Soldier chooses family over Army

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E27059%257E1739367,00.html

A soldier forced to choose between her family and her career chose her children over the Army and now faces the punishment that being AWOL is sure to bring.

Simone Holcomb and her husband of three years, Vaughn Holcomb, also a soldier, were both sent to Iraq early this year. The children's paternal grandmother came from Ohio to look after them.

But while the Holcombs were absent, Vaughn's ex-wife filed for child support and was threatening to seek full custody of two of the Holcombs' seven children, who range in age from 4 to 12.

The ex-spouse, who is the biological mother of the two children, was granted temporary joint custody with the grandmother.

The legal action forced the Holcombs to return here on emergency leave in September. A judge in a custodial hearing mandated that one of the parents must stay home to look after the children in order for Vaughn to retain full custody of the two.

[Cha]

1. god damn bush and his "war".

[dbt]

2. There can be NO AWOL penalty for the Holcombs!

They must pay exactly the same price for their actions as the Deserter in the White House paid.

:freak:
dbt

[madrchsod]

3. well our top gun

president should understand about going awol and maybe he can give them some ideas on how to do it without getting in trouble....

[roguevalley]

4. some tough lawyer better pro bono this right now

damned ex wife

[demdave]

5. What is the agenda of the judge?

I fail to see the reason the judge had to rule like this. The parents put the children in the charge of their grandmother until their duty was served. I fail to see why that is unacceptable. Grandparents raise children of their children all the time. What is different here? What is the judge trying to prove. Is this an anti-war issue?

As for the ex-wife, she has no soul. If she had a chance at custody, she would have already had it. The timing shows how shallow and vindictive she is.

[hang a left]

6. The children have been abandoned, no less than if the parents

were in jail. I am not justifying this just stating the facts. The biological parent always has rights over the grandparents.

[demdave]

9. The children were not abandoned

"Abandoned" means left without provision for reasonable and
necessary care or supervision.


Child Abandonment definition – the act of leaving a child without any intention of returning



Section 218 of the Criminal Code creates the offence of abandonment of a child. It says: "Everyone who unlawfully abandons or exposes a child who is under the age of 10 years, so that its life is or is likely to be endangered or its health is or is likely to be permanently injured, is guilty of an indictable offence is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years."



None of these apply here. The children were left in the care of a relative until their parents returned.

[hang a left]

11. It does not qualify in the eyes of the law. I am just the messenger

here, I don't agree with it. The parents are gone. The biological mother has all the rights here. The only reason she was awarded joint custody with the grandmother was the judge was considerate of the fact that both of the custodial parents are fighting in Iraq. Otherwise there would have been an immediate temporary custody change to the biological mother pending a hearing. A custodial parent cannot assign parental rights to someone including paternal grandparents over the biological parent.

[TacticalPeek]

7. Will NOTHING bring the Chimp-in-Chief's AWOL history to mainstream media?!

Remember, "Its a question of character".

And the Holcombs' situation is why God invented waivers.


:grr:

[bluestateguy]

8. Ahem

The president has the authority as commander in chief of the armed forces to end all this nonsense with the stroke of a pen.

We'll be waiting.

[jburton]

10. typical Repug "Family Values" n/t

[dArKeR]

12. Drug and Booze and Cowardness are the only reasons for AWOL

in Junior's Bible.