Report: DADT repeal no overall negative impact on the militaryOnline Only, Top Highlights Monday, September 17th, 2012
LOS ANGELES – The first academic study of the effects of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) has found that the new policy of open service has had no overall negative impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, recruitment, retention or morale.
The University Of California Los Angeles Palm Center released the study, the first academic study of its kind, last week.
Co-authors of the study include professors at the U.S. Military Academy, U.S. Naval Academy, U.S. Air Force Academy, and U.S. Marine Corps War College.
DADT was repealed Sept. 20, 2011. At the time there were warnings that repeal would have a negative impact on the military. A March 2009 statement signed by 1,167 retired admirals and generals stated, “Repeal… would undermine recruiting and retention, impact leadership at all levels, have adverse effects on the willingness of parents who lend their sons and daughters to military service, and eventually break the All-Volunteer Force.”
Recently, LGBT weekly.com reported that at a recent Press Club luncheon, Marine Commandant General James Amos said the repeal had gone smoothly: “I don’t think there is a problem,” said General Amos. “I don’t see it. I don’t hear about it.”
The report found that, “Even in those units that included openly LGB service members, and that consequently should have been the most likely to experience a drop in cohesion as a result of repeal, cohesion did not decline after the new policy of open service was put into place. In fact, greater openness and honesty resulting from repeal seem to have promoted increasedunderstanding, respect and acceptance.”
One of the authors of the report, Professor Tammy S. Schultz, Ph.D, U.S. Marine Corps War College said, “I just have so much respect for members of the armed services and would never have wanted to hurt someone,” she said. “The fact that we didn’t find that, personally I felt relief that I was right, honestly.”
Short URL: http://lgbtweekly.com/?p=29022