Really?

[NomadicMama]

Can this even be possible??

A woman posted on Military Families, on the "other" site. She is an Army wife and pregnant with triplets. Her husband is currently "stationed" (her term, not mine) in Iraq. ^o) He is due to come home in November (around her due date), but just learned that he is being sent back a few weeks after getting home.

Really? ^o)

I've googled. From what I can gather, there aren't any troops deployed to Iraq (which is what I thought to be the case). The State Department is now the US presence in Iraq. Oh, and she has a big ole "half my heart is in Iraq" blinky in her signature (so the excuse of "I meant to say Afghanistan" won't fly).

And, even if there are a handful of soldiers in Iraq, unless she's confused and he's only coming home for R&R, troop stabilization wouldn't allow this to happen, unless he signed up to do so, right? I would think that a soldier's chain of command would not allow a soon-to-be-father of triplets to voluntarily leave his three newborns and their mother/his wife.

Here's the link: community.thebump.com/cs/ks/forums/thread/67386579.aspx

Does anybody else think this reeks of MUD?

[NomadicMama]

Jul 17, 2012 17:32:11 GMT -5 Stan said:

Well, I mean, I'm sure there are SF ops in Iraq, and the State Dept. presence means there is some military at least. If her H was SF, I could see him getting sent back quickly, but she really shouldn't be talking about his job that way if he's SF, IMO.

While combat troops are out (and have been since December), I wondered about SF and units like that. . . but I kind of think that spouses of those in SF are better informed about something like PERSEC. She uses his/their last name in her bio and in at least one post.

I do know that there is stuff going on that I am certainly not privy to--but I'm rather skeptical on this one. (And I am one of the most gullible people ever!). I'm curious to see where things go with that thread. . .

[MrsAggie]

Dangit! It was DD'd before I got to it. DH said the Ft Hood newspaper always has updates about number of troops in various countries. He says there are 130 in Iraq according to the paper.

[meltoine]

Technically we don't have any military in Egypt either, but there are military members who work at and through the embassy on certain projects. I think it's entirely possible that this is also the case in Iraq.

[basilosaurus]

Or maybe she's confused about where he is specifically. There are still plenty of people in places like qatar, in support of iraq operations.

Why would a spouse's pregnancy prevent a deployment?

[JakJak]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking MUD

[NomadicMama]

Jul 17, 2012 18:26:58 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Or maybe she's confused about where he is specifically. There are still plenty of people in places like qatar, in support of Iraq operations.

Why would a spouse's pregnancy prevent a deployment?

A pregnancy would not prevent a deployment, but a second deployment, mere weeks after the soldier's return does not sem likely. I know that a service member can waive stabilization but this sound highly improbable to me.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who wondered about MUD. I didn't respond to the post. I know that I'm not an expert but things just felt "off". I mean, when DH and I were trading emails shortly after we met online. I wrote something about being stationed in Afghanistan. He explained what "stationed" meant and I have not made that mistake again. And yes, I know a service member can be "stationed" overseas. For his deployment in '09-'10, officially, DH was station is Kuwait, but deployed to Iraq.

[Dory1988]

Jul 17, 2012 18:26:58 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Or maybe she's confused about where he is specifically. There are still plenty of people in places like qatar, in support of iraq operations.

Why would a spouse's pregnancy prevent a deployment?

There were spots that needed filled on a deployment to Afghanistan about a month after DH and I got married. His CO wouldn't okay him to volunteer for the deployment due to our recent marriage and the fact that he had only been back in the states for about 3 months at the time. I'm thinking that's what she meant?

[psyck]

Okay, so what is the difference between stationed and deployed? (I'm not being snarky, I'm genuinely asking. I don't know the distinction.)

[sookie]

Jul 17, 2012 18:26:58 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Or maybe she's confused about where he is specifically. There are still plenty of people in places like qatar, in support of iraq operations.

Why would a spouse's pregnancy prevent a deployment?

Our squadron will do what they can on a first pregnancy to keep the AD member here if it means missing the birth. First time only, and if they have to go, so be it. I know we're a major exception and not a rule though.

[liamsmom]

Aw, DD

[basilosaurus]

I've just known plenty of people who missed the birth of their children. I've also known single moms who were deployed 6 months after having a child. I've actually never heard of stabilization. Maybe the AF is different.

If the OP made the mistake of deployment vs stationed under her husband corrected her, and someone in this thread is asking, then why is it difficult to believe nest poster would make the same mistake?

[sookie]

Jul 17, 2012 19:57:39 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

I've just known plenty of people who missed the birth of their children. I've also known single moms who were deployed 6 months after having a child. I've actually never heard of stabilization. Maybe the AF is different.

If the OP made the mistake of deployment vs stationed under her husband corrected her, and someone in this thread is asking, then why is it difficult to believe nest poster would make the same mistake?

It's not an AF thing, it's our squadron. However, we would send Mr. Sookie regardless because that's his job. It would be hard I'm sure, but we wouldn't be the first.

[basilosaurus]

sookie, I meant that my (vicarious) experience is AF, and the OP is army, so maybe that's why I hadn't heard about it.

I know there are rules about not being able to deploy for a certain amount of time after getting home or pcsing, but that seems to always be waived. H used to be involved with deployments and waivers, so I'd hear all sorts of stories, but I don't remember ever hearing one that got waived b/c of a pregnancy/infant.

[Dumbledork]

DHs first deployment was delayed for Bean's birth. Everyone else left in late Spring, and DH deployed a month after she was born in the late Summer. We actually wanted him to deploy with everyone else because we had already made alternate plans for the birth, in another state no less, but his COs basically told him it wasn't up for discussion.

I have no idea about the op though. I think MUD, but I really only have my own experience to base it on.

[NomadicMama]

Jul 17, 2012 19:57:39 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

I've just known plenty of people who missed the birth of their children. I've also known single moms who were deployed 6 months after having a child. I've actually never heard of stabilization. Maybe the AF is different.

If the OP made the mistake of deployment vs stationed under her husband corrected her, and someone in this thread is asking, then why is it difficult to believe nest poster would make the same mistake?

I know soldiers miss the birth of their child--my DH was deployed when I delivered. I'm not questioning that. My suspicions were aroused when she said that her husband is slated to deploy AGAIN after just a few weeks home from his current deployment--during which time she is likely to give birth to three babies. The Army is working to increase dwell time (time home between deployments) from 12 months to 24 months. The fact that this is the direction the Army is headed, the fact that we are engaged in only one major conflict now, instead of two, and, the US is drawing down our presence in Afghanistan now makes me wonder why her SGT of a husband is being tapped to be deployed, literally, back-to-back, when there should be others capable of fulfilling the mission. Yes, there are special snowflake circumstances. But those go both ways. A soldier returning home from deployment, to a wife due to give birth to triplets, would warrant an exemption. He is currently deployed. If he were to head back out, on an Army deployment, that would have him deployed for 18-24 out of 25 months. While the Army is working to cut deployment time down, typical soldiers deploy for 12 months unless it is a combat tour, then those are supposed to be 9 months.

There are units that are unique. I believe SF deploy under different circumstances. But, in my experience, those special circumstances are well understood within their communities.

Isolated mistakes do not make me suspicious. The combination of his location, rapid return to deployment, confusion of terminology and triplets have me wondering. (The triplet suspicion is the least of it, but having experienced infertility, and knowing through my friends' experiences with people on message boards faking multiples, it pings my radar.)

As for the difference between stationed and deployment. A service member is assigned a duty station. That is where his/her unit permanently resides. That is what ones BAH is calculated for. This is where a service member's family resides. Deployment is a temporary assignment that typically involves being in a combat zone, or in direct support of those in a combat zone. Families do not relocate to that location and are not able to visit. This is not an official definition, but along the lines of how my DH explained it to me.

[crimewatcher]

I don't believe the original story. I would hope they wouldn't send him right after having triplets but to be honest can see it happening.

H's buddy is in the Army just had his 2nd baby a couple weeks ago. He has unaccompanied orders to Korea for a year and leaves Aug or Sept.

We are lucky in the sense that H's squad tries their best to be accommodating with births. They will try their hardest to make sure the guys are here for the birth but after is kind of a crap shoot. One of our friends is being deployed and has a 1.5 month old. He was deployed but was able to to come back in time for the birth but because of that shorter trip they are sending it out again. (Granted H is a pilot in the AF, he deploys more frequently but not as long as other jobs).

[basilosaurus]

I've read all the responses, and I'm still not convinced that deploying weeks after a baby is born is something made up. Seems actually kind of normal. He's home for a few weeks after the birth, right? Longer than your average paternity leave. The back to back deployments seem normal IME. There are no hard and fast rules. Deployments for 18/24 have happened to many of my friends. H was supposed to be gone for 18 months with only a week turnaround in between, until his 365 billet got canceled.

FFS, that single mom I mentioned above? I had forgotten about her details, but I just remembered she was non-vol'd for a 365. To Iraq. Just a few months after her kid was born. She's army, too, so branch specific difference wouldn't apply here. This was recently, after the Iraqis kicked us out. We still have thousands of people there.

[NomadicMama]

Jul 19, 2012 2:54:14 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

I've read all the responses, and I'm still not convinced that deploying weeks after a baby is born is something made up. Seems actually kind of normal. He's home for a few weeks after the birth, right? Longer than your average paternity leave. The back to back deployments seem normal IME. There are no hard and fast rules. Deployments for 18/24 have happened to many of my friends. H was supposed to be gone for 18 months with only a week turnaround in between, until his 365 billet got canceled.

FFS, that single mom I mentioned above? I had forgotten about her details, but I just remembered she was non-vol'd for a 365. To Iraq. Just a few months after her kid was born. She's army, too, so branch specific difference wouldn't apply here. This was recently, after the Iraqis kicked us out. We still have thousands of people there.

We will have to agree to disagree on this subject. My experiences with the Army have been different than what you've seen.