I was a JAG in the military back in the 80s. Even then the military knew about the individual soldier that was great in battle but didn’t do civilian life so well.
I am not a fan of pschycobabble. So, I say it is a matter of right and wrong. He is responsible for conducting himself in an appropriate manner and as an adult is charged with know thing the difference between right and wrong. He is not the center of any universe. He has a brain and he has a soul and he better grow up fast. Life is full of hard things and disappointments. Life is unfair. You conduct yourself appropriately. And especially in the military. When I was in the military, the culture was such that you didn’t offer up excuses for wrongfulness, you said I was wrong, no excuse.
You’re absolutely correct. this generation has a cultural affliction in excusing bad behavior by making up addictions and disorders. Clinton has a sex addiction, that guy has a beating-his-wife addiction, that lady has a PMS disorder that made her kill all her kids in the bathtub...
Seems we’ve forgotten how to blame a person correctly when they do wrong. Going back to the older mentality of forcefully rejecting bad behavior actually cures/prevents that bad behavior. If I could blame it on my “addiction” or “syndrome”, then it’s not my fault, right? And then I could just let myself lose control... Well, that’s too easy.
Real men and women need to use logic and overcome those emotions that would end up getting them in bad trouble, even if it does feel good to lose it once in awhile. It is all about self-control.
Hmmm...a JAG lawyer.Excellent! First,I know nothing about military justice,never even having had even an Article 15 brought against me.Please tell me...how are JAG offices run? Are there JAG officers who exclusively do prosecutions while others exclusively do defense? Or do you switch around? Do JAG officers volunteer to do a particular case or are they assigned,as one would be assigned to guard duty? Did you ever defend a Soldier,Sailor,Airman or Marine in a CM? I ask these things to return to my earlier question to you.Your "client",accused of murder,has a documented brain injury,sustained in the line of duty.It's been noted by many (including medical personnel) that he hasn't been the same since that injury.Do you,his military counsel,hold him morally and legally responsible for having failed to conduct himself in an appropriate manner or do you explore,in depth,the nature and extent of his injury as well as how such an injury is known to adversely affect an individual..with the thought of possibly presenting your findings to the panel?