Question about fraternization

[fathom]

I have two friends in the Marine Corp right now. One is well on his way to becoming an officer and the other plans on finishing college but does not plan on becoming an officer. These guys are great friends. They've been friends for years. They only time they speak of the fraternization rule is when one jokes about eventually having to salute the other. How is this rule enforced. If I had them both over for lets say a bbq one of them a 2nd Lt. and the other a Sgt. would they still be able to hold the same demeanor with each other as they do now?

[Camper51]

Yes they can still be friends at your BBQ, however in a military context you would not find them going out drinking and partying together. However they could conceivably be invited over to each others quarters on occasion for social visits, like the occasional dinner gathering. Most likely they would not be serving in the same unit as that might cause problems (favoritism, etc...)

[Echo_Four_Bravo]

At the end of my enlistment a good friend of mine showed up on base wearing bars. We would speak to one another from time to time when we saw one another on base and spent a couple of holidays together right before I got out. The only time someone said anything, it became a nonissue when we explained that we had gone to school with one another from sixth grade through sophomore year of college when I enlisted.

[Marine84]

And it doesn't only happen between you guys either..................

[Phantom Blooper]

When Does Friendship Become a Crime?


Fraternization is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It falls under a subparagraph of Article 134, and is defined by the Manual For Courts-martial (MCM). According to the MCM, the "elements of proof" for the offense of fraternization are:

• 
  (1) That the accused was a commissioned or warrant officer;
  (2) That the accused fraternized on terms of military equality with one or more certain enlisted member(s) in a certain manner;
  (3) That the accused then knew the person(s) to be (an) enlisted member(s);
  (4) That such fraternization violated the custom of the accused's service that officers shall not fraternize with enlisted members on terms of military equality; and (5) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
• The MCM goes on to offer further explanation of the offense:
• 
  In general. The gist of this offense is a violation of the custom of the armed forces against fraternization. Not all contact or association between officers and enlisted persons is an offense. Whether the contact or association in question is an offense depends on the surrounding circumstances. Factors to be considered include whether the conduct has compromised the chain of command, resulted in the appearance of partiality, or otherwise undermined good order, discipline, authority, or morale. The acts and circumstances must be such as to lead a reasonable person experienced in the problems of military leadership to conclude that the good order and discipline of the armed forces has been prejudiced by their tendency to compromise the respect of enlisted persons for the professionalism, integrity, and obligations of an officer. Regulations. Regulations, directives, and orders may also govern conduct between officer and enlisted personnel on both a service-wide and a local basis. Relationships between enlisted persons of different ranks, or between officers of different ranks may be similarly covered. Violations of such regulations, directives, or orders may be punishable under Article 92.

Unfortunately, there were a couple of problems using the UCMJ/MCM as a basis of charges. First and foremost, the UCMJ/MCM only makes fraternization a crime for commissioned and warrant officers. Under the provisions of article 134, enlisted members could not be charged with this crime. While they could be charged under service regulations, each of the services had different and wide-ranging policies and definitions as to what constituted an "inappropriate relationship." Additionally, the explanation of what is and is not allowed is not specifically spelled out in the MCM/UCMJ.
In July 1998, Defense Secretary William Cohen directed the services to "adopt uniform, clear and readily understandable" fraternization policies. Cohen stated that the current separate policies were "corrosive to morale particularly as we move toward an increasingly joint environment."
The services submitted policy changes to Cohen that he approved Feb. 3, 1999. All of the new policies have been implemented in the respective service regulations. Now, while each of the services still have individual policies, they all share common standards with respect to relationships between officers and enlisted personnel, recruiters and potential recruits and trainers and trainees.
The Army fraternization policy required many changes and the most toughening. Navy and Air Force policies required little change. Marine Corps policy required no change.
All the services prohibit personal and business relationships between officers and enlisted members, calling them prejudicial to good order and discipline. Personal relationships include dating, cohabitation and any sexual relationship. Business relationships include loaning and borrowing money and business partnerships.
Following is a breakdown of the individual service policies, including each service's definition of fraternization and examples of prohibited relationships.

[fathom]

Thanks

[300]

So basically, an NCO and date a Troop, as long as theirs no problems, correct?

[Zulu 36]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 300 So basically, an NCO and date a Troop, as long as theirs no problems, correct?

Troop is an Army term. You mean a non-rate or a junior Marine.

Dating ALWAYS causes problems, sooner or later.

[300]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zulu 36 Troop is an Army term. You mean a non-rate or a junior Marine. Dating ALWAYS causes problems, sooner or later.

Excuse my insult. But according to fratenization, there would be no problem?

[Zulu 36]

My first CO in the Air Guard refused to attend the Officer's Club. He preferred to do his drinking with the NCOs at our club. He also refused to pay his O'Club dues (required). He was a damned good boss, so the senior NCOs usually chipped in to cover his dues and keep the general off his back (also the general liked security police and we wanted to keep it that way). We got it back from the boss eventually at the NCO Club. After five or six Black Russians, he could be easily talked into buying more than his share of rounds.

Most of the other officers were scared of him anyway. He was a civilian police chief and had once killed an armed subject with a butt stroke from a shotgun. He was big and could be very intimidating. The other officers wanted the general to run him up on fraternizing charges, but the general refused to allow it.

[Sgt D]

[quote=Zulu 36]Troop is an Army term. You mean a non-rate or a junior Marine.

or boot.

[chili77bowl]

yeah, i agree with Sgt D...I like boot myself...or F***Tard...

[bsktbll2006]

so if a pfc and a pfc are friends, then one gets CPL and the other stays a PFC. is that Fraternization if you knew eachother before achieving the rank?

[giveen]

Wow, you skipped a rank there Whatever happened to that Pfc getting LCpl?

I haved several friends who were LCpl's when I made Cpl. They and I had to learn the balance of respecting the fact that we are always Marines, even out of uniform, that I do get that respect as an NCO ....BUT I also needed to remember these are my friends and I should treat them as such.

My friends knew when I was just being friends and when I was acting as their NCO.

[bsktbll2006]

ok i know all of that. i want to know if in the order is it still fraternization. so is it still considered fraternization if you hang out?