re: Army Times: Brig. Gen. Sinclair will retire as a lieutenant colonel

quote:

---

Spinoff question that we discuss amongst ourselves in the military community (particularly the spouses);

Should Mrs Sinclair receive half of his benefits at the brigadier general (retired) rate? She is being punished because of her husband's adultery.

---

She shouldn't be entitled to anything in any scenario either honorable or dishonorable IMO, but that isn't really what you asked.

To answer your question: She should get whatever entitlements she is due for the rank that her husband retired. She can take up whatever grievance she has about that with him, it isn't the military's problem IMO.

I know the lines get blurred with military and government programs and entitlements, but when it comes to retirement that is an issue that is between the person who signed the contracts and the employer, not the wife. She could have left at any point and nobody should be subsidizing the spouses risk in that deal. Just my opinion. Great question though.

quote:

---

Kind of harsh. She faithfully served as a military spouse. Her husband did not faithfully serve as an Army officer as a colonel and a brigadier general. Just curious, are you married?

---

She benefitted from whatever service he did to rise to GO/FO rank, so she should understand that she will suffer whatever loss of status his misdeeds entail. It is harsh. But that's like asking if a murderer's child should suffer because his or her father is in the pen.

I've never been married. I was engaged for six months to a girl I still think about daily. But I was too immature (at 26) to do the right thing. She was German and probably the main reason I'm so fond of Germany.

That's your lesson, not: follow the UCMJ?

Are you being funny or ducked in the head?