The case of the pregnant midshipman that received a waiver to graduate and be commissioned has been clarified by a spokesman from the Trade School on the Severn:
“There were unique circumstances surrounding this case, to include the fact that she had completed all academic requirements for graduation,” Cmdr. Brenda Malone, spokeswoman for the chief of naval personnel, wrote in a statement.
The Naval Academy administration discovered the midshipman was pregnant a few weeks before the May 22 graduation, and that “as a result, her eligibility for graduation and commissioning would require review,” (CDR Cappy) Surette said…
Under academy regulations, she could take a yearlong leave of absence and return to finish her coursework, or resign and be required to pay back the cost of her education, about $150,000. Regulations also state that if a follow-on pregnancy test shows that she is no longer pregnant, she can stay at the academy. The policy does not explicitly spell out abortion as an option.
Complicating this situation, the source said, was that the midshipman was engaged to the baby’s father and they planned to marry within a month of her graduating. If she took the leave of absence, she would spend the interim still a midshipman, forbidden from marrying, meaning the wedding would have to be canceled and her child born out of wedlock. Also, when the issue came to light, the woman had two exams left, meaning she would spend a year away from Annapolis, then return to take just two tests.
Rather than take one of the options, the midshipman and her family lobbied for an exemption so she could graduate, be commissioned, and be married, the source said.
The rules are written for a reason of course, but they don’t forbid the exercise of good judgment when waivers are requested. No one’s interests would have been served by forcing a young officer about to be married into having abortion weeks prior to graduation, or putting her on the bench for a year to take two finals.
This was a good call, and demonstrates that large and seemingly impersonal institutions can nevertheless have human hearts beating within them.
We all know this, but sometimes it’s good to be reminded.
True. Perhaps it was a reasonable call on what to do with her problem, in the eyes of USNA management (not leadership).
Her problem, on the other hand, is a failure to adhere to the conduct expected of those who accept the conditions and benefits of attending the USNA. Perhaps her failure to pay attention in sex ed, or refrain from inappropriate conduct is not as heinous a violation as the Mid’n smuggling drugs, but both have demonstrated that they do not deserve the trust and confidence necessary to be a good officer.
If someone wants to be a party animal, there are schools attuned to that segment of society. If the lowest common denominator of behavior is sufficient for USNA students, there is no need for the taxpayers to foot the bill for providing the education, nor maintaining the staff and facilities to do so.
Defining deviancy and misconduct down, or retroactively excusing it only begets more of it. This case has set the precedent to encourage commissioning more officers with lower standards and more frequent failures to enforce regulations.
Honor? Courage? Commitment? I think she lacks those qualities.
What are you on about? “Party animal?” She’s having a baby with (I assume as of now at least) her husband, not some dude she randomly met at a party. She hardly showed the “lowest common denominator of behavior.”
The USNA cheats on admissions for minorities, bends the rules for graduation for a favored class of Midshipmen (females), and beats the daylights out of males in similar situations. How can they then expect Honor, Courage, and Commitment from anyone?
If you read the article, the rules were also bent for three males since 2005.
I second John’s take. If this were one of my men, I would castigate him for not having sufficient strength of character to keep it zipped. (Treating older women as mothers and younger as sisters, and not encouraging love until it is time, as the cae may be.)
If someone aspiring to that position cannot control their impulses in non-threatening, danger free environments, I have zero faith in their ability when placed in those.
Is chaste behavior THAT much to ask? After all, it is, and only ever has been simple self-control.
With all due respect, it still takes two people to propagate (at least without going the lab method)And we don’t know if her not-quite husband(who she has every intention of marrying, for gosh sakes!) is also a mid. Either way, the Academy is reaping what they’ve sown. Thank God for the ROTC program and schools like VMI, the Citadel, Norwich and Texas A and M.
So does this mean she failed Sex Ed?
Might have missed that putting the condoms on bananas or cucumbers was a metaphorical, not a specific, demonstration of the act. So…maybe yes.
You saying the mid was blonde?
Nope…just yer average kid in middle school with an MP3 player/iPod jammed in their ears whenever they can…
All of you condemning the participants in this, are you saying that consensual sex between two non-married partners, that doesn’t violate OPNAV 5370.2, renders one unfit for duty as an officer? That it is not in keeping with Navy core values? That an officer that can’t “keep it zipped” isn’t welcome in their wardroom?
Because if that is the standard, then I’m just glad it isn’t applied retroactively.
Scott,
Just like in many other vocations, the requirements to become “one” can be significantly greater than to stay as one.
Every time one part of our culture excuses poor discipline, we lower the bar in many other areas of culture. Is there a good reason to not demand excellence, or is profligacy just the new dumbed-down analog for excellence?
Kinda moving the goal posts, aren’t you? It was “one of my men”, women as “sisters”, “keeping it zipped” — all which would logically lead one to believe you were referring to the already commissioned fiancee. Ok, I’ll buy the idea that we are talking about those “becom(ing) one”. Are you saying that sex, while a mid, should be a dismissal offense?
Yea, right.
Who called it? Yeah, that’s right: me.
Which kind of scares me: I must be drinking too much of the Big Navy KoolAid.
Off for some JOPA shenanigans!
You know, one of these days, the Navy is going to wake up to this nightmare they’ve created and decide that the rules really are the rules, no matter if you’re an All-American quarterback or a hispanic female. When they mids find this out, they’re all going to riot, screaming their throats out, “YOU REALLY MEAN WE GOTTA DO IT THIS WAY? WE THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST KIDDING!”.
I just hope these future JOs and DHs meet up with some good Chiefs, or they’re not going to be worth pig flop.
So buddy was an academy liaison officer, I think in San Diego. Essentially you baby sit the midshipmen as they fly in and catch ships out for their summer trips or herd the kitty cats from one recruiting event (pick SWO, pick aviation, etc) to another. Anyway, he ran across some transgressions from time to time.
One of my favorites was when a midshipman missed ship’s movement. My buddy immediately secured his liberty and locked him down. The young man began to lecture the LCDR on how the academy treats the midshipmen like children and that they should treat them like adults, blah blah blah. It was with that in mind, my buddy grabbed the young man by his ear and showed him Art. 87 from the UCMJ Articles posted on the bulkhead. He told him that he was now guilty of a offense worthy of court martial. So, yes, I agree, the academy treats you as children, what say we step it up a notch and treat you like an adult now. He demurred. So, yes, Byron, you are correct, they DO act like that.
if i’m not mistaken when she signed on to be a midshipman she inked her “john hancock” to a piece of paper that told her she couldn’t be married or have dependents while a midshipment or she’d be separated…
at West Point a few years ago 2 cadets cheated on their final 2 mile run, a couple weeks before graduation…they were kicked out and into the regular army for 5 years…no diploma
a couple years ago pilot #4 on the Blues and a female officer were separated from the Blues and the Navy or Marines for an affair…
of course she should have been booted…end of story…
I all I can say is, “That musta been SOME study group!”
The real issue in situations like this is never the first, but the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th incidents that will refer to this as precedent-setting. OK, she was almost finished, she was engaged, and she was going to get married, so no harm, we’ll lookee the other way. Everyone feels good that the monolithic Navy made the compassionate decision. So now when the next one occurs and she ain’t getting ready to graduate, she ain’t engaged, her lawyer will easily defend her “right” to stay and birth the kid and graduate since the issue is not the decision but the timeline, and they’ll probably have to make a dependents dorm at Canoe U. We’ve seen it before, rules are rules to be bent, not broken. As Will Rogers (I believe) said “dishonest people are dishonest because they have the most to gain”.