"After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail."
On Wednesday, July 26, President Trump released the above announcement via Twitter stating that the reversal of Obama's legislation allowing transgenders to openly serve in the military is currently underway. The wording of these tweets insinuated that the new policy has already been implemented. However, it is important to note that no such policy has been approved as of late. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford said "In the meantime, we will continue to treat all of our personnel with respect." With this, Twitter should not be utilized as a credible political news source despite the fact that the announcement came directly from the president. Until a formal order is placed to revise and approve current legislation, this regulation cannot be enforced.
President Trump has yet to speak publicly on the issue. However, White House Press Secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, recently held a press briefing on July 27 speaking on behalf of the president.
After sitting through nearly twenty minutes of watching the Press Secretary get hounded by reporters, we learn only two things. First, it appears the decision was made in haste and as a result, federal representatives are either ignorant to the facts surrounding the decision or not obliged to release the information that was shared with them. Second, we learn the intended fate of current transgender service personnel. "That's something that the Department of Defense and the White House will have to work together as implementation takes place and is done so lawfully" Sanders stated. According to the Representative of the D-W1 2nd District, Mark Pocan, this will mean a discharge of approximately 15,000 service members representing 66% of the United States military. However, The Pentagon has recently stated that there is no way of acquiring an exact number of current transgenders in the Armed Forces due to their previous inability to serve openly until 2016.
With this, one cannot help but wonder why this regulation will soon take place. The reasoning provided to the public does not serve as proper justification for throwing out a significant percentage of well-trained military experts in an effort to eliminate the "burden of tremendous medical costs and disruption that the transgender in the military entails." If this were the case—that so many individuals are abusing the acquisition of a military status to gain access to medical care that allows them a personal operation at the expense of our federal tax dollars—then why is the call to drop all transgenders rather than revise military healthcare policy? If a service woman wished to undergo breast augmentation, the surgery would come out of her basic pay (personal salary) and her recovery would be scheduled to be taken from her annually allotted military leave. So why is this any different from an individual seeking gender reassignment surgery? The difference appears to lie in the recovery time.
Personal operations such as plastic and cosmetic surgery require 2-4 weeks to reach full recovery while Vaginoplasty (Male to Female) takes 4-6 weeks and Phalloplasty (Female to Male) takes 6-8 weeks. The five branches of the U.S. military provide their members 2.5 days of paid leave per month of service allowing them to accumulate a total of 30 days of leave a year. A member can save up to 60 days of leave over a two year period before their days are suspended.
This is not to say that gender reassignment surgery would not be feasible within the military. It just wouldn't be as easily obtained as other surgeries. To make this possible for those seeking to undergo this surgery, the policy should also require individuals to be put on a waitlist in order to control the number of members taking extended leave at one time. This is something one should consider before enlisting with the intentions of one day undergoing this transition. In the civilian world, jobs do not conform to your lifestyle choices. If a job does not meet your specific needs and standards, it simply isn't cut out for you. The military is no exception. That said, a transition to the opposite sex is a personal decision and right to civil freedom that should remain at the discretion of the individual. A decision that the federal government has no right to invade.
It is understandable why this policy necessitates change in terms of militant and economic need and President Trump's efforts in identifying this should be viewed as commendable rather than claiming he is turning his back on the LGBTQ community. However, permitting the military to be the only establishment in the nation to discriminate against qualified individuals currently serving as well as applicants who meet all other non gender-specific qualifications for any reason is far from "lawful" as the press secretary suggests it will be.
Ratifying a new military healthcare policy presents a far more reasonable solution to this issue without disrupting the function and mission of the United States military. This is not a matter of political correctness, social experimentation, or preservation of unit cohesion as many have claimed it to be. It is a matter of denying to uphold civil liberty to the very people who serve in the military and are willing to lay down their lives for our freedom.
