Guest Blogger Sarah Plummer

People think it’s easier for single soldiers to go to war.  In some ways, I believe it’s harder.

I was married once…nearly a decade ago.  Like anything in the Marine Corps, even the holy sacrament of marriage can be made into a competition – who gets married the youngest, who gets married the quickest, who remains married the longest, who has the hottest wife or husband, or who has the most children.  “Marriage” and “success” were (apparently?) synonymous.  The ironic thing is, most military marriages don’t last.

Several years ago when I began dating a civilian guy, he bluntly asked me, “Have you been divorced?”  His father, a former Air Force pilot, told him to ask me this because, in his opinion, all Marines had been married and divorced.  I hesitated, but replied, “Yes.”  The stereotype that a majority of Marines get divorced does exist for a reason.  Divorce statistics among the military population are well above the national average.

Usually, I do not volunteer information about my marital history until further along in a relationship.  When I am directly asked about it, though, I keep my answer simple.  I allow people think I am part of the military statistic.  I allow people to think my ex-husband and I just could not “hack it” as a young married couple.  I allow people’s minds to wander and to assume one of us cheated on the other, one of us abused the other, or one of us lied to or stole from the other.  I allow the questioners to fill their heads with whatever assumptions they already have about young, divorced Marines.  I do not explain to them that when I committed to my marriage, I had taken it more seriously than most of the other Marines I knew at the time and that before my fiancé and I got married, I evaluated the forthcoming union from all vantage points.

One of the ways I assessed the future marriage was logically.  I studied sociology in college and often applied the lessons I learned in the classroom to my personal life.  Therefore, I recognized the common education, socio-economic class, and general background my ex-husband and I shared.  Intellectually, we grilled each other on what we thought would breed success and why others had failed.  Personality-wise, we were both active, outdoorsy, and loved our families.  I also gauged the potential success of our relationship on a spiritual and emotional level.  We prepared by attending pre-marital counseling with our pastor and appeared to be compatible.  We were young, but by anyone’s standards, we were a good match.  This was a recipe for success, right?

I choose not to reveal the full details of my divorce to everyone when first asked about it because those details are painful to share.  One week after we were engaged, I was raped…by a fellow Marine.  My relationship with my then-fiancé took a tumultuous turn.  The high we felt a week before nose-dived into confusion that lasted for several months.  Eventually, we emerged from the emotional fog, believing we had made it through the roughest patch of our lives and come out mostly whole on the other side.  If anyone could do it – marriage – we could.  We followed through with our plans to get married four months later.

Two months after our wedding, I finally had an opportunity to report the assault.  At this point in time, my ex and I functioned as happy newlyweds, romantically in love with one another, disappointed to be stationed apart from one another, but confident in the strength of our relationship.  When I presented the facts of the rape to the Judge Advocate General (JAG) and moved forward with the legal proceedings, the scab was ripped open.  The Marine Corps’ institutional failure to handle the situation appropriately just poured salt into the wound; it was too much to bear.  I was forced to relive the rape every day for two months straight because I was required to tell the JAG, or my ex, the story again and again and again.  Even though my ex knew every detail of the story, he incessantly demanded that I retell it.  It felt like he didn’t believe me.  It felt like he insisted I repaint the picture in lurid detail time and time again in the hopes that he’d hear some new detail that would make him really believe me that I was raped and I hadn’t just made a drunken mistake.

Parts of me began to shut down.  I wasn’t myself.  I was depressed. I was exhausted.  I was in physical pain. I had nightmares. I didn’t want to be touched.  I went from laughing every day to crying every day. I was not Sarah, and my ex had had enough. I asked him to stick with me through those tough months because I knew it wouldn’t last forever.  I explained to him that I was having a delayed, but textbook, response to rape.  That the poor handling of the case by the TBS JAG was exacerbating this grief cycle, but darnit, I was trying my best to suck it up and move on.  “Just give me time,” I pleaded.  A couple months later, he shrugged his shoulders, raised his hands, palms toward me, and muttered the fateful words that begun the final unraveling, “I can’t do it anymore.”

We were divorced less than a year later.

The rape, the marriage, the reporting of the rape, and my subsequent divorce all happened during my first year as a Commissioned Officer in the Marine Corps.  As I progressed through my career and witnessed more and more of my peers and colleagues tie the knot, it bothered me that those with newly minted marriage bands held themselves above those who hadn’t taken the plunge (and certainly thought better of themselves than those who had already and “failed”). Shortly after my divorce, I remember a fellow female Marine at TBS looking at me with disdain, then speaking of her marriage as if it were a model to emulate based on its existence alone.  She had no idea what had caused the death of my dear relationship, yet she openly judged it…and me. Ironically, she, too, was divorced only a few years later and, as far as I know, under no more dire circumstances than the stress and separation the Marine Corps graciously bestows upon all of its members.  But I could be wrong; one never really knows another’s story and I do not intend to judge as I was judged.

It just seemed preposterous to me that some relationships were given more validity than others.  I knew of more than a handful of cases where Lieutenants met at TBS and were married by the time their MOS school was over in order to offer each other some sort of emotional guarantee before they went off to war.  These less-than-a-year-old relationships were looked upon as more of a relationship than those of people who had been together for years simply because they had an official label.  It disgusted me to know the cycle would just keep repeating itself as I talked to Marine friends – male and female alike – who rushed to figure out if they should marry their current dating partner.  They knew being married made you appear more grown up, responsible, and as a new officer (where you were often younger than your enlisted Marines), this was yet another plus on the pro/con list for getting hitched.

Though few and far between, I know of some couples in the Marine Corps who have been together for years without getting married yet.  I admire them because they’ve resisted the institutional force and good old-fashioned peer pressure telling them to do so; and those who resist often do so for all the right reasons. I wish I’d known a couple like that to talk to before my ex and I got married.   I remember thinking, “Being married will help keep us together when we are apart.”  (Gimme a  break, I was 22 at the time!)  When instead (and what I now advise to others) I should’ve taken a step back and thought, “If it’s going to work out, it’s going to work out regardless of if we’re married.  If we stay together through the PCS’s, deployments, and various other crap, then we’ll stay together whether or not there’s a license saying so.”  If you take marriage seriously, of course it’s more than just a piece of paper, but what I’m driving at is the point that if you take your relationship seriously – married or single – that will result in success; the attitude, not the label, determines “altitude.”

As far as deploying as a single person or a married one, on my deployments, I noticed a lot of married people couldn’t wait to get away – whether it was because they craved the Corps so much or couldn’t stand their family was irrelevant.  What mattered when I first started contemplating this topic years ago was that they were relieved to be anywhere other than “home” and/or were particularly happy living in a war zone.   I was single, yet I still yearned for home as deeply as anyone else; I intensely missed my family and every dear friend I had while I was deployed.  One of the worst parts of “going to war” was the simple fact that I was away; it wouldn’t have mattered if I was in a combat zone or vacationing in Europe.  Being in Iraq meant being removed from everyone else’s lives and hovering in suspended animation while their worlds kept turning and mine was Groundhog Day.

I empathized with the Marines who’d left spouses at home, though. I felt for them then, and I feel for them now when I think of being separated from someone you chose you marry.  Moreover, I really felt badly for Marines with children.  I knew I couldn’t imagine the pain they felt from that separation.  But for many of the young Marines, “spouses” were little more than that than by title alone and more of serious girlfriends in reality (sometimes not even that).  Yes, technically, they were married; but Marines I knew, male and female, entered into early marriages in order to provide a sense of the relationship being secure.  Also, and I think sometimes most importantly for some couples, marriage made the relationship valid in the eyes of the Marine Corps.  And when you have the DEPLOYMENT black cloud constantly looming above you, you will grasp onto anything that seems solid.  So I knew many of the nuptials were sure to leave one or both of the partners wanting before the deployment was over, and simple immaturity coupled with prolonged distance was usually the culprit.

Many of the unmarried and married Marines in the Squadron solicited me for relationship advice during deployments.  I particularly related to one handsome Corporal.  He was more like a college buddy than most of the other Marines.  I knew his union was doomed before we returned to the States.  What he told me about his young bride sounded familiar and his aspirations reminded me a lot of my ex.  He genuinely loved her and wanted things to work, but felt compelled to marry quickly based on the circumstances.  His relationship was one of the few that I perceived to be genuine, and so I felt deeply disappointed for him knowing it would probably end in separation soon after his return.  Sadly, we think we’re doing our partner a service by legally joining them to us, but when things sour, it makes the split that much harder.

I wish the Marine Corps honored the inherent value of committed partnerships.  I wonder now with the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell how same-sex couples will feel.  I wonder if they will flock to states that legalized same-sex marriage to get that stamp of approval.  I wonder if either group – the committed unmarried couples or steadfast same-sex partners – realize how much they have in common. I wonder if now that the gay and lesbian couples can come out, it will inadvertently help the dual sex couples.

Those of you for whom the shotgun-style wedding works, grows, and lasts – bless you.  I know your year by year ticking off of marriage achievement is something you wear like a badge of honor, and I am truly am happy for your “success.”  (I’m afraid this sounds sarcastic, but it’s not).  For those of you who really tried to make something doomed for failure work, I commend you.  For those of you abusing the system to get benefits and favor, shame on you.  For those of you too confused to know the difference, I wish there was more sound guidance available or an institution that didn’t prematurely push the bonds of yet another on you.  I wish the military institution didn’t force people into one institution whilst already fully enveloped by another…

According to the military machine, being married equates with being successful.

Capt. Sarah Plummer, USMCR is the prior Deputy Director of Geospatial Intelligence for MCIA and is a military Olympic athlete as a Reservist on the Women’s Soccer team.  Her blog is at MarineChick.com.

On Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich criticized fellow Republican candidate Rick Santorum on his recent comments on women in combat by saying:

“We should be very proud of the men and women who put on the American uniform and risk their lives in order to protect this country,” Gingrich told reporters. “I just think that Rick completely misunderstands the nature of modern warfare by his comments.” 

 “Whatever your technical assignment, whether you’re a truck driver or you’re working with logistics, or you’re a military person, you’re in combat.  And I think that we have to understand that from day one,” Gingrich said.

Note: to listen to the interview right-click on the link and Save As.

The law strengthens support for sexual assault prevention by:

• Increasing the rank of the Director of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response office to a flag officer or SES position;
• Outlining requirements for the number of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs) and Victim Advocates to assign to each military unit;
• Providing mandatory rank-appropriate training for military leaders at PME schools.

The law strengthens legal protections for survivors of sexual assault in the military by:

• Ensuring that victims have access to a legal assistance and maintaining their option of confidential reporting, even if they seek legal counsel;
• Mandating preservation of physical and documentary evidence and forms;
• Requiring the President to sign an executive order creating legal privilege between victims and victim advocates.

The law strengthens assistance for survivors by:

• Ensuring Victim Advocates and SARCs are certified and full-time service members or DOD civilians; and
• Providing victims of sexual assault with expedited consideration for a base transfer, if requested.

You can read the sexual assault prevention and response section of the law here (Begins with Sec. 581 on pg. 320)

The Pentagon attempted to get out ahead of the bill signing by implementing two new policies earlier in the week. Although the Pentagon press attempted to portray these policy changes as proactive, they are mandated by the new law. The DOD will be implementing the other provisions of the law as the year progresses.

SWAN worked with numerous Congressional offices on the bi-partisan bill including Representatives Braley, Tsongas, Turner, and Slaughter along with Senators Collins, Kerry and Klobuchar. SWAN also worked directly with General Mary Kay Hertog, Director of the Department of Defense’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO). This new law represents a tremendous win for survivors of military sexual assault and their families, for the U.S. Military and for supporters of SWAN.

What is truly remarkable about this bill is that during one of the most partisan, contentious and gridlocked sessions of Congress in memory, the sexual assault provisions in this bill were drafted, adopted and voted on with nearly unanimous agreement in both the House and Senate. And Congressional leadership worked very hard to ensure these essential reforms made it through intact into the final bill in spite of other controversial provisions found in the NDAA.

We won this skirmish, but the battle continues. In a recent column in the Washington Post, Pulitzer-prize winner and national security reporter Walter Pincus listed military sexual assault as one of the 2012 priorities for Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and put the White House on notice by calling sexual assaults in the military, “a military issue that has election implications.”

In 2012 SWAN will continue to drive changes within the military and VA and make institutional reforms a reality, and our list of priority issue areas is increasing. Over the Holiday break SWAN was the only organization to respond to a DOD’s report that showed a 60% increase in sexual assaults at the Military Service Academies and that the service academies were not in compliance with DOD policy. SWAN demanded that academy leadership be held accountable and is working with members of Congress to bring  institutional changes to the Service Academies as it has brought to the U.S. Military.

It’s a brand new year and SWAN is on the march!

Link to:

2012 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT SUBTITLE H – IMPROVED SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE IN THE ARMED FORCES

Marlisa Grogan

On October 22, 2011, I had the pleasure of moderating the “Women’s Issues Forum” at the Veterans and Military Families for Progress (VMFP) 2011 National Conference held in Arlington, VA. It was a great opportunity to raise awareness about the current challenges women veterans face upon their reintegration into civilian life as well as the critical needs of women currently serving in the military and that of their families. Having worked for SWAN’s Peer Support Helpline until recently, I felt committed to voicing the concerns raised by our clients, who play such an important role in informing the policies for which SWAN advocates.

Panelists each had 5-10 minutes to introduce ourselves and highlight the work that we’re doing. I gave an overview of SWAN, using the mission and vision statements as a basis to explain what SWAN does. Other panelists were:

Kayla Williams (author, Love My Rifle More Than You)

Linda Kreter (founder of VeteranCaregiver.com)

Pamela Stokes Eggleston (Development Director of Blue Star Families)

Audience members were very engaged, asking many questions and sharing their own experiences as veterans or military family members. We discussed a range of topics, spanning from the positive effect of the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) on service women, being that they have been disproportionately affected by the policy, to women veterans’ varied experiences at VA Medical Centers (VAMC).

The panelists were in agreement that certain challenges of reintegration disproportionately affect women veterans, such as homelessness, being a single parent or sole caregiver, or not being recognized or credited as a veteran at all. Other important points included that women are less likely to identify as veterans, which serves as a barrier to accessing military-oriented supportive services for which they are eligible, especially at the VA. Women veterans also face unique obstacles to filing successful claims, not only in the case of post-traumatic stress disorder due to military sexual trauma but also as a result of the combat exclusion policy.

We discussed how the VA must do a better job of meeting women veterans’ medical and psychiatric needs. Too many veterans have stories of being re-traumatized at VAMCs and going to understaffed Vet Centers. Panelists presented slightly different viewpoints. Concerns were raised that criticism of the VA must be constructive, cautioning that if critics are too vocal, women will be dissuaded from going to the VA, thereby causing client numbers and funding to dwindle. I added that multiple studies show that women are going to the VA at the same rate as men. From my perspective, the real concern is whether VA care is at a level where women vets will want to return. In light of extremely high health care costs, the choice many veterans are making is between VA care and no care at all. We both agreed that the VA should focus on successful models of care and replicate those models at the national level – to include promoting and showing support for those VAMCs and Vet Centers that are the gold standard.

The final topic addressed by the panel was one of the most important of the day: the urgent need for the Department of Defense to fix the way sexual assault is being handled in the military. One audience member, who works in the field of corrections, asked why so few military investigations into allegations of sexual assault result in trials or convictions. Moreover, why is the rate of such trials and convictions significantly lower than in the civilian legal system? All panelists weighed in on this point, recognizing that the military is taking some steps to address what essentially is a crisis situation for many service women as well as men. Nevertheless, the reality that military leadership at the unit level has the leverage to handle reports of sexual assault in informal ways is unconscionable. In far too many cases, substantiated instances of rape were never treated as a crime.

Coming together from our varied perspectives as veterans, caregivers, and service providers, the panelists provided a fuller picture of the issues women face as a result of their connection to the military – fuller than any one of us could have provided individually. My experience speaking with these strong women and audience members prompted me to think about the ways that women can come together, not only as a community of women veterans but also in partnership with the spouses who are equally affected by war, the struggles of motherhood, and the isolation that often is a part of women’s lives in the military.

SWAN is working to change Standard Form 86 to protect survivors of military sexual assaults

In the last 7 years, have you consulted with a mental health professional (psychiatrist, psychologist, counselor, etc.) or have you consulted with another health care provider about a mental health related condition? – Question 21, Standard Form 86 “Questionnaire for National Security Positions”

*UPDATE – In the first week of 2012, the ODNI informed Congress that the Question 21 change is currently in “Executive Coordination”.  SWAN is making another push on this issue and urges all supporters to reach out to Dr. Clapper and help to make this essential change happen now. 

Earlier this year, SWAN began working with several Congressional legislators, including Rep Chellie Pingree and Rep Jackie Speier, to engage members of the administration to change the wording of security clearance applications so that survivors of sexual violence in the military do not have to disclose counseling they received as a result of their sexual assault. After hearing from many survivors, it became evident that Question 21 is a huge barrier that keeps service members from seeking out counseling or other mental health services following a sexual assault. Answering “Yes” to Question 21 leads to the survivor being subjected to an investigation where they are required to provide the details of their sexual assault to non-medical personnel. Such disclosure can be retriggering and devastatingly retraumatizing.

In addition to the damage Question 21 does to the survivor’s heath, answering “Yes” to Question 21 can have other dire consequences. Disclosing mental health counseling can be grounds for not getting a security clearance approved or not having an existing clearance renewed. This effectively ends the careers of service members who require these clearances to do their jobs. And because the SF 86 form is used by anyone requiring a government security clearance, Question 21 follows the service member after they leave the military, making it impossible for them to find appropriate employment in the civilian world.

In 2010 the requirements for Question 21 on the Standard Form 86 were revised to exempt service members from disclosing counseling received for combat-related trauma. This was done In order to remove the stigma of mental health care and to encourage troops to seek out needed help; however, counseling received by sexual assault survivors was not included in that revision. The end result is that survivors of sexual assaults are not getting the treatment they need to heal. Many service members are instead doing whatever they can to cope, suffering in silence and counting the days until their clearance is approved.

One major hurdle to reforming this issue was overcome when SWAN researched and uncovered the complicated route through which the previous Question 21 revisions had been made. Although the Question 21 issue affects members of the military, the Department of Defense (DOD) does not own the form. Changes to SF 86 must be made by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).  Armed with that critical information, SWAN and our allies in Congress began to aggressively pursue ODNI to change Question 21 to include an exemption for counseling received as a result of a sexual assault. Lawmakers are currently actively engaging ODNI and pushing hard for this policy revision, and their efforts are strengthened by the courageous stories of service members and their supporters who have reached out to SWAN.

In October, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree sent a letter directly to James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) asking for sexual assault counseling to be included in the list of exceptions to Question 21.  Just last week the Congresswoman received a reply from Director Clapper dated December 7th. The letter can be found here.

It is worth taking note of the hand-written remarks made by Director Clapper. The Director of National Intelligence is one of the most powerful positions in the US intelligence community. For him to add personal remarks onto a policy letter is noteworthy and in this instance, encouraging. SWAN is hopeful that this issue is now becoming one of implementation, rather than one of persuasion. Our supporters in Congress are also hopeful that a decision will be made soon.

It is important that the pressure remain on ODNI. This week a letter was sent to Michael Vickers, the Pentagon’s Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USD(I)), asking him to urge Director Clapper to implement the Question 21 changes. The USD(I) serves as the Secretary of Defense’s primary representative to the ODNI and his help with this issue will be appreciated.

You can help by contacting your legislators and ask them to join us in pressuring Director Clapper to change Question 21 to include an exception for sexual assault counseling. You can also contact Director Clapper’s office and appeal to him directly.

James Clapper, Director

Office of the Director of National Intelligence

Washington, DC 20511

703-733-8600

SWAN Seeks Information About “Infamous Question 21″‘s Effects on Rape Victims

 PDF of letter from Director Clapper to Congresswoman Chellie Pingree

Find your legislator here

SWAN Helpline Caseworker Rebekah Havrilla

I must make a confession – the Cioca v. Rumsfeld case has been dismissed – and honestly, I’m ok with that.  In fact, I’m relieved.  When this lawsuit dropped in February, I was unemployed, living with a friend and navigating this experience practically on my own.  The media exposure was intense but I felt that the reasons I had for involving myself with this lawsuit were worth the potential discomfort and emotional distress.

Now it is December. Things are very different for me.  I have a full-time job, live in NYC and consider my work to be fulfilling, rewarding and very challenging.  Much of the challenge comes from navigating the personal and professional overlap that manifests itself in my work almost every day.  There is still a lot of media attention; I’ve found that I am not fond of googling my name and discovering there is more about me online than most people would want the general public to know.  But if I could go back and take myself out of the lawsuit, I wouldn’t.

I’m not very happy with the reasoning behind the dismissal of the case, or the arguments the DOD put forth about why they felt the suit should have been dismissed.  I find it problematic that there is no external judicial remedy for those who have served within the military system.  It is also extremely disturbing that rape can still be considered “incident to military service.” There is still much that needs to be addressed.  But now that the lawsuit has been dismissed, I’ve had a day or two to reflect on what changes have occurred as a result of this suit.  I stepped into a public forum along with a few other brave souls with the intent of bringing awareness to a serious issue within the military. I also wanted to help others feel safe about telling their own stories.  Both of these things have occurred, and more.  Hundreds of other people came forward with their stories. Media attention and awareness drove many legislative actions and departmental changes within the Department of Defense culminating in the most recent legislative effort – the STOP Act.  These changes would not have occurred if people had not made the active choice to involve themselves.  I cannot speak for everyone but I can imagine based on my own involvement how much thought must have gone into deciding to step up and speak out, and how much anxiety this decision may have caused them. I know how much emotional distress there may have been from continuing to navigate this very tough system myself.

I don’t think anyone can go through a process such as this and not be affected and/or changed by the experience.  I have always been willing to do things that were outside my gender norm and have considered myself to be a go-getter willing to put myself into situations many people would shy away from.  I’ve accomplished more in my almost 30 years than many people will in a lifetime and I can be proud of those things.  Participating in this lawsuit is something I can include on my list of accomplishments.  I stood up, spoke out and faced the dragon head on.  I’ve helped people, touched lives and hopefully made a positive impression on most of the people I’ve come in contact with.  I’ve helped affect changes in a system that are tangible and measurable, and I will continue to do so.  That said, I’m still glad that this part of the lawsuit is over – because I’m tired.  I need a break and I need time to reflect and plan for my next steps forward.  I’m not the same person I was and I need time to figure out what is next for me.

Thanks to all of the brave men and women who stepped out with me and for the support you all have provided.  I don’t think any of us could have done this on our own.  There is strength in numbers and I challenge everyone out there to join with us in continuing to pursue the necessary changes that still need to occur.  Change doesn’t happen quickly but there ARE changes happening and we can all be heard.  So let them hear us.