In discussions of the retention in the Navy of non-rated enlisted men, far too little has been said constructively about the marital status of these men, considering that it vitally influences every important decision they make during their first enlistment.
Officers, in most cases, try to discourage any serious thought of marriage for the non- rated teen-age sailor. There was a time when a man had to request his commanding officer’s permission to marry. But he was fortunate, indeed, if he got by his chief with the request. Further, only for second class petty officers would the government pay for moving dependents and household effects. That era is behind us, though even now only third class petty officers with four years’ service qualify for such moving privileges. But the Navy today is made up of an increasing number of young men who marry prior to enlistment or who marry soon afterward, long before they achieve petty officer status.
“Old salts” are not alone in proposing that we should go back to the “good old days” and once again require men to get the permission of their commanding officer; there is widespread support for this concept today.
In overseas areas, we require such permission. A serviceman stationed in Italy or Japan, for example, has to hurdle a significant administrative roadblock before winning permission to marry a foreign national.
The Services cannot really forbid a man to marry, but the attendant problems of marrying a foreign national are too little understood or appreciated by our young men. The current naval instructions are intended to force the individual to take time out to look at and, it is hoped, ponder factors that he may not have seriously considered.
But what about the seaman who wants to marry “the girl back home,” or the girl he met at the USO dance last month, or, all too often, the waitress at the club just outside the gate? Does the Navy have any responsibility to him?
He is free to make his choice, and all he has to do is qualify legally. Legality requires that he must have parental permission if he is not of age, pass the blood test, and obtain a license. He does not have to tell anyone else and because his off-duty hours are his own business, he can go right ahead and marry the girl of his dreams. The Navy gives the bride an ID card, arranges to include her allotment in its annual budget and—presto— the military has another dependent. And there the tale of woe begins.
From this day forward, for better for worse, the seaman’s marital problems become the Navy’s problems.
His new home life affects his attitudes, his motives, his incentive, and his career. If he was beginning to give his devotion and energy to the Navy, it now begins to shift elsewhere. The long separations, the financial hazards, and the emotional demands of home and sea divide his loyalty. When and if the young sailor has to make a choice, the Navy is more than likely to be the loser.
A few years ago, Admiral Arleigh A. Burke, U. S. Navy, addressed kind and understanding words to wives of sailors:
A Navy man, whether he is the captain of a ship, or a seaman, works hard for two reasons. A sailor has two loves, his family and his Navy. Throughout his life, no matter what he does, or where he goes, no matter what happens to him, he will have those two loves. He devotes his life to making a success of both. At times this is a hard task. A sailor, no matter what his rank or rate, needs the friendly understanding of his associates aboard ship.
It is equally important, perhaps even more important, that his love of the Navy be understood and supported, that his work be encouraged by the girl for whom he wants to be a success. No one knows better than a Navy wife that Navy life is insistent and demanding.
One chief petty officer sums up what many petty officers think about the “status” of non- rated men under them: “There are three things a sailor doesn’t need—a car, civilian clothes, and a wife.” Many a sailor has all three, the first two not paid for, and the third needing all his money and then some. Re-enlistment could not be further from his mind.
There are, however, at least two courses of action that can be taken by the Navy. Both have weaknesses as well as strengths.
First, the Navy could, as suggested earlier, return to the “good old days”—modified slightly—and require that a man be a third class petty officer or complete a first enlistment before being allowed to marry.
Second, the Navy can stipulate that only single men are eligible for enlistment—and require that they will stay single until they reach the magic number E-4, or complete a first enlistment, whichever comes first.
The U. S. Naval Academy and aviation programs demand bachelorhood with good reason. A man’s energy and efforts, they say, should be concentrated on his education and training. A wife is someone for whom he simply will not have time. Such a policy advances these prospective officers into their 20s before marriage is possible. And although age does not signify maturity necessarily, statistically, marriages contracted by people over 20 have a better chance of survival.
There are, as already suggested, some weaknesses in any proposal to delay marriage. First, denial of marriage seems to encourage immorality. Certainly, this is true in the military. The pattern of work, separation from home and loved ones, and compartment-type living is such that basic drives are accented way out of proportion and perspective. The absence of wholesome and companionable relationships with the opposite sex, over long periods of time, heightens imagined physical need. Many a sailor has gone “over the hill” for a girl.
Second, rules forbidding marriage tend to encourage secret marriages. A marriage that is contracted secretly is off to less than a good start. Even to friends and family, the husband must introduce his wife as his “girl.” The couple has to live a lie to the rest of the world, and this does not help to build character. Both the marriage and the career may suffer.
Another important factor is the great hue and cry that is raised over what will be called another invasion of privacy by the government. This sensitive and volatile area will not be considered in this essay, but it must be remembered that what we are discussing is a situation peculiar to military life. For one might even say that one’s military career is a voluntary renunciation of the right of privacy.
Rules for midshipmen, cadets, and officer candidates are not necessarily applicable to enlisted men, nor applicable for the same reasons. But understanding of the aforementioned problems is vital if the military seriously considers embarking once again upon a plan of delayed marriage.
In spite of the drawbacks considered, such a plan might work and deserves a hearing. If we can speak of the “sea of matrimony,” let us remember too that the sea state can get pretty rough at times. And, for the non-rated man, there are numerous ever-present “navigational hazards.”
Enlisted men, for example, can qualify for petty officer in less than three years if they are motivated, given responsible, dynamic leadership—and opportunity. But even if they attain petty officer rank, the basic pay for men with less than two years service has not been increased appreciably for years. That is regrettable. Right now it is one more reason for delaying marriage.
In the absence of a rule forbidding marriage for these men, what we need is a plan of guidance.
The second course of action is one that is already used in some areas and has much to commend it. Some local commands, such as schools of a few months’ duration, have instructions in effect that require the serviceman to submit a notice of intention to marry while under the jurisdiction of that command.
For example, at the Hospital Corps School, Great Lakes, Illinois, such an instruction has been used effectively, basically because the command believed it to be important.
Students who submitted their intentions were interviewed by three people; the executive officer (in effect, the commanding officer), the administrative or personnel officer, and either a Protestant or Roman Catholic chaplain, and sometimes both. Applicants were queried with regard to the seriousness of their intentions.
In some cases many hours were spent with these young people, singly and as couples. It was pointed out that the command was not requiring them to obtain permission to marry. To fulfill the requirements they merely had to file notice and be interviewed.
The command took the position that it had a responsibility to itself, the couple, their parents, and to the Navy. Had these young people ever talked about finances, the long separations necessary during sea duty, children, religious differences, and careers? How seriously and thoroughly had they made their plans?
Whatever their plans and intentions, these were discussed with the executive officer. Sometimes he would ask the couple to work out a menu for a month’s meals. They would go to a local supermarket and price the food required for this menu, and this in turn led to working out a budget. Many young couples think the answer to economic problems is to be found in two incomes. But this plan may cease to be useful about nine months after the marriage, when the income is cut in half, while the size of the family increases by one.
The chaplain would follow up the interviews with a letter to the parents, especially when the proposed marriage showed cause for postponement or cancellation. Parents were invited to support command efforts. Sometimes the students bitterly resented the requirement to file intentions—they felt that their personal plans were none of the command’s business. However, the confrontation was there and no interview was altogether fruitless. Students were advised as to the staff decision, favorable or unfavorable.
But no pressure was ever put upon them to accept or abide by the counsel. It was still their own choice.
The sessions brought students and administrative staff into more personal contact. Often factors were brought out during the talks which showed that a couple had failed to look at hard, cold facts. For many young people misinterpret both their loneliness and their need for companionship as “love.” And, to them, love’s logical conclusion is marriage. Occasionally a letter would arrive at the command after an applicant had graduated, saying that he or she was grateful now for the advice. Sometimes parents wrote to say they did not care what their children did, while others were happy the school took a personal interest and concern. And, of course, many students went ahead with their plans to marry. Subsequent failure in some of these marriages might have been avoided had command interest and advice been heeded.
Again, the basic purpose of such an instruction is not necessarily to prevent marriage, but to require more thoughtful preparation for it. This plan can be used in any command, ship or shore station. It has the backing of our whole leadership program and is one way of implementing it further.
In a ship, for example, non-rated men could be required to submit notice of intention to marry. (This is similar, actually, to the banns published in some churches, or the invitations sent out by the bride-to-be, to announce their intentions to the public. Marriage is not a private affair—it is public business, or the state would not make such requirements.) The sailor could then be interviewed by his chief or his division officer, chaplain, and the executive officer, or some qualified officer appointed by him.
Not everyone is prepared to speak with understanding about marriage, though everyone seems to have ideas about it. But any command that takes the time to set up such an instruction ought to take time to organize an effective counselling and interviewing procedure, avoiding as interviewers those who are hardened and bitter about marriage. Where possible, the chaplain should also interview the prospective bride and arrange to see the couple further. When that is not possible, he can refer them to a pastor of their own choosing, if that is what they wish.
There are distinct advantages to this plan. A man is forced to consider seriously not only his plans but his motives for marrying. The division officer is forced to know his men even more personally. If the approach taken is non- legalistic and more positive in its intent to aid our men, then it will go a long way toward helping them make intelligent choices.
This plan means, certainly, a lot of time and potential hard work for people already under pressure. But if we are to retain our men and build a Navy of dedicated people, we shall have to come down to the basic fact that it is not machines and numbers that make up the Navy, but people. Their interests must be our interests and their concerns our concerns. For without good leadership, their problems become our serious problems. When the non-rated, first enlistment man marries, from that day forward we inherit all that he is and ever will be while his contract with the government is in force.
Is it possible, then, to avoid inheriting only the sickness, the poor, and the worst of the marriage vow? With command interest, support and action, it most assuredly is possible.