Letter: MoD's concern for potential orphans
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: We are told by the Ministry of Defence that it introduced the policy of dismissing women when they got pregnant when women started to take up more front-line roles 'with the express intention of avoiding the creation of orphans' ('Servicemen challenge pregnancy payments', 6 April).
This was a fascinating revelation for those of us who have been acting for women unlawfully discharged from the Armed Forces as a result of getting pregnant. We have been told consistently by the Ministry of Defence and the Treasury Solicitors that throughout the period from 1978 to 1990 women who were discharged following pregnancy had a right to apply to return after the birth of their child.
They have used this claim as a basis for arguing before industrial tribunals that compensation should be limited to lost pay and pension for the period between the date of discharge and the date of the birth of their child. If the real reason for the policy was to avoid the creation of orphans, there would be little point in allowing the woman to return as soon as the baby was born.
Which of these mutually exclusive claims are true? Either the Ministry of Defence has been systematically misleading tribunals by asserting that there was a right to re-enlist after the birth of the child or, alternatively, the assertion that the justification for the policy was to avoid creating orphans is simply untrue.
Yours faithfully,
NORMAN LAMB
Steele and Co (solicitors)
Norwich,
Norfolk
6 April
The writer is chairman of the Armed Forces Pregnancy Dismissal Group.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments