DADI.org

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

---

Voices raised against placing moms in war zones

Published May 11, 2003

---

     ASSOCIATED PRESS
     With one single mother from the U.S. Army killed in Iraq and another wounded and captured, some conservatives are urging the military to restrict the deployment of mothers in war zones.
     "Healthy, responsible nations do not send the mothers of small children to or near the front lines. That violates the most basic human instincts," said Allan Carlson, a historian affiliated with the Family Research Council, a conservative organization devoted to family issues.
     For now, the cause has found few champions in Congress or at the Pentagon.
     But the critics, mostly from groups opposed to the feminist movement, vow to maintain pressure in hopes the Bush administration might one day review deployment policies.
     President Bush, asked about the matter Thursday, said it will be "up to the generals" to determine whether any changes are warranted.
     Among the fiercest critics of current policy is conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly, president of the Eagle Forum, who recently wrote a commentary titled "Does the Military Have the Nerve to Celebrate Mother's Day?"
     She contended that the women caught in the ambush of the 507th Maintenance Company in Iraq — Pfc. Jessica Lynch, who was rescued by commandos, and single mothers Pfc. Lori Piestewa, who was killed, and Spc. Shoshana Johnson, who was wounded — did not volunteer for the Army with the ambition of serving in combat.
     "The reason these sorry things have happened is that the men in our government and in the U.S. military lack the courage to stand up to feminists and repudiate their assault on family and motherhood," Mrs. Schlafly wrote.
     In a telephone interview, Mrs. Schlafly said she was frustrated that the Bush administration, which she supports on many issues, had made no effort to roll back Clinton administration initiatives allowing women into a greater range of war-zone duties.
     "There is no evidence in all of history that you win wars or advance the cause of women by sending women out to fight," Mrs. Schlafly said.
     Some critics of current policy hope that the Pentagon's postwar assessment of deployment in Iraq will look in depth at such issues as pregnancy, motherhood and single-parenthood.
     Mr. Carlson, for one, would like the military to exclude mothers with children younger than 3 from any war zone deployment.
     Col. Catherine Abbott, a Defense Department spokeswoman, said any such special treatment would be difficult to implement, especially if mothers were treated differently from fathers.
     "Obviously, it's something that tears on the heartstrings," she said.
     "But young dads miss their kids as well. People in the military are volunteers. When they raise their hand [to take the oath of service] they know what they're going into."
     Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he knows of no one on Capitol Hill eager to revisit the issue of women — mothers or not — in combat.
     Women who have children or expect to have them "don't have to volunteer," Mr. Skelton said. "But they do, and they perform their specialties well."
     About 210,000 women serve in the active-duty forces, 15 percent of the force of 1.4 million. As of September, there were about 24,000 single mothers on active duty and 65,000 single fathers.
     But Janice Shaw Crouse of Concerned Women for America, another conservative group, said that with the victory in Iraq fresh in Americans' minds, it may be too soon for policy-makers to reopen the debate.
     "It's an issue that will have to be handled very carefully," she said. "I expect the Bush administration will address it, or else be in trouble with some very basic parts of their constituency."

Back to DA*DI's Home