too invasive, I've seen good soldiers commit suicide due to lack of attentiveness to a situation after a good NCO leaves a unit out if his own control, this growing problem needs a fix and sadly those within ranks can only do so much or maybe even too much. Sexual harassment and assault cases can end up to have to much attention and ve too invasive as well as not enough attention to detail. Where can you say who did the right thing and who was in the wrong. When does it become dangerous for an NCO to be involved without being suspected of fraternization becuase soldiers go to them for support. Only because their own NCOs don't give them what they need. Ive seen this over and over again. Its just a huge problem for soldiers, for NCOs and everyone involved.
(0)
(0)
SPC Mara Stevenson
What are thoughts on a legitimate code of ethics and not JUST regulations being established.
(0)
(0)
SGM Bill Frazer
1. I have seen very few ethics codes having any enforcement teeth. Military Regs , when list as part of UCMJ have real teeth, and to a minor level all -regs due.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Most of the topics you point out are very dangerous to meddle in. Also, they are equally dangerous to ignore. That's why the system (the Army) has resources in place to fall back on.
So while on the surface leaders are supposed to be warm and fuzzy to these needs, when these instances arise they need to be dealt with in accordance with our training and passed on to the designated professionals for the care the soldier needs. Anything outside of passing the problem off to professionals places astronomical professional risk on the leader(s).
I had a potential domestic situation happen to a soldier. The soldier missed battle assembly because of it. I literally went to the police department (in uniform) during battle assembly and made a report with the details I had. The soldier was also given resources to reach out to. I don't think it went any further.
Selfishly, my ass was covered. What is expected more of leaders?
We are the maintainers of the equipment needed to execute our mission tasks. This includes soldiers. So while we are trained in minimal maintenance of equipment (oil change) some things we cannot address with unit resources (transmission replacement), and those need to be sent out for higher skilled repair.
If a soldier gives the signs of needed help as identified by our training I expect my NCO's and myself to act upon it and get the soldier help (maintenance).
At the end of the day, my NCO's and myself are individual people too, and we just want to make it through the day without crap blowing back on us.
So while on the surface leaders are supposed to be warm and fuzzy to these needs, when these instances arise they need to be dealt with in accordance with our training and passed on to the designated professionals for the care the soldier needs. Anything outside of passing the problem off to professionals places astronomical professional risk on the leader(s).
I had a potential domestic situation happen to a soldier. The soldier missed battle assembly because of it. I literally went to the police department (in uniform) during battle assembly and made a report with the details I had. The soldier was also given resources to reach out to. I don't think it went any further.
Selfishly, my ass was covered. What is expected more of leaders?
We are the maintainers of the equipment needed to execute our mission tasks. This includes soldiers. So while we are trained in minimal maintenance of equipment (oil change) some things we cannot address with unit resources (transmission replacement), and those need to be sent out for higher skilled repair.
If a soldier gives the signs of needed help as identified by our training I expect my NCO's and myself to act upon it and get the soldier help (maintenance).
At the end of the day, my NCO's and myself are individual people too, and we just want to make it through the day without crap blowing back on us.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google