American Legion Post 50 SAL 50 New York USA
| July 23, 2009 Aaron Kersaw's On the Inside Radio Report Hosted by Ken Kraetzer and John Chuhran Sons of the American Legion Special Guests: US Army wife, Kristina Kaufmann Native of New Rochelle, NY Congresswoman Nita Lowey |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
"The Sons of the American Legion Radio Report" is hosted by Ken Kraetzer
and John Chuhran every Monday at 2:30 PM. The program can be heard in
Westchester County NY on WVOX 1460 AM and nationally on WVOX.com.
The program is a production of WVOX and American Legion Post 50 Pelham
NY.
and John Chuhran every Monday at 2:30 PM. The program can be heard in
Westchester County NY on WVOX 1460 AM and nationally on WVOX.com.
The program is a production of WVOX and American Legion Post 50 Pelham
NY.
Congresswoman Nita Lowey meets with Ken Kraetzer of Sons of the American
Legion during 2009 American Legion Legislative Conference.
Legion during 2009 American Legion Legislative Conference.
Congresswoman Nita Lowey joins American Legion members and submarine
veterans in Pelham for October 2008 tribute to the sub USS Wahoo.
veterans in Pelham for October 2008 tribute to the sub USS Wahoo.
Army Families Under Fire
By Kristina Kaufmann
Monday, May 11, 2009
The Washington Post
As we approach eight years of war, too many military families are quietly coming apart at the seams.
The public hears the most dramatic stories and statistics -- soldiers killing their wives, themselves, each
other. Less well known are the effects that prolonged war and multiple deployments have had on our
daily lives. As the wife of a commander of a battalion that deployed last year, I know that many of us feel
embittered, powerless and disconnected from the Army in which we and our husbands serve.
The blogosphere provides a sense of the many families coping with health issues and the less tangible
effects of war and military life, including how marginalized many feel. "Spare me the rah rah party line
about how much the Army is doing for the soldiers once they come home," wrote one wife whose
husband had suffered a traumatic brain injury. "[T]hey don't do even half of what they should to provide
adequate treatment for soldiers coming back from deployment." Wrote another wife: "We are outsiders
living inside an institution that doesn't want to see or hear us. . . . You don't have to wear a uniform to
be wounded by these wars, but no one outside of those of us impacted seem[s] to know this."
Dishearteningly, the response from Army and Defense Department leaders has been haphazard,
sluggish and widely ineffective.
To be fair, no one expected our all-volunteer military to be bogged down in years-long battles across
the globe. But the loose network of support systems for military families -- which arose from the more
traditional and rank-based officers' wives coffee groups -- in place when the wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq began were quickly overwhelmed. And the military's inability to assess the wars' effects on its
families and to adapt and restructure its approach has frustrated families in the "trenches."
The old saying is that "If the Army had wanted you to have a family, they would have issued you one."
Army leaders would say this is no longer true, pointing to the many services and programs dedicated to
supporting soldiers and their families. Standard operating procedures have been implemented and
memos issued -- including one mandating that the word "Families" be capitalized in all Army
correspondence "to exhibit the Army's recognition of their sacrifice and importance." We should be
grateful, satisfied and quiet.
Questioning policies and speaking out are considered presumptuous breaches of protocol that could
land your soldier in hot water. I know this from experience. In April 2007, my husband and I were among
a group of commanders and wives invited to meet with a visiting four-star general. When the general
took questions, I stood and said that after six years of war, the Army should no longer expect its
burned-out volunteer Family Readiness Groups, running almost entirely without funds, to handle the
serious issues facing military families. Some senior leaders on base were not happy about my
comments, to say the least.
For years I tried to draw attention to these issues the "right way" and got nowhere. These issues are too
important for me to remain quiet.
What needs to change? First, families -- particularly the volunteer wives upon whom the military relies
so heavily -- need Army directors willing to ask and listen instead of dictating and commanding. It might
be naive to suggest such an approach to the nation's most hierarchical organization, but most of those
responsible for soldier and family support initiatives are out of touch. Their knowledge gap results in
delayed responses, reactive policies, misdirected resources and, ultimately, too many families falling
through the cracks. New gym equipment and child-care facilities are great, but expanding and
implementing mental health services so a soldier's child doesn't have to wait six months to see a
psychiatrist is more important. Why has it taken so long to establish respite care, so that a mother of
four whose sergeant husband is serving in Afghanistan can get to the gym?
Second, families, like their soldiers, connect with their units, not "Big Army." Too often, the leadership at
the unit level -- from senior sergeants to colonels -- fails to provide basic support. Indeed, many believe
doing so should not be part of their job. Maybe they're right, but right now the Army says it is a part of
their job, so proper training should be incorporated into the educational curriculum at all levels of
command. Today, commanders receive months of training regarding how to lead their units when they
deploy but are taught next to nothing about how to care for the families of their soldiers. To show that it
is serious, the Army should include in its evaluation reports -- the key to promotions -- an assessment of
how well officers do on family support.
Finally, the Army should directly fund its mandated Family Readiness Groups. Currently, Army
regulations require that fundraising be done within units -- so we bake cupcakes and sell them to our
own husbands in the motor pool, effectively taking from the people we are trying to support. We
shouldn't have to fundraise to treat families to pizza and bowling while their soldiers are deployed.
After multiple deployments, even the strongest wives -- the ones most likely to volunteer -- are at the
end of their ropes. "I can't do it anymore," one wife told me. "I'm just trying to hold my own family
together." Our military families deserve better.
The Obama administration has said it will convene a military family advisory board. I hope it includes a
broad spectrum of families -- the spouses of staff sergeants, captains and lieutenant colonels. The
situation is not sustainable. This is a conversation our military needs to have.
The writer is married to an Army lieutenant colonel. Her e-mail address is kkaufmanncool@gmail.com.
By Kristina Kaufmann
Monday, May 11, 2009
The Washington Post
As we approach eight years of war, too many military families are quietly coming apart at the seams.
The public hears the most dramatic stories and statistics -- soldiers killing their wives, themselves, each
other. Less well known are the effects that prolonged war and multiple deployments have had on our
daily lives. As the wife of a commander of a battalion that deployed last year, I know that many of us feel
embittered, powerless and disconnected from the Army in which we and our husbands serve.
The blogosphere provides a sense of the many families coping with health issues and the less tangible
effects of war and military life, including how marginalized many feel. "Spare me the rah rah party line
about how much the Army is doing for the soldiers once they come home," wrote one wife whose
husband had suffered a traumatic brain injury. "[T]hey don't do even half of what they should to provide
adequate treatment for soldiers coming back from deployment." Wrote another wife: "We are outsiders
living inside an institution that doesn't want to see or hear us. . . . You don't have to wear a uniform to
be wounded by these wars, but no one outside of those of us impacted seem[s] to know this."
Dishearteningly, the response from Army and Defense Department leaders has been haphazard,
sluggish and widely ineffective.
To be fair, no one expected our all-volunteer military to be bogged down in years-long battles across
the globe. But the loose network of support systems for military families -- which arose from the more
traditional and rank-based officers' wives coffee groups -- in place when the wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq began were quickly overwhelmed. And the military's inability to assess the wars' effects on its
families and to adapt and restructure its approach has frustrated families in the "trenches."
The old saying is that "If the Army had wanted you to have a family, they would have issued you one."
Army leaders would say this is no longer true, pointing to the many services and programs dedicated to
supporting soldiers and their families. Standard operating procedures have been implemented and
memos issued -- including one mandating that the word "Families" be capitalized in all Army
correspondence "to exhibit the Army's recognition of their sacrifice and importance." We should be
grateful, satisfied and quiet.
Questioning policies and speaking out are considered presumptuous breaches of protocol that could
land your soldier in hot water. I know this from experience. In April 2007, my husband and I were among
a group of commanders and wives invited to meet with a visiting four-star general. When the general
took questions, I stood and said that after six years of war, the Army should no longer expect its
burned-out volunteer Family Readiness Groups, running almost entirely without funds, to handle the
serious issues facing military families. Some senior leaders on base were not happy about my
comments, to say the least.
For years I tried to draw attention to these issues the "right way" and got nowhere. These issues are too
important for me to remain quiet.
What needs to change? First, families -- particularly the volunteer wives upon whom the military relies
so heavily -- need Army directors willing to ask and listen instead of dictating and commanding. It might
be naive to suggest such an approach to the nation's most hierarchical organization, but most of those
responsible for soldier and family support initiatives are out of touch. Their knowledge gap results in
delayed responses, reactive policies, misdirected resources and, ultimately, too many families falling
through the cracks. New gym equipment and child-care facilities are great, but expanding and
implementing mental health services so a soldier's child doesn't have to wait six months to see a
psychiatrist is more important. Why has it taken so long to establish respite care, so that a mother of
four whose sergeant husband is serving in Afghanistan can get to the gym?
Second, families, like their soldiers, connect with their units, not "Big Army." Too often, the leadership at
the unit level -- from senior sergeants to colonels -- fails to provide basic support. Indeed, many believe
doing so should not be part of their job. Maybe they're right, but right now the Army says it is a part of
their job, so proper training should be incorporated into the educational curriculum at all levels of
command. Today, commanders receive months of training regarding how to lead their units when they
deploy but are taught next to nothing about how to care for the families of their soldiers. To show that it
is serious, the Army should include in its evaluation reports -- the key to promotions -- an assessment of
how well officers do on family support.
Finally, the Army should directly fund its mandated Family Readiness Groups. Currently, Army
regulations require that fundraising be done within units -- so we bake cupcakes and sell them to our
own husbands in the motor pool, effectively taking from the people we are trying to support. We
shouldn't have to fundraise to treat families to pizza and bowling while their soldiers are deployed.
After multiple deployments, even the strongest wives -- the ones most likely to volunteer -- are at the
end of their ropes. "I can't do it anymore," one wife told me. "I'm just trying to hold my own family
together." Our military families deserve better.
The Obama administration has said it will convene a military family advisory board. I hope it includes a
broad spectrum of families -- the spouses of staff sergeants, captains and lieutenant colonels. The
situation is not sustainable. This is a conversation our military needs to have.
The writer is married to an Army lieutenant colonel. Her e-mail address is kkaufmanncool@gmail.com.
Kristina Kaufmann, is a native of New Rochelle and graduate of the University of California
at Berkeley. She married her husband a West Point graduate in summer of 2001. Her
husband is now a Lt. Col and the couple live in the Washington DC area after time spent
in Oklahoma and North Carolina. Her Op-Ed article describing the unmet needs of military
families has drawn national attention and constructive commentary from both the
Secretary of Defense and the White House.
at Berkeley. She married her husband a West Point graduate in summer of 2001. Her
husband is now a Lt. Col and the couple live in the Washington DC area after time spent
in Oklahoma and North Carolina. Her Op-Ed article describing the unmet needs of military
families has drawn national attention and constructive commentary from both the
Secretary of Defense and the White House.