So I went this week to get my dependent ID (J just joined the reserves). Anyway, I was taking my picture and saw a sign that said something like "we can't show pictures, so don't ask". So I was curious and asked the girl why they weren't allowed to show us the picture. Well I assumed they meant they can't show you YOUR picture when you take it. But it turns out, they mean they can't show you picture of you AND your dependents that they have on file, for privacy purposes...Hmm? I wondered, why privacy purposes? So she tells me, that it happens OFTEN, and has happened in the past when they used to allow people to see the pictures, where sailors will come in and get an ID for their new baby with their girlfriend so they can get benefits, and later the WIFE will come in to get an id or renewal and see that there is already a picture of ANOTHER dependent on file :wowsers. She said, they just don't want to have to deal with having to explain what that's all about, so they just don't let people see the pictures at all....

WOW, that is crazy, what's crazier is that it apparently happens OFTEN where a sailor is married and will come in later and get an ID for his new baby, from his girlfriend :oogle

:wowsers

Jeez, that is awful

:shock wow.

omg, i would so be kicking some ass!

OMG that's crazy!!!

Wow...amazing. I never even thought about that, though.

:wow

:freakout no way...that's crazy

Wow, that is insane

omg, i would so be kicking some ass!

We better form a line for that ass kicking to be more efficient :club

:wow That is crazy!!!

WHAT!!!!????? OMG, that is crazy!

WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
I HATE when they used to ask me if I am my DH's first wife. UM....Yes I FREAKIN AM!!!!!!!! :reallymad :kungfu I never saw the point to it!



This thread should be an FYI to folks to make sure the # of dependents is correct on the LES!!! ;)

apparently im the only lost one....

im gana read it again and see if im just reading it funny haha

apparently im the only lost one....

im gana read it again and see if im just reading it funny haha

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why are you lost?!?! LMAO!!!

WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
I HATE when they used to ask me if I am my DH's first wife. UM....Yes I FREAKIN AM!!!!!!!! :reallymad :kungfu I never saw the point to it!



This thread should be an FYI to folks to make sure the # of dependents is correct on the LES!!! ;)

Yea no kidding! LOL make sure that's really a 1 and not a 10 under depedents :teehee

Yea no kidding! LOL make sure that's really a 1 and not a 10 under depedents :teehee

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!! YUP!!!!! :lmao

Well honey, didn't you know I adopted a whole Ethiopian village?!?!?! Bet you do now!!!!! :rofl

Wow Scandalous!!!!

WoW, after what happend this weekend, I am not amazed!

My DH and his battle buddies tell me a little more than I want to hear!

But I am not amazed anymore, so I agree when they say "check your LES & everything else!"

Beware!

:wowsers Wow,is all I can say!

You know, I might be in the minority here, but I'm not all that shocked.. With as permissive as the Navy's getting with things, it happens quite often. There have been incidents with married guys fathering babies outside their marriages(and getting them benefits) at DH's last 3 commands..

holy crap! wow

Doesn't the Navy/military require a DNA testing. I have a 2nd cousin who had a girl come from the Philippines about 10 years ago saying her 7 year old daughter was his. Before she could gain any help from the Marines, she had to submit to a DNA testing for her daughter. He was/is the father and the girl is now about 17......he has no contact with her at all......yet he was ordered to garnish wages for support AND the girl got medical benefits until he got out of the Marines. I thought they were very strict with this stuff....like they can't just walk in and put any child on deers :dunno

I'm just saying:P

Wow I had no idea that that happened! lol! dang! That sucks!

Doesn't the Navy/military require a DNA testing. I have a 2nd cousin who had a girl come from the Philippines about 10 years ago saying her 7 year old daughter was his. Before she could gain any help from the Marines, she had to submit to a DNA testing for her daughter. He was/is the father and the girl is now about 17......he has no contact with her at all......yet he was ordered to garnish wages for support AND the girl got medical benefits until he got out of the Marines. I thought they were very strict with this stuff....like they can't just walk in and put any child on deers :dunno

I'm just saying:P

For most cases, as long at the father is listed on the birth certificate, then no DNA testing is required.

In that case, HE probably kept denying his daughter. :dunno So maybe his command required it, in order to help the baby's momma out. kwim?!

:wow that is so sad!

For most cases, as long at the father is listed on the birth certificate, then no DNA testing is required.

In that case, HE probably kept denying his daughter. :dunno So maybe his command required it, in order to help the baby's momma out. kwim?!


Oh yeah he denied it like crazy! The funny thing is he never wanted kids (does NOT like them) and has to this day stayed "child free". He wants nothing (and I mean nothing) to do with his daughter.

but thanks for the explanation........I'm now sort of shocked that all it takes is a BC with a name and nothing more to get children enrolled in deers:whatever

Oh yeah he denied it like crazy! The funny thing is he never wanted kids (does NOT like them) and has to this day stayed "child free". He wants nothing (and I mean nothing) to do with his daughter.

but thanks for the explanation........I'm now sort of shocked that all it takes is a BC with a name and nothing more to get children enrolled in deers:whatever

Yeppers! So you can only imagine the amount of insurance fraud going on in the military, oblivious or not!!! :scared

We better form a line for that ass kicking to be more efficient :club

I think "angry mob" would probably work better! :ticked:kungfu:fight:shakefist:angrywife:madwife:smackup:shoot:flamethrow:boxing:spank:cage

wow

holy crap:S

OMG Thats crazy but I guess I can see that happening. But its still wow.

Wow thats crazy

That kind of stuff happens all the while.....even outside of the military.


Be careful ladies. Always stay on your toes. Some of these men are wolves in sheeps clothing :yes

WOW.. Thats just crazy!! You would think the Military would be on top of this! Thats insane!

:wow

That is so crazy, but it doesnt surprise me. They dont want to have to put up with all the drama that some men cause, and i understand.

It sucks, but I can understand why they do it. I wouldn't want to be the one on the other side of the desk if I happened to be the wife, waltzing in finding out my DH had a mistress with a child. It's not up to the pass & ID guys to break THAT news to me :madwife

We better form a line for that ass kicking to be more efficient :club

:lol

You can just look on his LES form...so whats the big deal lol

You can just look on his LES form...so whats the big deal lol

Because maybe people don't check their SO's LES or have access to it....

Which is why this thread should serve as an FYI!

:arg

how can they get an id for a baby though if it's not from their wife? hmm...
i think that would be hard to find...
that's crazy though

aren't there repercussions if the military man has an affair? I don't see how they could get away with it, especially if they go in and REGISTER their illegitimate child.

You can just look on his LES form...

Where on there would it say that? Cuz the only thing I can find on DH's is the dental allotment and getting BAQ at the dependant rate and the dependant box says spouse. No where on there can I find anything that even includes a number that would account for DD. And she's enrolled in DEERS and her info is at the ID office. And DH was authorized to move here with 2 dependants (me and DD), so she's in the system.

aren't there repercussions if the military man has an affair? I don't see how they could get away with it, especially if they go in and REGISTER their illegitimate child.

the child is still a dependent though. I don't think it matters who the mother is.

i went to the WIC office and the lady told me that she had a couple come in and they were going through the applicatipn process and they asked if she was his first wife. well it turned out that she was actually his 3rd or 4th wife and she didnt know anything about the others...

aren't there repercussions if the military man has an affair? I don't see how they could get away with it, especially if they go in and REGISTER their illegitimate child.

How many women stay with men even after they have affairs? How many women refuse to leave their man...insist on standing by his side through thick and thin? So really...it's of no consequence to the guy sitting behind the desk. He shouldn't have to deal with it - not in his job description.

Where on there would it say that? Cuz the only thing I can find on DH's is the dental allotment and getting BAQ at the dependant rate and the dependant box says spouse. No where on there can I find anything that even includes a number that would account for DD. And she's enrolled in DEERS and her info is at the ID office. And DH was authorized to move here with 2 dependants (me and DD), so she's in the system.

Yeah, I've never seen a number either.....just something like (w/dep)

I don't think there is a number anywhere really:dunno

How many women stay with men even after they have affairs? How many women refuse to leave their man...insist on standing by his side through thick and thin? So really...it's of no consequence to the guy sitting behind the desk. He shouldn't have to deal with it - not in his job description.
but i think it is part of their job to report it.... its against the ucmj...or at least thats what i was told

:wow That does seem real crazy

but i think it is part of their job to report it.... its against the ucmj...or at least thats what i was told

Yeah, I agree. I mean what kind of A-hole wouldn't report it and then just turn blinds eye to a MARRIED member enrolling a GF's baby:no

IMO they would be just as lousy a person.....even though it's "not their job"

I don't even want to think about this ever happening.

:pray

cause if it did?

:ticked

Elements.
(1) That the accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person;
(2) That, at the time, the accused or the other person was married to someone else; and
(3) 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.
Explanation.
(1) Nature of offense. Adultery is clearly unacceptable conduct, and it reflects adversely on the service record of the military member.
(2) Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. To constitute an offense under the UCMJ, the adulterous conduct must either be directly prejudicial to good order and discipline or service discrediting. Adulterous conduct that is directly prejudicial includes conduct that has an obvious, and measurably divisive effect on unit or organization discipline, morale, or cohesion, or is clearly detrimental to the authority or stature of or respect toward a servicemember. Adultery may also be service discrediting, even though the conduct is only indirectly or remotely prejudicial to good order and discipline. Discredit means to injure the reputation of the armed forces and includes adulterous conduct that has a tendency, because of its open or notorious nature, to bring the service into disrepute, make it subject to public ridicule, or lower it in public esteem. While adulterous conduct that is private and discreet in nature may not be service discrediting by this standard, under the circumstances, it may be determined to be conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. Commanders should consider all relevant circumstances, including but not limited to the following factors, when determining whether adulterous acts are prejudicial to good order and discipline or are of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces:

(a) The accused's marital status, military rank, grade, or position;
(b) The co-actor's marital status, military rank, grade, and position, or relationship to the armed forces;
(c) The military status of the accused's spouse or the spouse of co-actor, or their relationship to the armed forces;
(d) The impact, if any, of the adulterous relationship on the ability of the accused, the co-actor, or the spouse of either to perform their duties in support of the armed forces;
(e) The misuse, if any, of government time and resources to facilitate the commission of the conduct;
(f) Whether the conduct persisted despite counseling or orders to desist; the flagrancy of the conduct, such as whether any notoriety ensued; and whether the adulterous act was accompanied by other violations of the UCMJ;
(g) The negative impact of the conduct on the units or organizations of the accused, the co-actor or the spouse of either of them, such as a detrimental effect on unit or organization morale, teamwork, and efficiency;
(h) Whether the accused or co-actor was legally separated; and (i) Whether the adulterous misconduct involves an ongoing or recent relationship or is remote in time.

(3) Marriage. A marriage exists until it is dissolved in accordance with the laws of a competent state or foreign jurisdiction.
(4) Mistake of fact. A defense of mistake of fact exists if the accused had an honest and reasonable belief either that the accused and the co-actor were both unmarried, or that they were lawfully married to each other. If this defense is raised by the evidence, then the burden of proof is upon the United States to establish that the accused's belief was unreasonable or not honest.".
Lesser included offense.
Article 80 (http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl80.htm)—attempts
Maximum punishment. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year to me, the part in red sound like enrolling a love child would be illegal

You know, I might be in the minority here, but I'm not all that shocked.. With as permissive as the Navy's getting with things, it happens quite often. There have been incidents with married guys fathering babies outside their marriages(and getting them benefits) at DH's last 3 commands..

Yep! Dh used to have a friend who we all thought was divorced and fathered a baby with girlfriend, well then come to find out not divorced at all, seperated but still booty called with the wife, while living with girlfriend! :vent Biggest reason he is no longer friend. Dh has little respect for crap like that. Another shocker (well maybe not so much), there were a couple of guys at the last command who wouldn't tell their wives when the ship pulled in early, they'd come home on the original pull in date and go home like everything was great. One wife started attending FSG meetings and heard us talking about hubby's being home, I felt bad for her finding out that way. After that the Ombudsman started sending out emails the morning the ship was to pull-in, if it was pulling earlier than expected, a few more hubby's got busted, that way. :dunno

Well the girl behind the desk was pretty non-chalant about it. She was kind of joking about it, didn't seem like she thought it was that big of a thing to her. So I doubt they get involved in anyway if that happens. From the way she was talking, she was saying noone there wanted to get involved in the sailor's lives, it was up to them to deal with it. But I do wonder if they report it to their command, who knows.

You can just look on his LES form...so whats the big deal lol

True, except I have known wives who had no clue how to log onto my pay, because they did not have his username or pass word. They didn't have a POA either, so the couldn't even go to dispersing on base. One of the wives at our old command, her hubby deployed and didn't even get her ID before he left. Our ombudsman had to contact the command for the proper form and one of the other wives took her on base to get her ID so she could at least access medical treatment. Her dh kept her very cut off from the military side of his life. :suspect

:yes Another one is when a subsequent wife goes to an MTF and finds out that she isn't a 01/123-45-6789, she is a 06/123-45-6789 :eek I was one of those wives too. Except I am just a 03, THANK GOD! I couldn't deal with anymore ex's. Two is plenty!

I thought on the LES the # of dependants was for tax withholding. My husbands said 0 until I changed it online to 5 so we wouldn't get such a huge refund every year. He doesn't have 0 or 5 dependants. ;)

holy shit, that is disturbing.. here's my question ?? i have called about our benefits before through the DMB or DMP or someone before and they ask me to list all the dependents on file. i guess that it is possible they would probably find out anyways.... crazy though.

I think an ass kicking is right, i think the wife should have every right to see the pic...
she deserves to know the ass is living a double life.....

It sucks, but I can understand why they do it. I wouldn't want to be the one on the other side of the desk if I happened to be the wife, waltzing in finding out my DH had a mistress with a child. It's not up to the pass & ID guys to break THAT news to me :madwife

Exactly!!! That would make for one crazy day at work!

:wowsersWOW, I have no comment for that.

Jeez, that is awful

Thats all I can say too!

Well, according to my Marine, he could have been in serious trouble with the Corps had his now ex-wife gone to them and filed a complaint that he had cheated on her..... I believe loss of rank/pay was one of many punishments for adultery.... not sure if that was his squadron, or the Corps on that one though.....

Damn.... I'm STILL in shock over this one.... holy bejeezus.....

:yes Another one is when a subsequent wife goes to an MTF and finds out that she isn't a 01/123-45-6789, she is a 06/123-45-6789 :eek I was one of those wives too. Except I am just a 03, THANK GOD! I couldn't deal with anymore ex's. Two is plenty!

lol me too!

wow that makes me feel sick inside.

CRAZY. juuuuuust CRAZY.

wow, thats crazy

I thought on the LES the # of dependants was for tax withholding. My husbands said 0 until I changed it online to 5 so we wouldn't get such a huge refund every year. He doesn't have 0 or 5 dependants. ;)

You can't just change the number of dependants just on a whim you have to be truthful with that information. If you are changing it and it's inaccurate then you are commiting a federal crime!

Where on the LES does it say how many dependents they have?
All I see on my DH's (and no, I am not suspicious about him having any other children or anything) is the BAH rate it says "with dependents" but not how many.

You can't just change the number of dependants just on a whim you have to be truthful with that information. If you are changing it and it's inaccurate then you are commiting a federal crime!

Well if thats a crime I know alot of criminals. I know alot of couples who changed their dependents to get back more in their paycheck. DH always puts 0 though.

Where on the LES does it say how many dependents they have?
All I see on my DH's (and no, I am not suspicious about him having any other children or anything) is the BAH rate it says "with dependents" but not how many.

Yea there is no number, lol...I just looked at DH's.

You can't just change the number of dependants just on a whim you have to be truthful with that information. If you are changing it and it's inaccurate then you are commiting a federal crime!

I didn't know that. DH has always had single on his so we're less likely to end up owing taxes. I don't see what the big deal. The IRS gets their money come tax time when u file ur taxes. And since we claim 0 on his LES but he actually has me and DD, they get to use more of our money interest free throughout the year until they have to give it back come tax time. I know lots of people who don't claim what they actually have cuz it all works out at tax time. I'm sure between the people who claim single and who claim more dependants than they have just for paychecks evens things out and then everything is put the way it's supposed to be come tax time.

Yeah I didn't think it mattered how many dependants you claim for tax purposes......and I certainly didn't think it was illegal:dunno

And yeah the LES doesn't ever show an actual number of dependants.....just (w/dep)

Doesn't shock me one bit. I know about all sorts of lies the guys tell their SO's. Dh is always telling me not to say this or that to the SO's or to not teach them this or that. Unless directly asked by the SO, I'm not about to go telling. But that doesn't mean I haven't said something to the Sailor about their actions and how they shouldn't lie.

:wow

Oh and you are correct, the LES doesn't say how many dep just if you are w/dep or wo/dep. His actual military file should have something in it regarding all dep. I know DH's has his marriage lic. from his previous marriage, the divorce papers, our marriage lic. and our DD's birth cert in it.