G-1, Human Resources Policy Directorate
Supporting Soldiers, Families & Civilians – Active, Guard, Reserve and Retired
3 September 2008
The Army accepts a number of younger individuals who vary in their maturity, intellect, and social skills. As senior leadership, what more, if anything, can we do to create an environment wherein all Soldiers feel safe. Is this even a practical goal? After all, the civilian streets are dangerous places too. (for discussion).
We want Soldiers to be appropriately aggressive. What do you feel is the best way for the organization to respond to hazing, harassment, and assaults? Is the JAG the best office to deal with such events? Should there be some sort of incident reporting, or surveillance system, for Soldier on Soldier aggression? (for discussion).
How do we help Soldiers distinguish appropriate from inappropriate aggression? (for discussion)
Does the battle buddy system work? Why or why not? Are there solid data to support the battle buddy system? (for discussion)
Is there some practical way to identify “at-risk” individuals before they enlist? Would doing so reduce the suicide risk? Could such a system have secondary benefits? (Previous efforts to identify at-risk individuals have failed. However, psychological testing is much more sophisticated today and, with sufficient research, a relative risk value can be assigned to Soldiers, permitting more precise allocation of resources to those Soldiers needing them. There will always be some degree of error when making predictions, but there is a certain, probably larger degree of error in our current system. Secondary benefits in attrition reduction may also be seen.)
Scenario #12 – Deployed PFC
STRATEGIC QUESTIONS and ANSWERS: