Author:

Publisher: Jeffrey Frank Jones

Published: 2019-03-05

Total Pages: 164

ISBN-13:

CONTENTS: Executive Summary on Hazing in the Military Hazing: A Military Study In the Military: A Pilot Study Perceptions of Hazing and Bullying among U.S. Military Service Members The Shift from Acceptance to Prevention Background Hazing in the military began as a celebration of accomplishments and strengthening of unit bonds. However, it has in some cases transformed through time into degrading and demeaning acts with the potential for deadly consequences. All services find acts of hazing punishable under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) law, yet, it still occurs. At the same time, it is important to note the distinctions between hazing and bullying (see Appendix A). Task: In January of 2012, the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) was tasked with the examination of hazing within the military. Definitions and the Current State of Military Hazing The concept of hazing within the military is unique. Hazing intermingles with other concepts, such as discrimination, racist behaviors, anti-locution (see Appendix J), bullying, and even acceptance, pride, and teamwork. The following conceptual areas outline these important attributes within hazing in the military. Historical and Current Events: Unfortunately, hazing is not a unique phenomenon, and often pervades most military branches and their specialty communities‘ cultures. The military Service branches currently lack a method to accurately gauge the prevalence of hazing behaviors. Still, the conventional wisdom maintains that many members engage in hazing behaviors (see Appendix B). Evidence of this is easily noted by searching the web or social media sites. Events such as what occurred at Aberdeen Proving Ground can be used to pave the way ahead and prevent similar events from happening. Definitions: All Services have defined hazing (see Appendix C). These definitions are followed by examples of specific hazing behaviors, the effects of hazing on the individual, and the potential ramifications for the Services if hazing is allowed to occur. Lacking Definition is Bullying: It is possible that what may be missing is a written distinction between bullying and hazing. The Department of Defense‘s (DoD) definition of hazing for example only includes hazing behaviors. The militaries of Canada and the UK have separate hazing and bullying policies. It is possible this may reduce the confusion and increase avenues for prosecution. Furthermore distinction may also serve to ensure many such acts are not seen and potentially excused as tradition or indoctrination. Distinguishing Bullying from Hazing: The terms bullying and hazing share some likeness; similar to the parallels between discrimination and bullying, the behaviors associated with hazing and bullying may be identical at times; however, bullying and hazing are distinct constructs. These differences are Not delineated in current policies are procedures. Based on the literature, what we may be witnessing with recent events may actually be act of bullying and not hazing. Policies/Programs Regarding Bullying: Currently there are no policies that address specifically bullying. In the UK and Canada there are policies and programs to prevent bullying Punishment of Hazing without Severe Consequences: The extent of prosecution of acts of hazing that do not result in death or destruction is unknown. Institutionalized hazing is known to occur and remains difficult to probe.