TOPICS
TOPICS
Sexual misconduct at Army, Navy academies persists, report finds
The Army and Navy's service academies have tolerated hostile attitudes toward women, hampering efforts to eradicate sexual assault and harassment at the institutions, according to a new report.
The attitudes of a certain number of midshipmen at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., and cadets at the Military Academy in West Point, N.Y., have created an environment where sexual assault is more likely to occur, the report states.
The 96-page report is the work of a congressionally mandated 12-member task force--made up equally of military and civilian members--assigned the task of assessing the cultures of the Navy and Army academies and recommending changes in their operations.
The Defense Task Force on Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Military Service Academies arose out of the sexual assault scandal at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colo. The Air Force Academy was exempt from the latest review, since a similar commission already had examined it.
The Army and Navy academies' response to sexual assault has been "sporadic and incomplete," the report concluded. Long-term efforts are needed, the panel concluded, because "sexual harassment and assault is not a 'fix and forget' problem."
A 2005 Pentagon inspector general report found that 111 individuals had reported incidents of sexual assault at West Point, 99 at the Naval Academy and 92 at the Air Force Academy. Members of the commission said they expect the number of reported incidents to increase as measures designed to encourage victims to come forward are implemented.
"The majority [of incidents] are jokes, sexual innuendoes, things that happen on a casual basis," said the task force's co-chair, Vice Adm. G.L. Hoewing, chief of naval personnel. "We believe that if those continue, the next step is that they become more egregious. That could result in touching and things like that could eventually lead to a sexual assault or worse."
The report was based on site visits by task force members, focus group meetings, survey information and interviews with school officials, experts, cadets, midshipmen and victims.
The commission recommended that the service academies increase the number and visibility of female officers and noncommissioned officers so they could serve as role models. The panel found that some members of the academies do not value women as highly as men because they are fewer in number, excluded from "highly regarded combat specialties" and held to different fitness standards.
Even though the Pentagon's new limited confidentiality policy on reporting sexual assaults, implemented in June, applies to the service academies, the task force recommended that Congress enshrine the policy in law.
"If they're sexually assaulted, we do know from experience that having immediate medical care and counseling support is going to create a healthier serviceperson," said the task force's other co-chair, Delilah Rumburg, executive director of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape. "We need to go the next step and create this by law, statutorily, and we think that's the right thing to do."
The report found that in the past two years, the system for holding alleged offenders accountable has improved, but current rape and sexual assault laws do not address some of the types of sexual misconduct occurring at the academies.
David S.C. Chu, undersecretary of Defense for personnel and readiness, said the Pentagon will evaluate the findings and recommendations of the task force and will report to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, as required by law.
"The department is determined to continue our aggressive efforts to halt sexual misconduct of any sort by refining and improving our policies and procedures and applying them to the field force," Chu said. "All members of the armed forces have the right to expect to be treated with professionalism, dignity and respect on duty and off duty."
According to a Pentagon spokesman, the task force will examine the issue of sexual assault throughout the armed forces for the next 18 months, as mandated in the fiscal 2005 Defense Authorization Act.
COMMENTS
- The reason the public is surprised by scandals, is that rarely does the military actually believe in the public relations campaign about honor and integrity. Most actually believe that hopefully they never have to face it. As long as the public never knows, they can get away with anything as long as they out-rank those complaining. The UCMJ, DoD, and Service "Directives" are just suggestions (especially DoD Directive 5500.7 chapter 12) and are subordinate to the opinion of the one with the rank. The system to uphold our rules really supports one thing: Rank. Nothing else matters. Whoever has the rank is correct. And if he desires, is allowed to ruin the career of the complainer. What this does is defend the tyrants, encouraging the cowardice tyrants tend to foster. Also expressed as: "Don't rock the boat" or other yellow-bellied expressions. I know this will not resonate, mostly because the PR campaign is successful. The public believes in it, and expects the military to behave properly. I bought into it until I learned my lesson -- and I'm a slow learner. I also realize some “patriot” is going to say I’m overselling. I don't have the time or inclination to provide an objective history of every time some "idiot" brought issues to the media while fighting an establishment trying to eradicate the “fool” who outed its "good-deal." I also have my own subjective experiences that have taught me this truth for 12 straight years, at every command I have been to. We need our military - desperately. And I am proud of what we are "supposed" to stand for. What is appalling is that power corrupting the weak-minded is so prevalent in the military. Even more appalling is the cowardice in our system that lets it happen, and instead of holding these tyrants accountable for their behavior, backs them up when they want to kill someone's career for speaking up about violations of our rules. And there you have the reason we keep having scandals -- because we don't have a culture with the courage required to be committed to integrity, nor the intestinal fortitude to provide leadership at any level to deal with the problem. Don't bother expecting me to respond - like the good officer I have been trained to be, I couldn't care less what your opinion is. GovExec.com reader Posted December 24, 2005 6:37 PM
- "Vice Adm. G.L. Hoewing, chief of naval personnel. "We believe that if those continue, the next step is that they become more egregious. That could result in touching and things like that could eventually lead to a sexual assault or worse." Someone needs to tell the admiral that touching is sexual assault! It does not lead to assualt it is assault. How can guys liike this solve the situation? I would suggest you get women or maybe men out of the military. A single sex military was appropriate and should be reinstalled - I don't care if the military is men or woment but it should not be both! What? Posted September 15, 2005 7:33 AM
- For the one who thinks Chiefs' initiations cause sexual misconduct" You must be wired up wrong. During my many years as a Chief Petty Officer, I never attended a Chiefs' initiation that even came close to the cause for sexual misconduct. You must be one who was afraid to go thru it, or else one who is jealous. As a matter of fact, when I was initiated in the early 70's, a female officer attended a good portion of my initiation, and left only because she had a meeting that prompted her presence. Admittedly, she appeared unexpectedly (by me but not by the Chiefs who organized the initiation). If you can't handle good fun at a Chiefs' initiation then you don't belong as one. The Navy should never give up the Chiefs' initiation, nor should the Chiefs ever allow it. Charlie Posted September 6, 2005 1:41 PM









