Guard mom must leave infant behind as she heads to Iraq (3 months old)

[Khephra]

SKOWHEGAN, Maine (AP) As she prepares to leave her 3-month-old son and deploy to Iraq with the Army National Guard, Amanda Bolduc savors each remaining moment with the child.

Bolduc, 29, was memorizing Brayden's every feature while she held him in her arms, knowing full well that she won't see him for a long time.

A 2nd lieutenant with the 133rd Engineering Battalion, Bolduc will fly to Fort Drum, N.Y., at the end of January to join her unit.

If she's lucky, she will see Brayden once during the next 18 months when she takes her allotted two-week leave. ''I hope to be able to take it when he has his first birthday,'' Bolduc said.

more.................

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/008/region/Guard_mom_must_leave_infant_be:.shtml

[Coventina]

1. WHAT?!?!?!?!?!

Shouldn't a mother get at least a year before seeing combat duty?
I mean 3 months!?!?!?!?
The baby isn't even weaned yet for Goddess' sake!!!!!

ARRRGH! I can't stand it!!!!!

[saigon68]

5. No one in my family is going to "join" anything.

Join up to do what?

How about have your life disrupted and maybe be killed by the resistence,
in at least 3 or 4 countries we are actively conquering or have plans to ????

The only fighting my family will do is here in mobilizing people to oppose this immoral war

[Malva Zebrina]

25. Bravo and that is what I would teach my children also

and what I did teach them, except they are of that in between generation anyhow.

What we engage in currently is not a war that would defend these shores, but wars and killing for the purpose of expanding these shores. I am all for defending our shores, but let's face it, there is NO, absolutely NO country on earth that can threaten these shores. What we do is attempt to invade other countries because they have something we want. There is no thought given to fair trade or even buying what we want, we have the military, we have the billions of dollars, we have the awesome, awesome killing machine and so we can just go in and take it! Nevermind that we kill thousands of children and nevermined that we LIE about the reasons for doing so-we do it because we CAN. We CAN because we are rich and powerful. Does that turn anyone one? YUP--lot's of ignorant AMericans are turned on by this and turned on by the stupid ignoramus of a president who says "bring em on" and who is a pathological liar. Yup--be proud all of you-support the stupid dullard who had to steal an election to get where he is--support his murders--and believe it is "defending our freedoms" when you do so.

It does not work. In the end, one human being must face up to him or her self and determine what exactly is the right thing to do--kill other innocent people, including children, so that a greedy, insensitive and stupid, fascist leaning, leader can give it's spoils to his corporate buddies? -- or teach the children to think for themself. I would prefer to teach the children that killing for greed is stupid. I would also prefer to teach the children how to think and parse and understand the nuances of propaganda and logic. WE can do that in our elementary schools. We can teach children how to think philosophically and intelligently and how to determine what is bull shit and what is not.

As it is, we seem to want to teach them that a god in an imaginary garden created a man and then decideed to create a woman from that man

Ugh ---please, this is serious., We need to teach our children that revenge is not the way, no matter how much a "macho" appeal of a coward of a leader like Bush, sends their way. IF necessary, I would forcefully prohibit my children from joining up under anything that has a "Bush" label on it. MOst likely it will be a lie.

[progressivebydesign]

23. They pay you.. you do your job.

If you want time home with a new baby.. you don't join the military or reserve hoping that day won't come. It's sad.. but it's the reality of the gig. That's why our taxes pay their salaries. Getting pregnant is not a way out... Hope she gets home safely.

[mbperrin]

30. Gosh, too bad she's not a convicted felon - the court could arrange the

sentences of mom and dad to be more convenient!

The US Military - if we're not treating you like garbage, let us know!

[progressivebydesign]

24. They pay you.. you do your job.

If you want time home with a new baby.. you don't join the military or reserve hoping that day won't come. It's sad.. but it's the reality of the gig. That's why our taxes pay their salaries. Getting pregnant is not a way out... Hope she gets home safely.

[kayell]

2. Classic pubbie family values

:eyes:

[NNN0LHI]

3. Asta-la-vista, baby!

It is her choice to go. Hope she makes it back OK.

Don

[soothsayer]

4. yipes

hope mom stays out of harm's way, but how sad for them to be separated after just 3 months.

[toopers]

6. It happens every day in the US

In order to maintain certain lifestyles and pay the bills, parents have to go to work and leave their babies in the hands of other non family members.

[NNN0LHI]

8. You are right. She chose to guard oil pipelines for Halliburton

Seems a bit drastic to pay ones bills to me, but the job situation does really suck right now.

Don

[Meritaten1]

13. No...

This is a lengthy absence. She won't be seeing her child on a daily basis.

This type of separation is entirely different than a parent taking a child to a daycare center before going off to work to pay the bills.

[jamesinca]

19. maintain a lifestlye 8 hours at a time

This is a non-visiting 18 months, not 8 hours at a time and seeing them the other 16 hours. I know she signed up to do the guard work and it is one of the hazards of the job, but that does not justify the illegal war and it is another tradgedy of this illegal war.

[eyesroll]

7. This is the obnoxious part:

Under Army policy, a mother who is a soldier can stay home with a baby until the child is 4 months old, according to Bolduc and her husband, Robert. After that, they said, a mother can find herself sent to the front lines to be part of the war effort.

But the U.S. Government's own health agencies say babies should be fed breast milk exclusively for the first six months of life, and breastfeeding should continue as the baby is introduced to solid foods during the next six months.

http://www.4woman.gov/Breastfeeding/print-bf.cfm?page=QandA

[SoCalDem]

9. Sounds like she "gambled" and lost..

She probably stayed in so that she could get the medical picked up for her pregnancy and delivery, and now she has to "pay" for it :(..

I have a friend who works on a reserve base, and she has often commented about how so many of the reservists and gaurdsmen that she sees daily, are "not in fighting condition" and how they have stayed in or have joined for the extra money.. I have no idea what they get paid , but waaaay back when my contemporaries were joining it was a couple of hundred a month.. Lots of the young guys joined back then, because it was about the equivalent of a car payment, and they did not have to do much to earn it..

Times have changed, though, and women or couples who see this as a way to earn extra money, might consider a different "second job".. this one can get you killed :(

It's hard for women too, because they want equal rights, and cannot complain when they have to leave children, without asking for "special favors"..

I feel for this young Mom, but she did know what she was getting in for.. She could have probably found a doctor who could have gotten her out on a medical reason.. Maybe she needs the money :(

[lazarus]

10. In this case

How many of the men over there have left infants behind, and where is the outrage over that?

"'It is unconscionable that, in one of the most civilized countries in the world, we do this to our children,' said, suggesting that mothers should not be forced to choose between their military careers and their children." But it's okay to force fathers to do so?

My only problem is if she's combat ready this soon after child birth.

[Coventina]

12. Men don't breastfeed their babies

I'd say that makes for an important difference.

[lazarus]

16. So?

Not all women do, either.

And, if you'll read the article, that's not the primary concern. It's just that a "mother has to choose between her career and her child."

Like men haven't had to do that for a while.

[Maine-i-acs]

11. 650 Guardsmen and women leaving Maine this month -

Biggest NG callup since WW II.

[quispquake]

14. This made front page news up here...

On the local paper, the Morning Sentinel:
<http://www.onlinesentinel.com/>

The front page of the newspaper has a large picture of the family, but it's not on the web link...

Everybody I know is completely disgusted, including a few of the Republicans I work with...

These are the stories & graphics we need to keep bringing up to show how 'family friendly' these repukes really are...

[KamaAina]

15. So much for "Leave No Child Behind"!

The Guard belongs -- right here in the U.S. in case of disaster! Bush* and PNAC badly underestimated how much cannon fodder they'd need to occupy Iraq, and now Mom -- and Brayden -- have to pay for it. :grr:

[alwynsw]

17. She joined the Guard, she had the child. Both were choices.

Choices have consequences.

Sounds like poor planning on her part.

Ref the above post about giving her at least a year with the child: FLA allows 12 weeks off for a new baby in any civilian job. Why should the military be any different?

[haele]

18. Most times, in the military, any prospective mother has been re-assigned

prior to giving birth, and will usually spend 6-8 months or so after the birth either in training or in some sort of support billet while she is recovering. Much like most other military personnel who are temporarily incapacitated or encountering some sort of hardship. Depending on the command and the billet requirements, it's usually not a major problem when a service member goes through such an event.

Guard members especially have had the flexibility to live what seems to be a normal civilian life; the majority of them joined to serve their community on an intermittent drill status or in case of emergencies while getting the socialized benefits of being in a military service.

However, there's always that specter that most service members will tend to have forgotten in normal day to day operations since the end of the cold war - the military may seem like a kindergarten job with it's "hurry up and wait" drilling mentality and seemingly pointless operations, but the purpose for the constant training and "readiness" is always there.

This guard member either forgot or never really understood the basic reason behind in the National Guard (no matter how it's being mis-used in the instance of Iraq). As SoCalDem indicated above :hi:, she apparently gambled that her country wouldn't engage her unit oversees in a war of attrition - and she lost - as many other parents (especially single parents) have done over the past two years.

I wouldn't exactly call it poor planning on her part; I'd call it bad luck.

The other issue is readiness. While most civilian type work gives the mother 12 weeks off after birth for recovery and "bonding", I'm not sure that she'd be able to physically do her job in Iraq 12 weeks after the birth.
As I indicated before, normally the active duty military would have her on a medical status until her case was reviewed and it would be decided that she was physically able to do her duties - that includes handling the Iraqi spring/summer and sandstorms.
However, if the Guards is anything like I remember the Reserves - which tends to evaluate physical readiness prior to deployment by the ability to complete the PRT (i.e., if you can do 50 sit-ups and 25 push-ups in two minutes each and run a mile and a half in 15 minutes, you're fit...) - I don't think she's gone through that intense an evaluation review.
Birthin' aint' easy on the body, a fact that matters when it comes down to doing the job - no matter what one believes about the mental/ethical fitness and choices of a working person who becomes pregnant or or otherwise decides to be responsible for a dependent.

Depending on her MOS, she might not be fit for duty for another few months.

Just my two cents.

Haele

[7th_Sephiroth]

21. this woman will need years of psyche help if she survives

not to mention the medical ramifications of a lactating woman on the battle field (Repub spin) the less money we hafta spend giving food to our troops

[Meritaten1]

20. You assume she made an informed choice...

TV and radio ads still suggest that people who join the national guard serve on weekends. The impression is conveyed that it's a good way to pay for college while aiding the country by helping out after natural disasters, fighting fires, etc.,...

Unfortunately, the ads neglect to mention that today our fearless leader is sending national guard units abroad for a year of service under conditions that could very well lead to premature death. Not only will these national guards NOT be readily available the next time their services are needed at home, but the men and women serving as national guards might easily have made uninformed choices about the consequences likely to ensue from their enlistments.

The "poor planning" argument requires the ability to assess consequences before making a choice. Was this young mother really given the chance to make an informed decision?

[lazarus]

22. She signed up 12 years ago

Which means she's reenlisted, probably at least twice, and is about to turn 30 years old, from the article.

So, not quite the innocent "young mother".

[Meritaten1]

26. Perhaps.

Or perhaps she mistakenly assumed when she re-enlisted in the national guard that our leaders would not repeatedly misrepresent the rationale for the conflict in Iraq, and the extent of the resources being committed there?

Maybe she believed the U.S. would not go to war abroad post-Vietnam without an exit strategy?

Or perhaps she thought re-enlisting in the national guard really meant defending the "homeland" from terrorism, not substituting for a shortage of regular troops overseas?

It's not clear to me at all that she made an informed decision when she re-enlisted.

I just think it's disgraceful that national guard units are being called up for a year and sent to Iraq. The current administration is too cowardly to take the politically unpopular position of re-instituting a draft before the election. Prediction: if Bush gains a second term, draft notices will follow in due course.

[lazarus]

34. I agree

I agree it's disgraceful, I agree the war is wrong, I agree Bush is bad, I agree with all of that.

All that said, however, I don't understand why the cries of outrage that this woman is being separated from her child, when there are thousands of men already there who have had to leave families, many with infants, behind.

Seems a bit sexist to me.

[bpilgrim]

36. yeah, join the service or move to china. let me see...

hmmmm... though choices no matter how you look at it.

peace

[bpilgrim]

37. maybe china has a 'LIBERAL' immigration policy?

and they would have let her bring the kid :shrug:

peace

[Pattib]

27. In 1985 the maternity leave was four weeks.

I had my son in February and was in Bermuda (TAD) in April. I came back in July. My husband was also in the Navy and he took care of my son. My sister took care of him while my husband was at work. I did not breast feed.

Perhaps this is the situation here. She probably has a husband and immediate family that is going to pick up the slack. Yes, it sucks but that is what women do when men go to war. They take care of the children. I never hear anyone complain about that.

[Solly Mack]

28. This is just one more story in a long list of stories

I'm not without compassion but I see this every single day.

This is life for many people. Mom or Dad deploys and the other parent is now a single parent. Sometimes, both Mom and Dad deploy and the children go to grandparents. Single fathers and single mothers having to leave their child behind. It's sad...until you've seen the many faces, you have no idea just how sad.

But no one case is more tragic than the other.

I wish it were different for them.

[dflprincess]

29. Meanwhile back at Enron...

I saw this on the news tonight, Enron's former CFO and his wife are cutting a deal so he'll serve his 3 months, then she'll server hers. That way their children will have at least one of the parents with them :puke:

There are Guard and Reserve familes where both parents are in Iraq and the kids are staying with relatives.

[mbperrin]

31. Exactly! She should have been a felon

instead! She'd have gotten better treatment!

[leesa]

32. Only if she was a rich felon.

[Fleshdancer]

33. After reading the responses in this thread....

what makes me sad is the fact that people are focusing on the mother and not focusing on the well-being of that 3 month old baby. This infant did NOT have the choice to be born from a military woman. Should the baby suffer because of it?

[lazarus]

35. Maybe

The mother should have thought of that?

[Fleshdancer]

38. Not all Mothers choose to be Mothers?

From a woman with experience, when you become pregnant with your husband and you have the resources and the love to keep the baby, there is very little option.

No one is pro-abortion because of war.