In Brief

Staff Reports

DADT Discharges Still Discriminate- Trio Of U. S. Senators Ask DOD To Fix Problem 
WASHINGTON -- In a letter Tuesday to Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta, U.S.Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Joe Lieberman (I-CT),and Mark Udall (D-CO) asked the Secretary to use his authority to streamline the process for those discharged under the repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) law in order to expedite discharge paperwork changes and upgrades. 

The Senators are asking DOD for a streamlined process for military veterans discharged under DADT with honorable or general discharges and whom are seeking changes to their narrative reason for discharge and their reentry code. The letter requests that the DOD clarify that the discharge review boards correct discharge paperwork upon receipt of a basic DD Form 293 application, provided that the board can then obtain the veteran’s paperwork, including the DD Form 214 and service record. It calls on the Defence Department to further clarify that, where there are no aggravating factors found in the service member’s record, the presumption should be in favor of correction. 

"For many, making changes to discharge paperwork is a matter of dignity and restoring honor to their patriotic service in our armed forces. For others, it's about qualifying for long overdue veteran's benefits. But for others, a discharge from the military for sexual orientation can be a barrier to employment and requires veterans to 'out' themselves to future employers. It's time to expedite this process to ensure that this discriminatory law doesn't do further damage to our veterans and their families," said Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) Executive Director Aubrey Sarvis, who is also a Army veteran. 

Since the repeal of DADT in September 2011, the Department of Defense has issued guidance regarding how to handle applications by veterans separated on the basis of their sexual orientation who want to have their discharge paperwork changed. The guidance expands who is eligible to apply to have their documents reviewed and provides specifics on how these documents may be changed. However, for a variety of reasons, each of these must be handled one by one. 

This past January the SLDN unveiled an online toolkit designed to help LGBT veterans who were discharged for sexual orientation and wish to make changes or upgrades to their discharge paperwork. Since then, SLDN has helped more than 150 LGBT veterans seeking to make these changes. 

Editor's Note: To view the toolkit or request assistance, click here.

Full text of the letter:


The Honorable Leon E. Panetta
Secretary of Defense 
United States Department of Defense 
1000 Defense Pentagon 
Washington, DC 20301

Dear Secretary Panetta,

When the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) took effect on September 20, 2011, then-Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Dr. Clifford Stanley issued a memorandum providing guidance to the military services regarding applications from veterans separated on the basis of their sexual orientation seeking changes to their discharge paperwork. The memorandum made clear that Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) “should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for a discharge…[and that] requests to re-characterize the discharge to honorable and/or requests to change reentry codes to an immediately-eligible-to-reenter category” should be granted when the original discharge was based solely on DADT and there “were no aggravating factors in the record, such as misconduct.” The guidance goes on to say that while “each request must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis,” having “an honorable or general discharge should normally…indicate the absence of aggravating factors.

While this guidance was an important step in the right direction, it is insufficient for the vast majority of veterans discharged under DADT. The current process is protracted and overly burdensome for veterans who—according to Dr. Stanley’s guidance—should be entitled to have their discharge documents corrected. Our understanding is that many veterans who meet the criteria outlined above must first gather their service-related paperwork, which many veterans do not possess. The veteran must then file an application with the supporting documentation to overcome the presumption of the DRB that the discharge was proper. To accomplish this, the veteran must argue that the discharge should be changed according to the standards of “propriety” or “equity,” per DRB regulations. Only after overcoming this presumption will the DRB change the discharge paperwork.

We understand that changing discharge paperwork is not a small matter and that in most cases, a careful case-by-case evaluation is warranted. But as long as a former service member’s Narrative Reason for a discharge is “Homosexual Conduct,” “Homosexual Act” or “Homosexual Marriage,” that service member is compelled to be “out” to any future civilian employer and anyone else who sees the document. Likewise, the negative reentry code serves as a barrier to employment opportunities.

Therefore, the process should be streamlined for those veterans discharged under DADT who have honorable or general discharges and only seek changes to their narrative reason for discharge and their reentry code. We thus respectfully request that the Department clarify that DRBs shall correct discharge paperwork upon receipt of a basic DD Form 293 application, provided that the DRB can then obtain the veteran’s DD Form 214 and service record. The Department should further clarify that, where there are no aggravating factors in the service member’s record, the presumption should be in favor of correction.

Veterans who were discharged under DADT should not be compelled to carry with them a narrative reason for separation that indicates their sexual orientation to anyone who sees their discharge document. In order to begin to put the regrettable policy of DADT fully behind us, the process of getting these documents corrected needs to be accessible and achievable for all. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Tennessee Lawmaker Says Bullying Is Because Of Bad Parenting

State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby)

NASHVILLE, TN -- Republican representative Jeremy Faison created a controversy on the house floor Tuesday during a debate over a proposed cyberbullying bill, HB 2641. In his remarks he told his fellow lawmakers that failure to instill proper values by parents in the victims of bullying is what leads young people to commit suicide.

“We can’t continue to legislate everything. We’ve had some horrible things happen in America and in our state, and there’s children that have actually committed suicide, but I will submit to you today that they did not commit suicide because of somebody bullying them. They committed suicide because they were not instilled the proper principles of where their self-esteem came from at home,” Faison said. 

A spokesperson for the Tennessee Democratic Party immediately reacted to Representative Faison's comments on the TDP's website writing:

"Faison is apparently blaming the parents of suicide victims for their inability to “instill the proper principles” in their children. What a disgrace. Now, of course a tall and burly Faison doesn’t see any problems with bullying, as he admitted, he was perfectly capable of defending himself or dishing out punishment as he saw fit. But many kids don’t have that ability. That is why laws like these need to be passed.  

It is unfortunate that some in the Republican Party have become the protectors of bullies. Of course, it is not terribly surprising, because as a legislative group they are nothing but bullies, disparaging and demeaning those without power in this country in order to build themselves up. So it is no wonder that they would see no big deal with the problems associated with childhood bullying in this country, and become the defenders of harassment."

A source in the offices of Tennessee House Speaker, Republican State Representative Beth Harwell, told LGBTQNation that Faison may have been referring to the recent suicides by Phillip Parker and Jacob Rogers, both of whom had allegedly complained of being bullied over their sexual orientation.
Late Wednesday evening Faison issued a statement saying that he regretted the choice of words and that his opposition to cyberbullying legislation is rooted in a belief that lawmakers should not criminalise childhood bullying.

“After reviewing my comments on the House Floor today, I regret what was a poor choice of words. My true intent was to protect children from becoming criminals. Suicide has touched my family, and I would never want a parent or family member to feel they were responsible for such an unimaginable tragedy.” 

Tennessee’s controversial “Don’t Say Gay” bill was approved by a state House committee last week on Tuesday. The Tennessee state House Education Committee approved the legislation by a vote of 8-7. The measure had initially failed on a voice vote, but passed in a roll call vote requested by its sponsor. The proposed legislation would restrict all sexually related instruction in the state’s schools to “natural human reproduction science” in grades kindergarten through eighth.