The Case Against College Deferments in a Reinstated Draft System
The introduction of a military draft, particularly in the context of a global conflict or national emergency, would necessitate a careful review of the criteria and processes for deferments. This includes examining which groups, such as college students, ought to benefit from deferred enlistment. The Vietnam War, for instance, highlighted a critical flaw in the draft system where individuals from lower economic backgrounds were disproportionately affected due to their inability to pursue full-time education.
The Historical Context
The Vietnam War, which began in the early 1960s and continued until 1975, is often remembered for its harsh realities, particularly the slogan "The poor man's war." Many young men from lower socioeconomic backgrounds were more likely to be drafted due to their lack of financial means to study in college full-time. This situation arose because the draft system was designed during a time when full-time college attendance was not necessary for deferment. As a result, those who were unable to maintain full-time student status were at higher risk of being drafted, while affluent and academically inclined students could secure deferments.
The Inequality in Draft Exemption
The inequality in draft exemptions highlights a moral and ethical dilemma. Individuals who were less fortunate or faced other personal circumstances that precluded them from attending college full-time were subjected to the draft, while those who could afford it or chose not to were given deferments. This is not a modern problem; it was a significant issue during the Vietnam era, where the lottery system combined with birth date and state of birth further exacerbated the divide.
Reinstating the Draft Today
If a military draft were to be reinstated, the system would need to evolve to address these historical injustices. One proposal is to give deferments to all college students to ensure that economic background and educational opportunities do not dictate who serves in the military. This approach would be equitable and reduce the potential for abuse of the deferment system, ensuring that both the economically disadvantaged and those pursuing higher education have a fair chance to serve their country.
Debate on Severe Disability as a Deferment Condition
A central point in any draft system is the concept of deferments for severe disabilities. While there is general agreement that individuals with severe medical conditions should be exempt from military service, the line between severe and not-severe can be blurry, especially in cases like bone spurs. Bone spurs, for example, are commonly treated and managed without requiring significant medical attention, thus disqualifying them as a severe disability. However, other conditions, such as severe mental health disorders, might warrant a deferment.
Real Life Example: Donald Trump's Military Service
The potential exemption from military service based on non-severe conditions has been highlighted through real-life examples. Notably, former President Donald Trump was exempted from military service due to a lumbar strain, which is not typically classified as a severe disability. This debate raises questions about the fairness and integrity of the deferment criteria, suggesting that there should be stricter medical standards for deferments.
Conclusion: Inclusion and Equity in Military Service
In concluding, the reinstatement of a military draft would require significant reforms to ensure fairness and equity. College students should be granted deferments to ensure that financial and educational opportunities do not influence who serves in the military. Additionally, the criteria for deferments based on severe disabilities should be rigorously defined to prevent abuse and ensure that only the most deserving cases are exempted. The lessons from the past should inform and guide these reforms to create a more just and equitable system.