Doctor refuses to serve after Military education

**Midnight Mike** · 2008-01-16, 08:03 PM

Hey Mel, check this one out! Ya think maybe this gal deserves an arse whooping :?:

BOSTON - A federal appeals court has upheld a judge’s ruling that the Army was wrong to deny a Massachusetts doctor’s application for conscientious objector status.

Doctor Mary Hanna had agreed to serve four years on active duty and another four years in the reserve after the Army paid $184,000 for her to attend Tufts University School of Medicine.

But Hanna — a 31-year-old anesthesiologist — argued that her religious beliefs had since changed and she could not in good conscience participate in war. She went to court after her application for conscientious objector status was denied last September by an Army review board, which last September.

Judge Nancy Gertner overruled the decision and ordered Hanna discharged.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld Gertner’s ruling Wednesday by a 2-1 vote.

**wunaladreamin** · 2008-01-16, 08:19 PM

What a disgrace.

**adam613** · 2008-01-16, 08:27 PM

WTF?

Why was a civilian court able to make a decision about someone's military status? And can't the Army make her pay back the money if she refuses to serve?

**PhilDernerJr** · 2008-01-16, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by adam613

Why was a civilian court able to make a decision about someone's military status? And can't the Army make her pay back the money if she refuses to serve?

Well said. Unbelievable.

**mirrodie** · 2008-01-16, 10:38 PM

Its simple. She entered into a contract with the military. She owes the government that money back. Simply restitution.

Nice judge. She gave the Dr. the right to anally rape the US Army and send it in dry.

**cancidas** · 2008-01-16, 11:32 PM

they should let her practice... in GITMO.

**Tom_Turner** · 2008-01-17, 12:35 PM

I am not particularly worked up over this one. However, I feel it really does need to be "squared away"; meaning she should be paying back that money ASAP. On a strict accelerated schedule. Shouldn't be that much of a hardship if this is really a matter of principle. Its a real injustice otherwise.

Tom

**USAF Pilot 07** · 2008-01-17, 06:01 PM

What kind of upsets me about this is that she's a doctor, an anesthesiologist at that, not someone actively fighting people. The Army sent her to school to help people, not kill them, so I think the conscientious objector argument is very weak. Basically it sounds like she doesn't want to help people.

I think she just realizes that all her peers are making well over $100,000 (even though she would most likely be making over $100,000), are setting their own hours, not living in some of the armpits of America and enjoying their practices/lives. The grass is always greener on the other side. What she doesn't realize is that she doesn't have close to $200,000 in student loans to pay back and she has a guaranteed job, possibly working under some very stressful conditions, for the next 4 years. She'll probably get to the civilian sector and realize she now has all the debt to pay, and will realize that she's not as happy as she thought she would be.

If she doesn't want to serve, she should be forced to pay the Army back for the education received. And she should be forced to pay all the money back the day she is released from the Army. If she can't pay it in full, she should not be given any student loan rates, and should be forced to pay regular interest rates.