Warning: mysqli_num_fields() expects parameter 1 to be mysqli_result, boolean given in /home/ucmjdef1/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 3283

The Old Army Policy

courtmartialdefenselawyer256Previous AR 600-20 (30 Mar 88), para 4-14. Two Part Analysis: Improper Superior-Subordinate Relationships & Fraternization (ISSRFRT)

  1. Part One: “Army policy does not hold dating or most other relationships betweensoldiers (sic) [of different ranks] as improper, barring the adverse effects listed in AR 600-20.” Old DA Pam 600-35, Para. 1-5(e). Therefore, Army policy did not prohibit dating (even between officers and enlisted Soldiers), per se .
  2. Part Two:a. “Relationships between soldiers (sic) of different rank that involve, or give the appearance of, partiality, preferential treatment, or the improper use of rank or position for personal gain, are prejudicial to good order, discipline, and high unit morale. It is Army policy that such relationships will be avoided.” Old AR 600-20, paragraph 4-14. b. Commanders and supervisors will counsel those involved or take other action, as appropriate, if relationships between soldiers (sic) of different rank
    1. Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.
    2. Involve the improper use of rank or position for personal gain.
    3. Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority or morale.Old AR 600-20, para 4-14a. Old AR 600-20 was not a punitive regulation. The revised paragraphs ARE PUNITIVE.

Army Policy

Part Two:a.