No war against women? Try telling that to the women of the U.S. Armed Forces.
In two very particular ways, our servicewomen are on the front lines of this war-that-isn’t:
First, they run twice the risk of being raped as their civilian counterparts.
And, second, they alone — unlike most other women in the federal system — get no health coverage for abortion resulting from rape.
Studies have long shown that a woman doubles her risk of sexual assault just by joining the military. And every year, reports of sexual assault increase.
Last year, there were 3,192 such reports — a 1 percent rise over the previous year, according to the Department of Defense’s Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military, released in April.
The DoD estimates as many as 85 percent of all sexual assaults go unreported, so the actual annual figure is likely closer to about 19,000.
Hampton Roads, with its high concentration of active-duty military and their families, should be especially appalled by this version of targeted violence against women in uniform — usually by their own comrades.
In a prepared response to the report, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta insisted “sexual assault has no place in this department. It is an affront to the basic American values we defend, and to the good honor of our service members and their families.”
But the affront doesn’t end there. It continues when servicewomen are discouraged by their superiors from reporting sexual assaults, or punished when they do.
And it culminates when a servicewoman becomes pregnant as a result of that rape, and discovers Congress has singled her out her to deny her insurance coverage for an abortion.
Congress doesn’t deny that coverage to other women in the federal system — not to government employees, not to Medicaid recipients, not to federal inmates.
Only to women in military service to their country. Only they must scrounge for private funds to pay for an abortion. And, once they find the money, they must then find a doctor to provide it — most overseas military hospitals are forbidden to provide abortion care.
The heartening news is that on May 24 the Senate Armed Services Committee approved a provision to fund abortions for servicewomen in cases of rape and incest. It would finally grant them the same coverage already provided women in most other branches of the federal government.
“This is about equity,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., was quoted as saying. Shaheen sponsored the amendment to the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act.
But, to the surprise of no one, many in Congress have a real problem with equity. It has consistently rejected similar amendments, including one late last year. And another in 2010.
The Senate committee did just give it bipartisan support, with Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Susan Collins of Maine voting in favor. But even if it passes the Democrat-controlled Senate, it may well get torpedoed later this year by the Republican-controlled House.
Anti-abortion activists are fighting the measure tooth and nail. They say it would threaten “military readiness” and morale. That it would discourage young doctors who don’t want to perform abortions from enlisting — although precedent has long shown that military doctors who oppose abortion wouldn’t be forced to perform them.
They say the current ban reflects the “moral and fiscal values” of Americans — but a Gallup poll in May found 77 percent of respondents approve of abortion in all cases, or under certain circumstances.
Granted, Gallup didn’t ask respondents how they felt about funding abortions for servicewomen who have been raped, but I’ll go out on a limb and speculate that most would have no problem with it.
Incredibly, a constitutional law expert associated with the conservative National Center for Public Policy dismisses government-funded abortions for servicewomen who’ve been raped as the “crisis du jour.”
Horace Cooper claims lifting the ban is a ploy by abortion advocates.
“This is part of expanding pushing abortion,” Cooper told the Air Force Times, “and trying as much as possible to find circumstances to use taxpayer dollars to do it.”
No. This is about no longer dishonoring women in uniform — women already traumatized by rape, then victimized again by ideologues within their own government.
(c)2012 the Daily Press (Newport News, Va.)
Visit the Daily Press (Newport News, Va.) at www.dailypress.com
Distributed by MCT Information Services
“Violated twice” ??
Huh?
What happened to military honor and such.
Best of luck to all our women in uniform.
This is also about the UCMJ actually being applied UNIFORMLY too. When Unit Commander’s become aware of a female (or male) unit member being sexually assaulted it’s that Commander’s legal, and Command, duty and responsibility to stand up for them and investigate to the fullest extent possible, taking conditions and circumstances into account at the time of discovery / reporting. It is NOT that Commander’s responsibility to decide to take action based on their career’s agenda or upcoming Fitness Report or OER. When a Unit Commander is in Command they are responsible for their Command’s most important resource, the people who make up that Command. When these people are made a piece of ‘collateral damage’ in the face of a Unit Commander’s career plan, well, maybe it’s time for that particular Service to think seriously about removing them from not just Command, but the Service as a whole. Our folk’s in uniform deserve the best Command that we as a Nation can provide. It’s also our responsibility to remove it when it fail’s. Given the sexual assault reporting rate’s, and these are all at least 30% BELOW the actual rate’s of assault’s being committed, isin’t time that the Service Chief’s came out and demonstrated their Command Commitment to their people by saying “No More ! And if we find you, you are gonna go to the brig, end of story” and then back it up publicly ?
Sounds as though this is more pro-taxpayer funding of abortion than concern for women, Tamara.
Your numbers are not correct on the Gallup Poll–the poll on June 1 stated that 59% of Americans want all, most abortions illegal in most or all circumstances, with 39% saying legal in only a few circumstances and 20% illegal in all circumstances. So, where did the 77% for come from–your magic hat of numbers? Guess all of your other numbers should be questioned also.
Scott Brown, Susan Collins and Jeanne Shaheen are adamantly pro-abortion, so no surprise with their endorsement of providing abortions in cases of rape and incest(so fathers are serving with their daughters, etc.?), but John McCain’s support would not be in line with his pro-life “stand.”
Women in the military should be protected, as our female children in colleges where co-ed dorms and bathrooms are promoted. There is a disconnect in common sense reasoning in our United States of America.
Being pro-choice is NOT the same as being “adamantly pro-abortion.” And if your daughter had been raped in the military and didn’t have access to the same health benefits as other women, you might be justifiably angry, as some of these women are.
I am pro-choice. That does not mean I am “adamantly pro-abortion”. While I personally could never have an abortion, I believe each and every woman has the right to choose what is best for them. You do not have to be pro-abortion to be pro-choice!
It is just plain ignorant to say people who are pro-Choice are “pro-abortion,” or “adamantly pro-abortion.” It’s the same as saying people who are pro-Life are “adamantly pro-death of the mother.”
We’ve been telling ol Suz about that for years and years and years…
This could not be good for our service women if sue helps out these ladies like she did the people at loring AFB a few years back they will really need helpbefore it is over.
What did she do to Loring, being elected after it closed?
An important article that shows we have not achieved true equality yet. Thanks for sharing.
A woman in the military who has been raped and impregnated should not have to “deal with it” on her own. She should be able to have an abortion that is provided by the military health care system. We are not talking about someone who gave her consent to have sex with the “father”. She was viciously attacked by him.
No, I am not pro-abortion.
no one is “pro abortion”.
Pro-choice however should be every woman’s choice.
Military members who pray on their comrades are almost as bad as the leadership that condones it. Lowest of the low.
I just enlisted in the Army last month. While I am very aware of the cases of MST, and feel compassion for all victims, I also think in a very few cases the “victim” could have made it up. I do believe that any allegations made- true or not- should be fully investigated and consequences enforced.
Yes it’s true by joining I may have increased my risks of being a victim, but hey where I live in VT, I could easily get grabbed and raped too. It’s a double edged sword. I guess my point is the ability to accomplish what I’ve dreamed of since I was a child is worth the potential risks- one of those the worst thing than doing it is not doing it.
This is really sickening. So do the rapists get to be called heroes later on?