Troubled Army Recruits Become Soldiers, More Troubled; Who's Responsible?

The Boston Globe reports that 11 percent, more than 1 in 10, of Army recruits this year were given waivers because they have criminal records (more than 6,000 soldiers). Now this is hardly news, the Army has been systematically lowering standards for years—aptitude and fitness levels, health status, moral conduct, down; age and bonuses, up—in fact each year more and more recruits with waivers (and tattoos) join the ranks.

But the coverage is missing the mark somewhat on the full extent of what these lowered standards mean. Partly they mean what the media is focused on, that we have a compromised armed force, that we are putting men with guns in combat situations, where some of our fighters five years ago wouldn't have been considered fit for such a battle. After all, the Pentagon established standards, whether it be for asthma or high school diplomas, for reasons, reasons they also let slide during Vietnam, under similar circumstances.

Really, is anyone surprised? The Globe criticizes the Pentagon for failing to emphasize the increase in waivers in announcing the "good news" that the army is meeting its recruiting goals. It's been meeting those goals for years, precisely because of lowered standards.

What no one is talking about is this: 20 percent of recruits with waivers (medical, criminal, moral) means more than a compromised fighting force; it complicates matters back at home immensely. Doctors in veterans' hospitals across the country are trying to diagnose soldiers who are disturbed, troubled, injured, trying to decide whether their PTSD, their psychological issues, their physical ailments, are combat-related, a call that, if made, means $2500 a month per soldier, for life. A past of mental health issues, a criminal record, pre-exisiting health conditions, these are all up for grabs in the diagnosis. Clouds the burden of war, makes doctors jobs nearly impossible, and make us wonder, who's responsible once soldiers return home?

Comments

As a Vietnam vet going through yet another economic downturn, I eventually went to the vet hospital in Minneapolis at the urging of relatives and family. The doctors spoke with me for a few minutes and said my problems didn't stem from PTSD. They were problems I had previously before the service. I wondered how they could come up with such a quick conclusion. It didn't matter that I had almost killed my first wife while having a dream I was back in 'Nam. It didn't matter that loud noises sent me to the floor or out the door nor that I almost killed a friend thinking I was being attacked. When someone is shooting at you, shelling you any time of the night or day, you learn whom to trust real soon. Never could trust those doctors or politicians or officers.

Posted by: J. Coleman on 11/28/07 at 12:45 PM Respond

As a proud father of a wounded worrior I see this administration also did not plan for this problem. He went to Fort Lenordwood at 17 for basic and stared work for Uncle Sam the day he graduated and got his commission. It has been 90 days since he arrived at Fort Sam and BMAC. Thank God for the Fisher Foundation, and the commitment from them for the wounded Worriors. The Center for the Intrepied works like our goverment should, to have the needs ready for our solders.

Troubled Army Recruits Become Soldiers, More Troubled; Who's Responsible?

Comments

ARCHIVE

RECENT COMMENTS

THE CURRENT ISSUE

SEARCH MOTHER JONES

PHOTO ESSAYS

TODAY ON...

SPECIAL REPORTS

INTERVIEWS

LETTERS

BLOG LINKS

Blog Reader Project Survey

IN PRINT

DONATE TODAY