Do Ask, Do Tell

By: Kyle Schoff, Joe Eckstrom, Erin Walsh

In 1993 former president Bill Clinton announced a new policy that has allowed homosexuals to serve in the military, just as long as they pretend to be straight. This new policy, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” was meant to be a sign of tolerance and to end “witch hunts.” But since its instatement there have been discharges in the thousands for homosexuals who were found out.

In 1981 the Department of Defense issued a new regulation in order to stave off court challenges against the military’s discharge of a homosexual. It stated that “homosexuality is incompatible with military service” and that it was grounds for banning and expulsion from the armed forces. That same statement was also in the 1992 Government Accountability Office’s report on the DOD’s policy on homosexuality.

Throughout the 80s and 90s there was much congressional debate regarding the ban and whether or not it should be lifted. It wasn’t until 1993 that Clinton was able to achieve the compromise that is “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Rather than lifting the ban completely, as was Clinton’s initial campaign promise, he was able to appease both sides.

The new policy still states that homosexuality and homosexual acts are grounds for discharge. The loophole is that you can enter the military as a homosexual because asking for a person’s sexual orientation is no longer a part of the screening process. But if you are proven to be homosexual or to have committed a homosexual act you will be indicted and discharged from the military.

Like Clinton, President Barack Obama has promised (in a speech given at the Human Rights Campaign dinner) to end DADT and to allow homosexuals to openly serve in the military. However, he has given no specific timeline for when he will make good on his promise.

Such an issue may bring about controversy, considering there were reasons for DATD’s instatement. For one, it offered a form of protection for homosexuals. As long as they obeyed the law, they would not be hazed for their sexual orientation by other military personnel.



However, regardless of this protection, homosexuals still rightfully felt discriminated against.

“There are all kinds of people - the very young and the very old, the sick or disabled, violent criminals or, in combat roles, women - whom we regard as unfit to be soldiers,” James Bowman of The Weekly Standard said. “The fact that open homosexuals are also excluded cannot by itself be considered an injustice.”

True, homosexuals in the military are not the only ones being discriminated against, but still, the problems each type of person faces are hardly comparable. Is it really fair to lump them all together?

"The military exists to kill and destroy. It is not fair. It is not unbiased. It is prejudicial," Thompson said. "I am not saying that ‘tradition’ is a good reason why things should remain the way they are. But, at the same time, it is a reason. Americans, for some reason, resist change."

Americans and their beliefs do change, however. An ABC/Washington Post poll performed in 1993 showed that 44 percent of Americans thought homosexuals should be allowed to openly serve in the military. The poll was performed again in 2001, resulting in 62 percent in favor, and again in 2009 with 75 percent.

Clearly the times are changing, and despite being instated with arguably good intentions, DADT has become outdated and ineffective. The American Medical Association (AMA) claims that the policy can actually cause issues with patient care.

“The policy threatens the physician-patient relationship and compromises the medical care of gay patients in the military,” say AMA delegates.

As it stands, the military reserves the right to inspect military personnel medical records, in order to check for combat readiness. If patients reveal their sexual orientation to their doctors, the chance to be honorably discharged would always be present.



Paul A. Wertsch, a family physician and delegate for the Wisconsin Medical Society, says that the military and their physicians are being put in a very undesirable position by this law.

“If you can’t trust your doctor to tell the truth, you’re not going to tell the truth,” said Dr. Wertsch. “If a doctor feels that by writing down the truth, he can get you in trouble, that’s a bad situation.”

Dr. Wertsch, whose son is gay, firmly believes that DADT is “hurting people, making doctors lie, having patients not get proper care and hurting the military.”

DADT does not just hinder physical health, but causes emotional problems as well.

Darren Manzella, former combat medic and liaison officer, was honorably discharged from the United States military in June 2008. For nearly two years prior to that, he had been openly gay.



“After returning from my first deployment in Iraq, after seeing death and violence, losing friends and comrades, it really made me look over my life,” Manzella said. “I looked at some issues I had always had trouble with. I had debated, ‘Am I gay?’”

While struggling with these issues, Manzella began a relationship with another man and soon after began receiving anonymous phone calls and emails while in between tours. The messages were all threatening, saying things like “you are stupid” and “the Army is going to kick you out.”

“I didn’t know if the military police would be coming through the door to take me away because someone had reported me,” Manzella said. “This was some of the paranoia I was living with every day.”

Manzella sought out help from his supervisor, who in turn reported him for breaking the law under DADT. A follow up investigation produced no proof of open homosexuality on Manzella’s part, but word of his orientation quickly spread.

“Ironically it pulled the unit together. A lot of them started to invite me out,” Manzella said. “My co-worker was getting married; she told me that my boyfriend and I were invited to the wedding. It made me feel like I was more a part of the family.”

During his second tour in Iraq, in 2006, Manzella’s unit knew that he was gay. He could have pictures of his boyfriend out and talk openly on the phone without worry of someone overhearing. His openness relieved a lot of the pressure he was feeling.

And then seemingly out of the blue, in 2008, he received discharge papers, which read “homosexual conduct admission.” For two years, working alongside his understanding and accepting unit, Manzella had no problems being open. But despite his acceptance, the military has no choice but to uphold the law.

“The Army enforces the homosexual conduct policy because it is the law,” said Army spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver. “The policy is not a military policy. If the law were to potentially change, the Army would change to enforce whatever the law may be.”

The U.S. military’s current plan for the next four fiscal years is to expand the number of their ground troops by 48,000. Since DADT was instated in 1994, more than 13,000 military personnel have been discharged due to their sexual orientation. Approximately 800 of these servicemen and women held statuses deemed “mission critical,” having positions such as linguists, pilots, or combat engineers.



The Government Accountability Office estimated the cost of replacing military personnel discharged for their sexual orientation to be roughly $190.5 million from 1994 to 2004, or about $20,000 per service member.

This total, however, was later found to have left out a number of factors, including the original cost to train those who were discharged, many of whom served for multiple years. After such numbers were factored in, the cost nearly doubled, reaching $363.8 million.

As if these factors were not enough, perhaps the most outrageous statistic is the military acceptance of DADT. As of December 2006, Zogby International poll found that 73 percent of service members in the U.S. military said that they were comfortable working with gay and lesbian personnel. 10 percent said they would not re-enlist or extend their service to the military if homosexuals were allowed to openly serve, and 14 percent said they would only consider these options.

A loss of 10 percent military personnel would be the equivalent to 228,600 troops, more than the number of those serving in the Marine Corps. However, the acceptance of homosexuals in the military, by both service members and the American people, is just too overwhelming to simply ignore.

Society is ever changing. There may have been a time when “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was an acceptable law; but as we begin to see new errors in our old ways it is time to consider a new policy.