HOW WOULD YOU SUMMARIZE 2021?

Stéphanie Raymond, Veteran

Photo Credit: Stéphanie Raymond

Esprit de Corps Magazine January 2022 // Volume 28 Issue 12

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 34

By Military Woman

Question: 

How would you summarize 2021?

Answer:

Shocking? Painful? Eye-opening? Annus horribilis? Let’s look back.

January

14th – Gen Jonathan Vance hands over command of the CAF to Adm Art McDonald

17th – Vance’s end-of-career exit interview with Mercedes Stephenson, Global News, airs

February

2nd – Stephenson publicly reports on two sexual misconduct allegations against Vance

9th – Parliament starts one of two committee studies into the allegations against Vance

24th – McDonald steps aside as CDS after a sexual misconduct allegation is made against him

March

5th – LS (Retd) Marie-Claude “MC” Gagnon, founder of It’s Just 700 (IJ700), steps down after seven years of unsuccessfully advocating government to fund a peer support program for those impacted by military sexual trauma (MST)

11th – Fifth Estate airs allegations that the military chain of command can and does interfere with military sexual misconduct investigations

17th –  LCol Eleanor Taylor’s resignation from the military “in disgust” reported publicly

24th –  Operation Honour declared “culminated” and to be closed out

29th – VAdm Haydn Edmundson steps aside as Chief of Military Personnel (CMP) after a sexual misconduct allegation is made against him 

April

28th – MGen Peter Dawe  provided a registered sex offender character references

29th – Former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour asked to lead a sexual misconduct review

May

16th – Project Trauma Support medical director, and board chair, step down after acknowledging they knowingly selected a male registered sex offender (the same offender for whom Dawe had previously written character references for) to be a peer mentor for a female moral injury cohort

31st – Former Supreme Court Justice Morris Fish tables his military justice system report

June

2nd – Office of the Veterans Ombud reports that all veterans, regardless of the cause of their service-connected mental health conditions, should have equitable peer support program access 

14th – LGen Michael Rouleau resigns after socializing (a golf game) with Vance, who was still under investigation by military police (who report directly to LGen Rouleau)

22nd – IJ700 is initially replaced in function by It’s Not Just 700 (INJ700) prior to fully closing

July

2nd – US Independent Review Committee on Sexual Assault in the Military report released 

8th – Retired Canadian generals organize to bring Afghan interpreters to Canada quicker

15th – Vance charged with obstruction of justice – his trial is not expected until 2023

August

15th. – Kabul falls and Canada calls a federal election

18th – MGen Dany Fortin charged by Quebec prosecutors with sexual assault

25th – Canada’s last military flight out of Kabul, thousands of Afghans left (still) awaiting word on Canada’s approvals for their resettlement applications

September

11th – Nova Scotia’s Lionel Desmond’s Fatality Inquiry identifies unmet veteran care needs

20th – Federal election results in a repeat minority Liberal government

October

5th – Dawe removed from proposed new sexual misconduct related job after public outcry

13th – LGen Trevor Cadieu steps aside as proposed Canadian Army commander after a sexual misconduct allegation is made against him

15th – LGen Steven Whelan steps aside as CMP after a sexual misconduct allegation is made

November

10th – Former WO André Gagnon is sentenced by a civilian court to six months in prison for sexually assaulting MCpl (Retd) Stéphanie Raymond

24th – CAF/DND Sexual Misconduct Class Action officially closes with almost 19,000 claims submitted, over 40% of which are from men

December

7th – Edmundson, the CMP before Whelan, charged with sexual assault and indecent acts

Fortunately, there have also been some upsides to 2021.

In April, Lt (Retd) Christine Wood successfully led IJ700/INJ700 advocacy efforts to achieve Gagnon’s longstanding goal – dedicated military sexual trauma peer support program funding.

From July onwards, many Veterans have been organizing in support of Afghans in need. Well-earned shout-outs in particular for Veterans Transition Network, Aman Lara and the Ukrainian special operations folk. Bravo Zulu.  

Although it might seem logical to end this year in review with the federal government’s long awaited sexual misconduct apology on December 13th, we won’t.

Instead, our parting thoughts about 2021 will be to acknowledge MCpl (Retd) Stéphanie Raymond’s impact past and future.

It is Raymond’s 2011 military sexual assault case that pushed then CDS Gen Tom Lawson to order the Deschamps report, which led to Op Honour. Thanks in large part to her courage and perseverance over this last decade, many of us have cautious but genuine hope that 2022 will be better.

 Stéphanie, thank you for never giving up on your fight for justice.  Respect.

THOUGHTS AND HOPES FOR THE NEXT PARLIAMENT

Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Mental Health and Addictions

Photo Credit: Canadian Club Toronto

Esprit de Corps Magazine December 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 11

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 33

By Military Woman

Question: 

Any thoughts to share with the Cabinet Ministers of Canada’s 44th Parliament?

Answer: 

Absolutely!

To Anita Anand, Minister of National Defence:  We are told that your strengths include a deep knowledge of governance, the public service and procurement. Hopefully, you will soon be adding two additional strengths to that list – an understanding of military culture(s) and military servicemember unique needs.

Military servicemembers are the one group of federal employees which can be legally ordered, without access to union or administrative recourse, into unsafe work environments. Therefore, the military aspires to always have the right people with the right training and the right equipment to effectively, and as safely as possible, achieve any assigned tasking or mission.

Many assume you will either be able to successfully advocate for the resources needed by the military to do its mission safely, or you may find yourself admiring the view from the proverbial glass cliff – much to the security detriment of both Canada and her military’s servicemembers. Your ability to best support the military’s mission may well end up depending more on your ability to influence those above and beside you during cabinet budget discussions than any influence or changes possible directly within CAF.

To Lawrence MacAulay, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence:  We call on you to “lead by example” and to ensure your department’s full implementation of gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) to allow for sex, gender, and intersectional equity considerations in all that you do. 

We also call on you to improve on the transparency and accountability to Veterans for all VAC programs, services, and research.  VAC (and DND) should follow the Office of the Auditor General’s 2014 recommendations to focus more on health and well-being performance measures and less on total numbers of people put through various unvalidated programs and services.  VAC (and DND) should also be signatories to upholding the Federal Tri-Council Policy on the Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS2).

Lastly, we remind you of your personal 2019 promise for an annual Women Veterans Forum. An annual forum was to confirm and showcase the department’s women Veteran research strategy. A research plan that was to address known gaps in baseline data and understanding for women Veteran issues such as how to prevent women Veterans housing insecurity/homelessness and other female sex specific medical, mental health, addictions, eating disorders,  moral injury and reproductive wellbeing related issues.  An annual Women Veterans Forum was also to be an important opportunity for the mobilization and transfer of women Veteran specific knowledge to the civilian health care provider community. It’s time to name a date for our next Women Veterans Forum.  

To Filomena Tassi, Minister of Public Service and Procurement:  Despite the previous mandate letters that ordered fighter and Navy fleet updates, the military is still using out-of-date, verging on obsolete, equipment to keep Canada “strong, secure and engaged.” Defence related procurement decisions need to be made. 

To Marci Ien, Minister of Women and Gender Equity:  Moving forward, we hope to see inclusion of diverse military and Veteran voices in all your gender-based violence work and continued support to further the implementation of sex and gender-based analysis throughout the Canadian Armed Forces. 

To Harjit Sajjan, Minister of International Development:  Your prior experience with Women, Peace and Security issues and GBA+ should serve Canada’s feminist foreign policy development well. One request is to immediately find funding options for charities, like Veterans Transition Network, that o provide lifesaving supports to the Afghanis awaiting Government of Canada final paperwork processing prior to their ability to leave Afghanistan.

To Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Mental Health and Addictions:  Present mental health and addiction prevention and treatment strategies require a radical redesign to become more inter-disciplinary, whole-health, and patient-care centric including for servicemembers and Veterans. Hopes are high that this new portfolio will serve to disrupt the ineffective status quo.

To all: Building Canada “back better” this Parliament, will need everyone working together for the well-being of all Canadians, servicemembers and Veterans included.

Update:

• 2024. ACVA member Carolyn Bennett resigned as a member of parliament and was  thereafter named as the next Canadian Ambassador to Denmark. She was replaced on the ACVA committee by the Parliamentary Secretary for Women and Gender Equality (WAGE) Lisa Hepfner.

WHO WAS BRIGADIER GENERAL SHEILA HELLSTROM?

Sheila Hellstrom, Canada’s first female General Officer

Photo Credit: DND/CAF

Esprit de Corps Magazine November 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 10

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 32

By Military Woman

Question:

Who was Brigadier General Sheila Hellstrom?

Answer:

BGen Sheila Hellstrom was a trailblazer who  “charted a smoother flight path for others to follow.” We dedicate this month’s column to her memory.

Born in 1935 in Lunenburg, NS, BGen Hellstrom’s lifelong commitment to the military was first ignited upon seeing Norwegian WWII sailors who were living nearby at “Camp Norway.” After graduating from high school in 1953, she immediately tried to volunteer for the Korean War – only to learn that the enrollment age for women was higher than for men. Also finding herself unable to join the Royal Military College, she enrolled into the RCAF University Reserve Training Program at Mount Allison University. She was welcomed in 1954 into the Personnel Administration classification – one of the few non-medical trades open to women at that time.

Her first military summer job was at RCAF Station Senneterre, which was part of the Pinetree Line radar defence network. This first DEW Line station had both a ground-control intercept and early warning mission mandate. Future summers were spent at Canadian Joint Air Training Centre at Rivers, Manitoba and at 4 Fighter Wing in Baden-Soellinger, Germany.

In 1956, with a science degree in hand, Hellstrom was promoted to Flying Officer and was finally able to join the Regular Force — three years later than her male peers. She went on to serve for over three decades throughout Canada, including Winnipeg, Gimli, Toronto, Kingston, Ottawa, North Bay, and St. Hubert. Her one beloved overseas posting (1959) was to the RCAF Support Unit in Metz, France. Her duties in Metz included acting as a courier delivering classified material and being the officer in charge of the decontamination centre for service women and dependents in the event of nuclear attack. 

Her often-cited career first is to have been first woman promoted to the rank of Brigadier-General in 1987. Her passion, however, was to promote the expansion of employment opportunities for women in the military – an aspiration she shared with her colleague and life-long friend, LCol Shirley Robinson.  

Among her many roles promoting the advancement of uniformed women, Hellstrom worked in the Directorate of Women Personnel (1980-1985) in support of the Service Women in Non-Traditional Environments and Roles initiative (aka the SWINTER trials). Hellstrom also chaired the Committee on Women in the NATO Forces (1987-1989) and post retirement she served as Deputy Chair of the Minister of Defence’s Advisory Board on Gender Integration (1990-1995) and was a member of the Ottawa Police Service advisory committees for women, race relations, and employment equity (1990-1995). She also sat on several Defence Minister’s Monitoring Committees (1997-2003). BGen Hellstrom’s lifelong dedication to CAF and the integration of women into the military was recently recognized by an Esprit de Corps Top 20 Women award (2020).

BGen Hellstrom is remembered as someone that did not demand perfection but supported and inspired those around her to do better and to be better. VCDS LGen Frances Allen’s Beechwood memorial service eulogy, aptly described Sheila’s relationship to the military as being, “Unconditional. Unreserved. Unfailing.” BGen Hellstrom will be remembered as someone “compelled to push the institution and its people to continually grow and evolve.” 

Not blind to the flaws of the military, BGen Hellstrom nonetheless always wore her medals with tremendous pride. Her career was living proof that military women have come a long way, but she would have been the first to say there is more work yet to be done. We hope she can rest easy in knowing that the next generation are working together to pick up the baton she has handed us with the expectation that we will keep moving her beloved institution in the right direction.   

Especially now, women’s history month, let’s all take a moment to reflect on the work and sacrifices of those that have served before us and upon whose shoulders we now stand.

Per Ardua Ad Astra         Parati Vero Parati          Vigilamus Pro Te

ADVICE FOR THE NEXT PARLIAMENT – 2021

Photo Credit: Parliament, Ottawa, Government of Canada

Esprit de Corps Magazine October 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 9

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 31

By Military Woman

Question:

What advice does “Military Woman” have for the new federal government?

Answer:

This column was written before knowing the results of the election; however the health and welfare of military women is expected to be of continued political interest regardless of the winner. So, what general advice could we offer to the new government?

1. Be Bold. There is still much that needs to be fixed in the military. The easy fixes have already all been made.  It will require patience and perseverance to identify and address the root causes of the military’s remaining complex intersectional problems. And, although the political focus has been largely on sexual misconduct, all forms of systemic bias and discrimination in the military must be addressed concurrently. It will take a government with vision and courage to successfully oversee and direct the needed changes in military culture. Uncomfortable conversations must still be had with Canadians, politicians, and military members alike.
   

2. Talk to Canadians. For a number of diverse reasons, recruitment is likely to be challenging for the foreseeable future. This reality means the military’s sustainability will be predicated on its ability to successfully effect culture change to attract young Canadians and to clearly articulate to them for what and why they are signing up. Peacekeeping? Combat? Cyber? Domestic emergency response? Let’s reconfirm with Canadians what their military’s primary functions should be. Only then can we fully reimagine and communicate what an “ideal Canadian soldier” needs to be to make our military strong, secure, and inclusive. 
   

3. Listen to Military Members.  Because military members must be apolitical and non-unionized, their voices are often muted when the political level seeks their input. Politicians would therefore be wise to concurrently seek the voice of the retired/released military members and their loved ones, who are unencumbered by such limitations. Government would do well to remember that the most efficient and effective recruiters in all the world are happy healthy veterans.
   

4. Do No Harm. When developing any new military program, policy or benefit follow three steps. First, apply a sex and gender-based analysis. For the military to attract and represent the diverse population it serves, inclusion and intersectionality issues must be addressed. Second, the military is, by definition, a trauma-exposed workplace. Therefore, all programs and policies applied to the military should be trauma aware and informed. Third, the military is by definition “not civilian.” Civilian decision makers must seek out and include military culture awareness, including the existence of a plethora of military sub-cultures. Missing any of these three steps makes preventable harm inequitably likely to occur to members of the non-dominant military groups such as women, Indigenous people, LGBTQ2 people and people of colour.
   

5. Uphold Sexual and Reproductive Human Rights. Many military women want to serve their country and to have a family. Because of the unique work stresses and exposures possible especially in operational military jobs and environments, every military pregnancy ideally is planned. As military member’s medical care is a federal, not provincial, responsibility there is much that the federal government can do to ensure military women’s sexual and reproductive human rights. Or policy makers, health care providers, military members and their chain of command should be aware of the basics of how to support women’s health needs particularly on-board ship, in the field, and during deployments. All military members should be allowed to store their sperm/eggs prior to deployments as a government provided workplace benefit. All military members should be aware of what their options are after unplanned sex, regardless of where they are in the world. Day-after sex medications (Plan B) should be accessible without barriers to all members, including on ships and during deployment. Medication abortion (Mifegymiso) should be available including by telemedicine support when operationally so required. Margaret Atwood’s “Handmaid’s Tale” cannot be allowed to become a Texas based  documentary instead of what it is – a highly evocative and disturbing sociological commentary and warning.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE DOGS

Service Dog with Veteran

Photo Credit: DND/CAF

Esprit de Corps Magazine September 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 8

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 30

By Military Woman

Question:

What do you think about service dogs for veterans with mental health challenges?  

Answer:

Veteran or civilian, healthy, or sick, there are many benefits for humans to spend more time with animals, especially dogs.  

One of the many benefits of animals is their potential to be a calming influence on stressed out humans. This trait has made it commonplace for purpose-trained and certified therapy animals, usually dogs, to be made available in stressful public settings such as airports, hospitals, courts, and mental health counselling sessions.

People who feel chronically stressed or anxious for any reason may find benefit, with their physician’s support, from an emotional support animal. Since no specialized training or testing is required, these animals are generally not allowed in public spaces except in some special circumstances such as airplanes.

While an emotional support animal does not require specialized training, nothing stops people from getting it. Training can include things like teaching your dog to recognize when you are having nightmares and to wake you up. Training your dog to complete mental health related support tasks does not require you to have a formal mental health diagnosis or recognized disability status.

So what is a service or assistance dog? Many are familiar with purpose-trained dogs who assist people that are sight-impaired, autistic, mobility-challenged or epileptic. Such dogs are traditionally breed specific, professionally trained, and tested to ensure their behaviours are safe to be allowed into the public domain. These dogs will usually also have been taught three or more specialized tasks unique to their specific human’s formally declared disability needs. The North American standard for these types of service dogs is generally recognized as those set by Assistance Dog International (ADI) .

The VAC website defines mental health service dogs as “extensively trained to respond precisely to specific disabilities of their owners including individuals with mental health diagnoses such as PTSD. Service dogs are trained to detect and intervene when their handler is anxious; contribute to a feeling of safety for their handler; and promote a sense of relaxation and socialization.”

So, what are the differences between a mental health service dog and an emotional support dog? One difference is that a mental health service dog is examined and certified to be safe in all public settings, and emotional support dogs are not.

Another difference is that Veterans seeking a service dog must have a federally recognized disability requiring the presence of the animal in all settings.

A third difference is who pays. Generally, a Veteran pays all costs related to an emotional support dog but often can have the costs of a service dog (up to $50,000) paid for by interested fundraising charities. There is also a federal tax credit available to help defray additional and ongoing service dog costs.

As it stands, there are lots of good folk, charities, and dog trainers alike, all doing the best they can. Unfortunately, there are others working hard to charge veteran charities top dollar for under-trained, and in some cases inhumanely trained, service dogs. This chaotic non-standardized state of affairs in Canada impedes researcher’s ability to produce quality, intersectional, peer-reviewed service dog research. Without a standardized and enforced national training and certification standard for mental health service dogs, everyone stands to lose. 

One way around the growing minefield of vendor related conflicts of interests is for the Government of Canada to follow the example set by the US Department of Veterans Affairs –which supports the training of breed-specific dogs to ADI standards for veterans, by federal penitentiary inmates.

In other words, one way to support mental health service dogs for veterans could be to build a Canadian not-for-profit dog training and certification capacity. This would also allow for standardized dog training, certification, and reproducible GBA+ (gender-based analysis plus) research to provide, once and for all, the evidence based impact of mental health service dogs on Veterans – women and men.

Update:

• 2024. Research continues to mount showing positive impact for Veterans with mental health conditions to own a service dog compared to owning no dog. However little research has been done to date to show what benefit, if any, owning a service dog is over owning an emotional support dog or regular dog. Canadian standards for mental health (psychiatric) service dogs for Veterans continues to be an unresolved discussion area.

NOTHING ABOUT US WITHOUT US

 Greg Lick, Veteran and DND/CAF Ombuds

Photo Credit: Canadian Military Family Magazine

Esprit de Corps Magazine August 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 7

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 29

By Military Woman

Question:

What does it mean when people from the military sexual trauma community say, “Nothing About Us Without Us”?  

Answer:

The motto “Nothing About Us Without Us” is used to remind decision-makers of their responsibility to learn from and be accountable to those most impacted by their decisions.  

First used in the 1980s by activists for disability rights, “Nothing About Us Without Us” is now a global movement that has expanded into many other advocacy areas including patient, women, and veteran rights.   

Over the last decade, patient feedback through representation on civilian hospital boards, committees and research ethic boards has become routine. To best serve military patients throughout their lifespan, the military medical system needs to be similarly anchored and informed by patient feedback. To achieve this goal, the capturing of lessons learned from veterans is essential. Hopefully one day soon Canada will have an equivalent feedback mechanism to the US’s “Veterans Experience Office.”

Nothing About Us Without Us.

Furthermore, DND/CAF and VAC now widely acknowledge a need for more diverse voices at all decision-making levels. The follow-on challenge then being how to ensure its the “right” voices that are newly invited to the table. Every one of us can help to identify missing representation voices and advocate for their inclusion, even if it means us personally stepping down to make room for those more directly impacted to be heard.

Nothing About Us Without Us.

Many defence related decisions are based on defence policies that come from defence research findings. To all the defence researchers, please consider co-creating your future research alongside those with lived experience in the topic of your study. The most value-added and relevant research results are likely to occur when your research question is co-developed and your research project co-designed with those having lived experience.

Nothing About Us Without Us 

Public perceptions about the military are known to be largely dependent on the media’s coverage. To the talking heads who have never themselves served in uniform, please don’t assume you can speak for military women just because we share the same biological sex. Please find and amplify the voices around you that do have direct lived experience and allow us to speak for ourselves.

Nothing About Us Without Us. 

To the political decision-makers who ask military women to speak about their sexual misconduct experiences despite knowing the significant emotional toll it takes on us to do so – please don’t exploit us for your personal or partisan gains.

Nothing About Us Without Us. 

To the DND/CAF Ombuds who has volunteered his office for an expanded investigative oversight role, our lived experience suggests there to be cause for concern. The Ombuds Office was originally created in 1989 specifically to address the growing number of military sexual harassment and assault cases; and yet, a simple review of thirty-plus years of subsequent Ombuds systemic investigations, reports, statistics, strategic plans, priorities, and interactions with Justice Deschamps demonstrates little proof of commitment to, or interest in, his office’s original raison d’être. 

Furthermore, common sense along with the lessons already learned from the RCMP’s newly formed Independent Centre for Sexual Harassment Resolution suggest that any truly “independent” office would not be run or staffed with members from the same institution to be investigated.

Nothing About Us Without Us. 

Lastly, a word to Justice Arbour.  Whatever recommendations you make to the military in the days ahead, a core issue is how to fix broken trust. Whether from military sexual trauma, moral injury, institutional betrayal, sanctuary trauma or operational stress injury – trust has been broken by many against many.

To regain the trust of serving members, veterans, and the Canadian public, CAF/DND and VAC need to be, and be seen, as trustworthy institutions. Those that have been harmed the deepest and most directly must be allowed to be listened to and heard. Their healing is a necessarily prerequisite to healing the institution.

For all these reasons and more, this is why you may hear a military sexual trauma community member say, “Nothing About Us Without Us!”

Update:

• 2024. DND/CAF ombuds, Greg Lick, completed his contract on June 30th, a few months after a feisty last parliamentary committee testimony. Robyn Hynes, has been offered a one year contract as the interim ombuds while government ramps up the Government in Council (GIC) job application process.

PEER SUPPORT SERVICES – ONE SIZE DOESN’T FIT ALL

Nishika Jardine, Veteran and Veteran’s Ombuds

Photo Credit: Nishika Jardine

Esprit de Corps Magazine July 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 6

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 28

By Military Woman

Question:

Should everyone with military-related trauma have access to government funded peer support services?

Answer:

Yes, of course, they should – but don’t they already?

Since 2001, the Operational Stress Injury Social Support (OSISS) program, jointly funded and run by CAF and VAC, has been providing peer support services to all those with persistent psychological difficulty resulting from military operations, whether training, domestic or international.

So, given that mandate one might have incorrectly assumed that OSISS also provides military sexual trauma (MST) peer support. 

Although some leaders within OSISS have made individual efforts to welcome all those with mental anguish as a consequence of their military service, the OSISS program has a history of excluding those with MST. A variety of reasons have been cited for why MST support has not been formally included within OSISS programming including the questioning of if MST is “operational.”

So, what exactly is MST if not an operational injury? That remains to be seen, as the federal government is still working on its own definition of what MST is; a definition that will hopefully capture the diverse physical, mental and spiritual dimensions of this workplace injury.

Harm from MST arises from the initial sexual trauma(s) and/or the subsequent institutional betrayal and moral injury from dysfunctional workplace responses often aggravated by mandatory reporting requirements. MST causes real symptoms, dysfunction, pain, and suffering which together constitute an undeniable and serious occupational, if not also operational, stress injury.

With time, more and more people are viewing MST as a bone fide operational stress injury (OSI). Many MST cases occur while on operations or training.  Other MST cases occur during the 24/7 operational like tempo often demanded by normal military life. Yet others consider MST and OSI to foundationally be moral injuries and thus with similar peer support needs and benefits.  

Another reason cited for excluding MST from OSISS services was lack of funding to provide the specialized clinician oversight required for MST peer mentor screening and training to ensure both the health and wellness of the MST peer mentors and quality control of their services. Also, some of the MST community expressed a preference for peer support services in single, vs mixed, gender group settings. 

The Veterans Ombud reviewed all of this in her recently published investigative report “Peer Support For Veterans Who Have Experienced MST,” which validated the need for improved access to MST peer supports. The Minister of Veterans Affairs is presently working with CAF/DND to use the 2021 federal budget funding tailored for the development of an online and in-person peer support group for those who have experienced MST.

So, what would the ideal MST peer support program look like? 

A logical and sustainable way to ensure equitable peer support program quality and access, would be to work collaboratively within the already long-standing OSISS infrastructure. Using the newly available federal funding, OSISS could be rebranded into an “Occupational” Stress Injury Social Support service provider and with a Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA+) ensure all its programs are flexible enough to meet the varied needs of people with different types of service-related trauma(s). New MST aware clinical staff could be hired to ensure all OSISS peer mentors were trauma, and specifically MST, informed.  OSISS could then offer groups online and in person, in the language of the person’s choice, with single or mixed genders, focusing on three service streams – combat, MST and a combined group open to any military specific trauma(s).

The new federal funding could also allow for an evidence-based update to military-related trauma peer support programs to include the rapidly growing understanding of the importance of moral injury. Peer support that normalizes our various internal responses to external traumatic events may well be the way of the future. Regardless, let’s agree that everyone with military-related trauma exposure distress or symptoms should have equitable access to government funded peer support programs and services.

Let’s get these long overdue MST peer support programs up and running!

Update:

• 2023. The Veterans Ombud’s annual report card reflection to the department notes that none  of the “Peer Support For Veterans Who Have Experienced MST” report recommendations have been implemented, yet.

• 2024. The Government of Canada continues to debate what the Canadian definition of MST should be and how to best provide peer support for those impacted by MST. Initial peer support programming attempts for MST via the “Togetherall” chat board ceased in March. Hopefully more peer support programming options for supports soon follow!  On a bright note – the mandatory “Duty to Report” sexual misconduct incidents was officially rescinded June 30.

LOUISE ARBOUR – WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS

Louise Arbour, Supreme Court Justice (Retired)

Photo Credit: Canada Without Poverty

Esprit de Corps Magazine June 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 5

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 27

By Military Woman

Question:

What would your recommendations be for Louise Arbour?

Answer:

As you may know, Supreme Court Justice (Retired) Louise Arbour has been named to lead a review of sexual misconduct in the military. While there have been some grumblings that this is just a repeat of the review conducted by Justice Marie Deschamps in 2015, in fact the scope of Justice Arbour’s mandate is much wider and this time all report recommendations are binding. We at “Military Woman” offer a few recommendations for Justice Arbour’s consideration.

1. Choose your words carefully. Sexual misconduct is an extremely broad term that can mean many things, ranging from an one-time inappropriate sentence in an email to a premediated tortuous gang rape. The term is often used as a euphemism to downplay or avoid the direct naming of rape, sexual assault, sexual coercion, and/or sexual harassment.  Please be precise in your word choices and always provide definitions for your key terms – including what “independent” review or “external” monitoring system truly means.
   

2. Talk about power – not sex. As Dr. Alan Okros PhD (Dallaire Centre of Excellence) is fond of saying, “If I hit you with a shovel, you wouldn’t call it inappropriate gardening.” Although the acts of misconduct may be sexual in nature, they originate from power imbalances. Sexual misconduct being but one of many possible negative outcomes from abuses related to military power imbalances.  
   

3. Do not call sexual misconduct a women’s issue.  Politicians and journalists have undone decades of hard work by women in uniform to not have sexual misconduct or military sexual trauma (MST) labeled as “women’s issues.” Women constitute just over 15% of the military and, while women are more likely than men to be victims of military sexual violence, the total gross number of men victimized is actually higher than the total number of impacted women. Male victims of MST were co-sponsors of the recent sexual misconduct class action lawsuit and have also repeatedly spoken out to the media about their experiences.
   

4. Look beyond legal issues. The politicians, lawyers and police have all to date, not surprisingly, focussed their action item lists on legal issues around sexual misconduct reporting, investigation, and justice systems. Quite unfortunately absent, are non-legal areas such as the military health care system which is responsible for the prevention, identification, support and treatment of sexual misconduct case health and wellness sequelae. Given that MST is an acknowledged military specific occupational hazard and the direct cause of ongoing workplace injuries and illnesses, the military medical system’s absence from many of the MST discussions and system reviews is inexplicable.
   

5. Understand the culture. Canadian military culture is different from other Canadian organizational cultures. We urge Justice Arbour, therefore, to seek input from those with lived Canadian military experience to anchor and inform her recommendations. Without a demonstrated understanding of military culture, it is highly likely that the recommendations will once more not be internally embraced by CAF members (or veterans).  

We believe that Justice Deschamps’ (2015) decision to describe the military culture as a “sexualized” work environment although understandable, was unintentionally harmful.

How?

The absolute refusal by so many women and men in uniform to accept the validity of the “sexualized culture” descriptor directly contributed to the internal pushback to Justice Deschamps report and recommendations. Lived experience input may have suggested “male-dominated,” “masculine assumed” or “male locker room” as alternative descriptors that may have been better accepted internally.

At the end of the day, understanding military culture through a sex and gender intersectional lens is essential to conducting an external review of sexual misconduct in the military. In addition to reaching out to the many experts on military culture, such as Drs. Karen Davis and Maya Eichler, we strongly urge Justice Arbour and her team to sit down and review all the Military Women pieces written since March 2019 (vol. 6, no. 2). It is our hope that the more you learn about our world and its culture the more likely your recommendations will receive internal (and external) support and be, this time, successfully implemented.

Let’s get it right this time around!

DOING YOUR PART TO FIX THE CRISIS

Karen McCrimmon, Veteran

Photo Credit: Government of Canada

Esprit de Corps Magazine May 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 4

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 26

By Military Woman

Question:

How can we all do our part to fix the "military sexual misconduct crisis"?

Answer:

First, we need to agree the military has a problem in need of being fixed. Only then can we all work together to hold our Members of Parliament (MPs) accountable to do their jobs, which includes the provision of civilian oversight of the military.

Do you think most Canadians who have been hearing about the sexual misconduct stories from the military would entrust their daughters and sons to the Forces right now? Add to that, the breach of trust felt by many serving members towards their senior leadership, the genuine fear many of those leaders now have of becoming tomorrow's front-page headline (deservedly or not), and the national security implications of lowered military recruitment and retention. Yet despite the dire seriousness of this all, many media and partisan veterans are focusing on "who is to blame". So would you like to know the answer? We all are to blame. Surprised?

Canada is, for now, still a democracy. We are all responsible to vote and select our MPs who then act as our voice federally.

MPs do a lot. MPs decide when, where and how our military will be used (at home and abroad). MPs also decide the military's budget, the number of people allowed to work in the military, the location of military bases, what system of military rank will be used, what colour military planes will be painted, and what oversight mechanisms will be in place to monitor the military's workplace environment and its resulting culture. MPs decide just about everything important for the military, including who the Chief of Defence Staff is.

Military sexual misconduct has been a problem for decades – spanning both Conservative and Liberal governments alike and impacting, by gross numbers, more men than women.

Conservatives stake claim to caring about the military, but traditionally haven't paid out for the needed big-ticket military and veteran support items. The Conservatives have also traditionally shown more interest in women choosing to serve as civilian spouses then as uniformed servicewomen. The Liberals may still fixate on bygone UN peacekeeping days, but generally have funded needed military equipment and care programs for still serving and released/retired members. Both political parties have historically been blind to the injurious military workplace situations experienced by those that were not "ideal" white heterosexual male soldiers. It's time now to move beyond the finger-pointing blame game, but how?

First, agree there is a problem.

This might sound obvious, but many senior leaders, politicians and journalists continue to express "shock" at the latest sexual misconduct stories. This being despite so many of us who have been shouting from the hilltops for years about the presence and devasting impact of military sexual trauma.

Seriously, how can people still claim to be "shocked"?

The fact is that many men and women in the defence team live in well-guarded echo chambers, and truly believe that today's crisis is unrelated to them and their own past actions. This same group often serves to source the cultural gatekeepers who perpetuate and inflict a "death by a thousand paper cuts" for those of us seeking military culture change. This group still prefers to think the problem is "bad apples" rather than the culture that groomed, supported, and rewarded the "bad apples".

Second, let your MP know that serving members and veterans need them to step up. Every MP is accountable to you (their constituent) for carrying out their federal responsibilities which include oversight of the military and ensuring care for injured veterans. Demand that your MP become an ally for military and veteran issues. If your MP is not supportive of serving and veteran members, then find and support a political candidate that does in time for the next election.

Admitting there is a culture problem in the military allows us to better define the problem and develop the action plan to fix it. The bright side of acknowledging we all are part of the problem is that we can then all work together to be part of the solution.

Update:

• 2024. LCol (Retired) Karen McCrimmon was federal Member of Parliament (MP) for Kanata-Carleton from 2015-2021. She returned to politics after winning a 2023 by election to become the same riding’s Member of the Provincial Parliament (MPP).

WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE NDDN?

Angus Campbell, Australian Chief of the Defence Force

Photo Credit: Sgt Ford, US Army

Esprit de Corps Magazine April 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 3

Let's Talk About Women in the Military –  Column 25

By Military Woman

Question:

What do you think about everything that is going on right now in the National Defence Committee?

Answer:

Every political party says it cares about ensuring the wellbeing of those serving in the military (and veterans) – but that sentiment isn’t always evident in parliamentary committee meetings. So, while the highly politicalized media storylines may keep shifting, from the perspective of serving and former military members the one point that hasn’t shifted is that ALL political parties can, and need to, do better. 

In case there are any readers not already aware, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on National Defence (NDDN) started a study into sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces mid-February  The study was initially slated for three committee meetings, but strategically timed, laser-guided incoming media bombs have resulted in a continuation of those meetings. Spillover from NDDN is expected to soon reach into other committees such as Status of Women (FEWO) and Veterans Affairs (ACVA).

When one is discussing the need for improved federal government oversight mechanisms for Canada’s all volunteer military workforce, within a minority government situation, Canadians might have assumed that all political parties would work together towards achieving that commonly held goal. Surely, the wellbeing of women and men in uniform would be the one time and place that doing the right thing would trump individual and party-political agendas. Unfortunately, that assumption has not yet proven to be correct.

Elizabeth May always elevates any political discussion she’s involved in, so kudos to her for her involvement of late in the NDDN; however, let’s face it, supporting women in the military has never been a priority for the Green Party.

The signature strength of the NDP party is its support of “the people” and yet there is no NDP call for unionization of the military. If unions are good for the RCMP and several European militaries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland), why not the Canadian military too? 

Québec is home to over 20% of Canadian veterans and the Bloc is usually keen to highlight and amplify that fact and support francophone voices. But we continue to watch as courageous Francophone women such as Stéphanie Raymond and Marie-Claude Gagnon take on the military system alone.

The Liberal Party says all the right things about women and intersectionality, and it did introduce gender-based analysis and named the first ever Ambassador for Women, Peace and Security (Jacqueline O’Neill).  But the Liberal’s significant efforts to increase the number of women in the military to 25% continues to fall short. One has to be willing to boldly address the core issues behind CAF’s “diversity and inclusion” recruitment and retention woes. This includes identifying and neutralizing the dinosaurs still roaming amongst us that come from all political stripes, Liberals included. 

That leaves us with the Conservatives. While in uniform, military members are apolitical. We vow to serve Canada and Canadians faithfully and fully regardless of which political party governs. However, as per all law and order-related professions, there tends to be a natural alignment between soldiers and conservative values. For example, when a veteran recently ran for party leadership, the Conservative party successfully played to those values to help grow its constituency. The Conservative party has successfully solicited financial support and campaign volunteers through military and veteran social circles, charities, and organizations – officially and unofficially. As a result, many veterans, including from the highest military ranks, have now, often for the first time, become politically active.

So where does this leave us? Instead of everyone working together to ensure the wellbeing of military members (and veterans), individual military-related vendettas and agendas are being intermixed with opportunistic party politics at the NDDN. It’s hard not to feel exploited.

The Australian Chief of Defence Staff, Gen Angus Campbell, recently commented at a Conference of Defence Associations Institute event that sexual misconduct within the military really comes down to two problems – abuse of power and lack of respect for the individual human being.  

The failure of Canada’s MPs and political parties to prioritize military members’ needs for federal workplace safety conditions feels like another layer of abuse (of parliamentary powers) and disrespect for those in uniform.

Being in service means putting the mission first and self second.  Ensuring all Canadian military members a welcoming and inclusive workspace is part of the parliamentarian’s mission to achieve. We do our job; we need parliamentarians to do their job.  

Members of the NDDN, we deserve your help. Together we can fix these problems. 

Let’s get on with it.

INCLUSIONARY LANGUAGE CONTINUED…

Operation LENTUS evacuations by 436 Transport Squadron

Photo Credit: Cpl Beliwicz, CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine March 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 2

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 24

By Military Woman

Question:  

Can you share some more examples of inclusionary language issues in the defence community?

Answer:

Thank you for the chance to continue the conversation we started last month on the importance of inclusionary language. Increasing our word precision is one way to improve on our common understandings of defence related topics.

For an example, let's consider Operational Stress Injury (OSI). TermiumPlus, the official Government of Canada (GoC) terminology database, defines OSI as, "a persistent psychological difficulty resulting from operational duties performed by a Forces member." The OSI Social Support (OSISS) website defines OSI as "any persistent psychological difficulty resulting from operations in the military. Those operational duties can include training incidents, domestic operations and international operations."

When you read these official definitions, is it clear to you whether persistent psychological difficulties from military sexual trauma (MST) are an OSI or not?

Some who read these definitions are completely convinced that OSI is inclusive of MST, but others are equally certain that the OSI definitions above exclude MST. A precise OSI definition would explicitly state the inclusion or exclusion of MST impacted members to the government funded OSI services and programs.

MST is also an imprecise term. US federal law defines MST as the "psychological trauma, which in the judgment of a Veterans Affairs mental health professional resulted from a physical assault of a sexual nature, battery of a sexual nature, or sexual harassment which occurred while the Veteran was serving on active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty training". By this definition, the term MST refers to US military members.

However, in the absence of any equivalent Canadian approved terminology – what options are there for groups like "It's Just 700" but to embrace its use? How can those impacted by MST not feel excluded from GoC research, policy, and programs when there is no agreed to Canadian terminology to describe their trauma?

Sexual Misconduct (SM) is a perpetrator-focused term defined by the GoC terminology database as "conduct of a sexual nature that can cause or causes harm to others." Covering the full spectrum of possible inappropriate behaviours, this term can refer to anything from a one-time slightly off joke to criminal crimes such as premeditated gang rapes. This term's lack of precision means it should be used sparingly, so as to not euphemistically whitewash the profound seriousness of many of its included actions. When possible, discussions should be conducted using more precise language such as sexual insults, gestures, harassment, coercion, assault, stalking, rape and so on.

Can you think of more examples from your own conversations where miscommunications occurred due to the lack of precision in word choices? If we know that precise language use can avoid inaccurate and unclear communication which may result in defence team members feeling excluded, why do we not use it more?

Is it possible that we have been encouraged as "polite Canadians" to preferentially choose neutral terms versus more accurate but "uncomfortable" words, especially for sensitive topics? While euphemisms may sound more "polite", they can have the unintended consequence of excluding and minimizing the real-life experiences of others. This type of exclusion matters, especially in the military.

Problems within Canada's defence community culture are well documented, including Maclean's special investigation reports about military sexual violence (1998 and 2014), Justice Deschamps' external review into sexual misconduct and sexual harassment (2015), the Auditor General of Canada's report on inappropriate sexual behaviour (2018), and the recently settled sexual misconduct class action lawsuit (2020) – and that's all before even considering race, Indigenous or LGBTQ2 issues.

Tackling such a massive culture change requirement can feel overwhelming at the individual level. One small, but meaningful, individual action step we all can take, is to commit to the deliberate use of more accurate and precise inclusionary word choices. To perpetuate the use of vague, confusing, or whitewashing terms is to be part of the problem, instead of the solution.

INCLUSIONARY LANGUAGE

Members of the Canadian military presenting arms 

Photo Credit: MCpl Letourneau, CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine February 2021 // Volume 28 Issue 1

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 23

By Military Woman

Question:

What types of things can the defence community do to ensure it is a welcoming and respectful place for all of its members?

Answer:

One thing everyone can do is to be open and curious to learn more about what inclusivity is, why it matters, and how to use inclusive language.

To the credit of the Royal Canadian Navy, it recently changed its use of the word "seaman" to "sailor", a more inclusive and accurate term. This is likely to be a smart move from a recruiting standpoint given studies that show when the suffix "man" is used in contexts that are meant to refer to the general population, the listener/reader is likely to picture men-only verses mixed-sex groups. Words like "seaman", therefore, may have unconsciously served to perpetuate outdated stereotypes that Navy jobs are only for men.

Indeed, what would you think if you overheard someone saying to a mixed-sex group of young cadets, "Every future military leader needs to develop his communication skills."? Can you see how a more inclusionary choice of words might be to instead say, "Every future military leader needs to develop their communication skills." By simply switching out the word "his" for the word "their", every cadet present without exception can now envision themself to be that future military leader. (And yes, "they/them/their" is now considered a grammatically correct option for singular pronoun use).

Inclusivity can be actively reinforced through deliberate and precise word choice. Precision helps avoid inaccurate or unclear communication that, in turn, can lead to misunderstandings, confusion and result in a sense of exclusion. An example is the use of sex qualifiers. It's appropriate to add a sex or gender qualifier, such as "woman" or "man", to neutral terms like soldier or veteran when knowingly describing single-sex or gender situations or directly comparing one group to another, but otherwise may not be needed. Language can also unintentionally imply a hierarchy in value of one group over the other, if one group is always listed first. For this reason, inclusive language norms would support the defence leaders that consciously and deliberately say both "men and women" and its reverse ordering of nouns "women and men".

Studies have also shown that using non-inclusive language can cause harm, and that employers need to factor this into their workplace policies and practices. In the case of the federal government, it uses Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA+) as a tool to help identify how different people may experience inclusion to workspace culture, programs, and initiatives differently.

According to GBA+, the "plus" is there to remind us that intersectionality is about more than sex (biological) and gender (socio-cultural). Commonly cited "plus" characteristics include race, age, religion, language, ethnicity, income, sexual orientation, geography, education, and disability. Especially for military and veteran contexts, additional categories include marital status, family status, years served, time-period served in, rank, occupation and hazard exposures in Canada and abroad/deployed.

When considering these compounding factors together, one more easily appreciates how individuals may experience the same event, workplace, or government policy very differently. Present times and events have further heightened the awareness around the significant magnitude of impact variability from our diverse individual intersectionality factors. Many GBA+ factors are still evolving concepts, making it challenging to keep up with. One way to approach such a complex topic is through the lens of language, which can provide many daily opportunities to practice being curious about inclusivity. It's now commonplace for us all to experience moments of uncertain of what the "correct" words or phrase to use is.

Embracing these, often awkward, moments as opportunities to "correct and continue” learning a new skill set is encouraged. With continued practice, checking for inclusive language use can become as second nature as checking for grammar or spelling errors.

If interested to learn more about inclusive language, recommended resources include the writing style books from the American Psychology Association, Queen's University, University of Victoria, and the Government's Termium website.

SAFE MILITARY PREGNANCIES PART 3: SECOND TRIMESTER

Second Trimester Pregnancy – from the 14th to 27th week

Photo Credit: Alicia Petresc/Unsplash

Esprit de Corps Magazine January 2021 // Volume 27 Issue 12

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 22

By Military Woman

Question:

Do women need more military workplace considerations to ensure safe pregnancies?

Answer:

To fully answer this question, we need to consider each stage of pregnancy separately. Having already covered pre-conception (July 2020) and first trimester (October 2020), this column will focus on the second trimester of pregnancy (months 3-6).

Generally speaking, if there was a good time to continue one's duties in field, air, or sea operations while pregnant it would be during the second trimester. Why? Largely because this is the time period after the resolution of first trimester risks (e.g., miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy) and yet precedes the start of third trimester risks (e.g., early labour). The second trimester is also the stage of pregnancy where new organs and body systems have finished forming, making them less sensitive to most external hazard exposures. Furthermore, by the second trimester most women no longer suffer from morning sickness, acute sensitivities to smells or motion stimuli (for example, car, air, sea sickness).

Overall, most women feel quite well during their second trimester and may therefore naturally question the need for any operational duty employment restrictions. In fact, often the only potential employment limitation identified by pregnant servicewomen is the sense/need to urinate more frequently (due to the pregnancy's growth placing ever increasing amounts of pressure on her bladder). This may pose operational challenges if there is a lack of easy access to a bathroom and/or if there is a need to remain at one's post (e.g., flying a helicopter). Military women have long self-addressed such situations by tactically reducing their water intake; however, this can potentially lead to dehydration and increased health risks-especially when pregnant.

Since operational environments are neither static nor predictable, another consideration is abdominal blunt trauma. This type of risk increases as the pregnancy starts to grow above and beyond the protection initially provided by the pelvic bones. The risk of being thrown against the wall of a tank/plane/ship upon hitting a pothole/patch of turbulence/sea swell, and suffering a blunt abdominal trauma, although rare, is clearly higher than if working in an office environment.

Medical assessment of any direct abdominal blunt force events for a pregnant woman can require different thresholds of concern, training and equipment than needed for a non-pregnant adult. The specialized care, training and resources required for obstetric-related trauma assessments are not typically available in Canadian operational military settings. Transportation time to the appropriate level of medical care, especially if over one hour away, can increase the risk of adverse outcomes for both the woman and her pregnancy.

Another potential military exposure consideration is noise. Sound waves are known to be able to travel directly through the abdomen and have the potential of negatively impacting a new and still growing auditory system. To minimize this risk, workplace standards for pregnant adults have long been set at a maximum of 115 dBA for high frequency sound exposures. There is, however, a growing body of experts recommending this standard be lowered to 85 dBA. This is especially relevant to serving women as many military workplaces are known to be at 85 dBA exposures or above-including construction sites, machinery spaces, airfields, engine rooms, and anywhere there are weapons and/or explosive discharges.

Avoiding low frequency sound waves, or vibrations, while pregnant is also recommended. Sources of whole-body vibration can include aircraft (especially helicopters), ships and military vehicles. More information about these and other exposures can be found at an online resource called Reproductive Health in the Workplace (US National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health).

In closing, despite the second trimester of pregnancy generally being considered the safest period of time in a pregnancy, there are still many unknowns that require targeted resources and efforts to study properly. Research into identification and risk mitigation strategies for military workplace hazard exposures while pregnant remains woefully lagging. We can and must do better.

Update:

• 2024. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has updated materials on workplace reproductive hazards for employers and employees as does the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS).

WOMEN VETERANS’ FORUM 2020

Lisa Campbell, Associate Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada

 Photo Credit: Government of Canada

Esprit de Corps Magazine December 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 11

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 21

By Military Woman

Question:

Was there a 2020 Women Veterans' Forum?

Answer:

Yes! Before we discuss the 2020 Women Veterans' Forum (WVF), let's do a quick review of why such forums are needed in the first place.

Most members of the defence team are aware of the four legally mandated federal equity groups under the Employment Equity Act – women, members of visible minorities, Indigenous peoples, and persons with disabilities. In addition, because of evolved societal awareness and the LGBT Purge class action lawsuit settlement, LGBTQ2 is commonly now considered as an additional equity group. The military, to its credit, has established multiple pathways (e.g., Defence Advisory Groups/networks and senior leadership "Champions") to ensure that any defence team member's inequity concerns are heard and rapidly addressed. There is, however, no equivalent system in place for Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) clients.

VAC primarily listens to systemic veteran concerns through its Ministerial Advisory Groups (MAGs) and various working groups. Unfortunately, VAC doesn't automatically include equity group representation considerations in its selection of veterans for its committees. As a result, there is no recognized mechanism within VAC for women veterans (who represent both the largest and the most rapidly growing of the five equity groups), to have women-specific issues meaningfully heard, prioritized and /or addressed. This defacto institutional silencing of military women-specific inequity concerns signalled the need for new advocacy tactics, such as lobbying government directly for stand-alone women veterans' events.

The culmination of these advocacy efforts was the inaugural Women Veterans' Forum held on May 23, 2019 (Charlottetown, PEI). Lawrence MacAulay, the newly named Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, attended and personally committed to annual women specific forums. The promised in-person May 2020 WVF was understandably rescheduled due to COVID and re-designed as three 90-minute online "update" sessions that ran early this fall. Lisa Campbell, then Associate Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs, moderated a VAC, CAF, and WAGE (Women and Gender Equality) panel for the first "update" session (Aug. 26, 2020). This session opened with a review of basic equity and GISSO terminology (Gender Identity, Sex at Birth, and Sexual Orientation) to establish a shared understanding of key terms and concepts.

Departmental updates included the tabling of VAC's first GBA+ Strategy  (March 2020), and the creation of the new "Office of Women and LGBTQ2" (July 2019). Stakeholders, however, remain curious as to why the government rejected the many recommended alternative names, including the more inclusive "Office of Health Equity”.

VAC also acknowledged that, historically, veterans have not always felt respected or treated with dignity in their interactions with the department. To address this, several proactive steps to improve future VAC service provision were described (e.g., trauma, gender and culturally informed awareness training for VAC front line staff, and more robust efforts to ensure the meaningful inclusion of veterans' voices and lived experienced at all levels of VAC's work).

Stakeholder key take-aways from this first WVF session included:

1. Prevention, where possible, of service-related injury and illness for the incoming generation of service women remains a top priority for many injured/ill women veterans. Continued efforts by CAF/ DND, and RCMP/Public Safety, to communicate and work closer together with VAC to capture and integrate women veteran's hard-earned downstream lessons back upstream to CAF is highly encouraged.

2. VAC's acknowledgement that "one size does not fit all" for its programs, services, benefits and policies are a step in the right direction. Mainstreaming GBA+ throughout the department should go far in addressing the ongoing inequities related to VAC clients' who hold equity group membership(s).

3. Equity group representation needs to be standard for all VAC advisory and working groups.

VAC also needs senior leadership equity group "Champions" to work closely with VAC staff, VAC clients and CAF Champions. Until this is achieved, important issues, like women's service-related infertility and homelessness, will remain existent but systemically invisible. For more information about these topics, or to watch the any of the previous WVF sessions, please go to VAC’s  “Women and 2SLGBTQI+ Veteran Engagement” page.

Update:

• 2020. Lisa Campbell, Associate Deputy Minister, leaves VAC to become the first woman President of the Canadian Space Agency.

• 2022. Ken McKillop, Veteran, is named as VAC’s new Associate Deputy Minister.

• 2023. Ken McKillopp leaves VAC to start work at the Governor General’s Office.

• Minister of VAC promises to stand up a Women Veteran Council.

• 2024. Christine McDowell is named as VAC’s new Associate Deputy Minister.

THE BENEFITS OF ANONYMITY

CAF Aircrew supporting Operation REASSURANCE

Photo Credit: Cpl Trudeau, CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine November 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 10

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 20

By Military Woman

Question:

Why is the Military Woman column anonymous? 

Answer:

We publish this column anonymously for several reasons. One simple reason is to allow serving and released/retired women and men to input into the column without any worries of first needing workplace permissions before voicing their opinions on what could be viewed as government-related policy matters. 

Anonymity also removes all concerns around how to best recognize and order multiple inputter’s names into the column’s byline.

Another reason for anonymity relates to the original purpose behind this column – to spark thoughtful reflections and open honest conversations around topics that can be considered by some as politically sensitive and/or controversial. Keeping the column’s readers blind to the authors’ identities (including their rank, age, gender, race, trade, military experiences) helps to keep the focus on the issues, and not the authors. 

A final reason for anonymity is for our own piece of mind. Throughout society, including the defence community, it largely still remains a position of privilege to be able to challenge the status quo without concurrent concerns that doing so may negatively impact the security and safety of one’s work and personal life. Most women, and some men, do not (yet) hold this privileged position, and must still choose between full participation in public life and compromising their sense of safety for themselves and their family. 

Talking about women and women specific issues in any public forum can, unfortunately, result in unwanted attention. The fact remains that women who publicly challenge the status quo are still being met with gender-based aggression. One has only to look at the Amnesty International report titled “Toxic Twitter – A Toxic Place for Women” to see the validity of such safety concerns. This report lists numerous online abusive behaviours aimed specifically at women, including name calling, body shaming, racism, sexism, homophobia, misogyny, doxing, stalking, rape threats, death threats, and threats against women’s families.  

Furthermore, a disturbing trend of late is the increasing prevalence of online threats crossing over to real life threats. Sometimes the perpetrators are unknown to their targets as was the case for then Environment Minister Catherine McKenna, MP for Ottawa Centre, and for Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. Other times the perpetrators are well known to their targets, often previous intimate partners, as was the case for Private First-Class Vanessa Guillen. It should be of no surprise, then, that women’s voices remain underrepresented in many areas of public discourse — including the defence community.

Many military women’s issues, including the benefits of online anonymity, have been eloquently explored in the “Wavell Room,” a British contemporary military thought website. In one such article, “Second Order Sexism,” the anonymous author acknowledges that men can also find themselves open to receiving online backlash, but “when a man gets into an argument on Twitter, the worst that tends to happen is he gets called a few names. The game for women is entirely different. Putting our real names to our accounts opens us up to doxing, stalking, trolling, revenge porn and worse.” 

The article goes on to assert that an anonymous author’s arguments and ideas are no less worthy of consideration, and that “we should be looking at the quality of the argument/debate/discussion that an individual provides rather than getting caught up in the name they use. Engage with the argument, not the individual.” 

These are especially wise words when applied to defence-related discussions where it is still possible to find regimental “tribal” loyalties, combined with ingrained gender and rank hierarchies, that serve to dismiss, intimidate, and silence dissenting voices and opinions. “If we really want to be a diverse, inclusive and female-friendly organisation,” concludes the author, “let’s come away from the outdated idea that only troublemakers choose to be anonymous and accept that for some of us, personal security is far more than just a phrase, it’s embedded in everything we do.”  

For all these reasons and more, that’s why this column is anonymous – for now.

SAFE MILITARY PREGNANCIES PART 2: FIRST TRIMESTER

First Trimester Pregnancy –  first day of last period until end of the 13th week.

Photo Credit: Unsplash

Esprit de Corps Magazine October 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 9

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 19

By Military Woman

Question:

Do women need more military workplace considerations to ensure safe pregnancies? 

Answer:

In July 2020’s Military Women column we talked about military workplace considerations pre-conception. In this month’s column, we continue that conversation into the first three months, or trimester, of pregnancy. 

Pregnancy may be a normal physiological life event but the risks, even in “normal” environments, are different for every person, every time.  For example, during the first trimester, up to 70% of pregnant women experience nausea and vomiting that can vary in severity from mild to profound and up to 20% of pregnancies result in threatened or completed miscarriages. Miscarriage symptoms can vary from minor to debilitating uterine cramping, emotional distress, and/or bleeding; and can require urgent access to specialized medical care. Ectopic pregnancies, the implanting and growth of the embryo outside of the uterus, affects up to 2% of first trimester pregnancies. Ectopic pregnancies can cause sudden incapacitation and even be life threatening — needing emergency surgical intervention. Other pregnancy-induced physiological changes increase a women’s risk of urine infections, kidney stones, and ear blockages. 

So how should workplaces best accommodate for these baseline pregnancy risks for all while concurrently ensuring no additional or new risks? Unfortunately, there is no easy answer.

Workplace standards that ensure safety for the average healthy adult cannot be assumed safe for medically compromised adults, children, and/or pregnancies. Specific reproductive hazard research is required to know if pregnancy loss and physical and cognitive birth defects are being kept to baseline “normal” levels or not. Because we can’t deliberately expose pregnant women to potential hazards, it’s not possible to do “gold standard double-blind randomized control trial” types of research. Most workplace reproductive safety standards are therefore determined “after the fact,” using observational studies documenting the workplace exposures of men and women and the final pregnancy outcomes from hundreds, if not thousands, of pregnancies.

Well-studied workspaces, such as office administration and teaching, are generally proven safe to work in while pregnant without limitations. Other large workplace studies, for example hospital nursing and commercial aviation flight attendants, identified the need for decreased exposures while pregnant to operating room anesthetic agents, radiation, circadian rhythm disruptions, and prolonged standing.

Less well-studied workspaces include the many areas women have only recently been entering in significant numbers (e.g., military, first responder services, mining).  Given the research gaps of what, if any, sex-specific health impacts these non-traditional environments have on adult non-pregnant women, it’s no surprise even less is known about these workplace’s impact on pregnant women. 

To establish pregnant military worker’s safety standards, researchers will need to review literally thousands of pregnancy records. Given the magnitude and complexity involved to study military specific exposures (e.g., military flying, diving, isolated field environments, serving at sea), international collaboration is likely needed. In the meantime, the gap between “what is known to be safe” during pregnancy and “what is known to be unsafe,” in military specific environments remains unacceptably wide.

Thermal, vibrational, biological, chemical, ergonomic or acceleration workplace exposures can negatively impact pregnancies at any stage, but especially so in the first trimester. Workplace reproduction hazard identification and avoidance are therefore especially important to enforce during the first trimester, the time when pregnancies are known to be the most sensitive to them.

The present lack of knowledge surrounding military workplace reproduction safety raises many questions. How can military operational effectiveness be best achieved without any worker discrimination based on sex? What is the employer’s responsibility to identify and minimize potential hazard exposures?  What is the right of the military woman to decide the level of workplace risk she is willing to take vis-à-vis her own health and that of the pregnancy? How can informed decisions happen without more information? 

One thing we can all agree on, is that more sex-specific (male and female) military workplace reproductive research is needed.

When we know better, we can all do better.

Update:

• 2020. Public Health Agency of Canada publishes report on pregnancy “loss and grief”.

• 2021. New Compassionate Leave Policy to support pregnancy loss (CANFORGEN 139/21)

  • New Short Leave Policy to support family-related issues  (CANFORGEN 166/21)

  • US Navy “Reproductive Hazard Assessment” process developed

• 2022. US Air Force  “Voluntary Acceptance of Risk” process for pregnant aviators developed.

• 2023. Clinical screening tools developed for identifying reproductive loss related grief.

• 2024. Research suggests around 25% of pregnancies will have bleeding in the first trimester (threatened miscarriage) with approximately 11% losing the pregnancy (miscarriage).

PREGNANCY AND SOCIETY

Photo Credit: Sgt Turcotte, CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine September 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 8

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 18

By Military Woman

Question:

If pregnancy is a normal fact of life, why is it still a big deal in the military?

Answer:

In the June 2020 Military Women column, pregnancy was indeed highlighted as a perfectly normal physiological life event, however pregnancy is also a commonly cited bone fide sex difference that we know can impact military employment and operational effectiveness. Let’s consider some of the unique aspects of pregnancy in the military first within the context of the history of women in Canadian society.

Did you know that women only became legally recognized as “persons” on October 18th, 1929 (Edwards v Canada)? This constitutional change paved the way for women’s increased participation in public life, a milestone acknowledged annually with the official designation of October 18th as Persons Day.

During both World Wars, women were asked to temporarily fill traditionally male military and civilian work roles. However, once World War Two was over, married women were expected to return to the home, while unmarried women were pushed back into gender normative civilian positions. Employee pregnancy was not something the male dominated workspaces, military or civilian, expected to be seeing or dealing with.

In 1960, all Canadian women, including Indigenous, were finally accorded the right to vote. In 1965, due to human resource shortages, the military allowed a handful of gender-appropriate trades to recruit up to 1,500 unmarried women into the regular forces. Military women were still being released upon marriage, in part due to the assumption that they would soon become pregnant. Those assumptions were no longer valid when the oral contraceptive pill was made legal in 1969. The ability of women to control their own reproductive status was a gamechanger.

The pivotal Report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women (1970) noted that society has “a responsibility for [the] special treatment of women related to pregnancy and childbirth”. The Commission opened the doors for women to potentially return to the workforce after a pregnancy with recommendations for both maternity leave and guaranteed job security. The report also opened up military colleges, gave women access to previously men-only military pensions, and removed marriage and pregnancy as reasons for mandatory military release. Finally, women didn’t have to choose between a family and a military career — at least not on paper.

In the same decade, the Canadian Human Rights Act (1977) prohibited federal workplace discrimination related to sex, marital status or family status, and the military conducted a complete personnel policy update review (1978).

Momentum for women to stay in the workforce, both during and after pregnancy, grew in the 1980s. Canada signed the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1980) that, among other things, called for special workplace protections for women during pregnancy.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) prohibited workplace discrimination based on sex. The Employment Equity Act (1986) required the identification and elimination of unnecessary barriers to employment in federal workspaces for identified groups, including, specifically women. The decade ended with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (1989) supporting a complaint against the military for employment discrimination based on sex. The result was that the Canadian Armed Forces was ordered to fully integrate women into all jobs within 10 years. Since the 1990s, women have entered with ever growing numbers into the previously male-only military operational combat roles and environments.

The last 100 years have seen the legal barriers to workplace equity for Canadian women removed — including in the military. However, many employers have put more resources into enrolling women into the previously male-only trades then proactively ensuring their safe retention through enabled, appropriately accommodated workspaces. In the military, the politically driven focus on total numbers of women working in non-traditional and operational military roles continues to overshadow the parallel concurrent need to knowledge generate evidence-based protections and supports for those working women, especially while pregnant or breastfeeding.

How to best address that is another discussion for another day.

IS IT OKAY TO NOT BE OKAY?

Fleet Diving Unit Diver on Exercise TRADEWINDS,
St. Kitts and Nevis

Photo Credit: Sgt Bédard CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine August 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 7

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 17

By Military Woman

Question:

Is it okay to not be okay? 

Answer:

The short answer is…yes. It is okay to not be okay.

Before March 2020 most of us had never heard of “coronavirus”. We have quickly learned that although everyone is at risk from the virus, the impacts from it can be quite varied.

Some of us have stood by helplessly as friends and family members have fallen ill, and distancing restrictions have kept us away from a loved one’s bedside or even their funeral.

For others, coronavirus has meant the postponement of needed chemotherapy sessions or long-awaited surgeries. For those newly diagnosed as pregnant, the pandemic adds a layer of fear of the unknown on top of what should have been sheer unadulterated joy.

We all empathise with our elderly neighbour’s indignation at their seemingly overnight loss of independence. Elderly parents, no longer able to babysit or visit, can quickly start to suffer from social isolation – too often followed by depression.

Regardless of how the virus is, or is not, impacting you – we can all agree that these are not normal times. Canada has passed the point of no return. There is no going “back to normal,” things are going to be different. Be that good or bad, change and uncertainty are always stressful. It really is okay to say, I’m not okay today.

We know women are experiencing these phenomena differently than men. Women are still disproportionately fulfilling the role of caregiver for others. School closings have meant younger children are now home all day – needing to be fed, entertained, and homeschooled.  Many women question if they are now unable to return to paid labour because of their increased parenting and caregiving work at home; or they are continuing their parenting and caregiving roles at home in addition to their work as “tele-workers.”  Women are also known to be bearing the brunt of the ever-increasing rates of intimate partner violence. 

It’s been a tough few months in other ways as well. Canada’s worst mass murder spree was initiated by intimate partner violence. That horrific event resulting in the first of three rapid sequence workplace deaths of Canadian women in uniform (RCMP and military). We’ve all been further shaken by the shocking deaths of people of colour, women, and men, on both sides of the border.

And what about women veterans?  Is it true women veterans are so self-reliant that they find it harder than civilian women to ask for help, especially for themselves? Do some woman veterans still think that “sucking it up” and suffering in silence is a badge of honour? Do some women veterans stay busy, taking care of everyone else, so they don’t have time to self-reflect about their own needs and feelings? It really is okay to say – I’m not okay today. It’s okay to be sad today, or angry. It’s even okay to cry. Acknowledging our own emotions comes from a place of strength, not weakness.

Most of us have been jarred out of our normal daily routines. Why not take this surreal moment in time to just stop. Breathe. Reflect. Reassess. Let’s focus our minds not just on the challenges, but also on the opportunities. Let’s start the lessons learned discussions in our families, communities, cities, provinces, and nation. How can we build back better? How can we ensure tomorrow’s Canada and world are more equitable for all? We really are stronger together.

Let’s also reach out to that friend, neighbour, or battle buddy we haven’t talked to for a while.

Let’s start having more authentic and meaningful conversations with the people we interact with. When people ask, let’s tell them how we really feel. On days we are struggling, let’s remember Dr. Bonnie Henry’s healing mantra: “Be calm. Be kind. Be safe.”

And on those days when we are not okay, let’s give ourselves permission to say, “I’m not okay today.”

SAFE MILITARY PREGNANCIES PART 1: PRE-CONCEPTION

CAF Medical Staff on deployment

Photo Credit: CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine July 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 6

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 16

By Military Woman

Question:

Do military women need more workplace considerations to ensure safe pregnancies? 

Answer:

Last month we discussed whether military women need “special” occupational health and safety (OHS) workplace considerations. We concluded that both military women and men can have biological sex-specific needs, and that these facts of life shouldn’t result in the naming of one sex’s issues as “normal” and the other’s as “special.” 

One obvious OHS workplace difference between women and men relates to pregnancy. Pregnancy is a natural life event that all Canadian employers should include as part of their OHS workplace plans and preparations. Ideally, pregnancy and subsequent parenthood should not adversely affect a woman’s health or career progression in any job setting. For many traditionally women-friendly workplaces, the large number of women who have worked while pregnant has already paved the way for reproductive hazard identification and the implementation of required risk mitigation measures. 

Women entered with significant numbers into “non-traditional” operational workplaces, such as the military, starting in the 1980s. Since the number of women in these workplaces is relatively small compared to men, and the number of pregnant women is even smaller, there is a dearth of research into women-specific hazard exposures. This means that operational military environments are in a bit of a “research desert,” with little robust science available to base policy or recommendations on.  So military women and their employers are left unclear on how to best scientifically quantify and address workplace reproductive hazards. 

The military’s present risk management approach to reproductive health hazards requires three different, and sometimes competing, determinations of what is in the best interest of the: (1)  woman’s health and career in the short and long-term; (2) pregnancy; and (3) military’s need to meet OHS and legal standards, while also addressing operational effectiveness and mission success requirements.

One strategy to ensure the health of the mother and baby, while also meeting the needs of the military, is to pre-plan pregnancies whenever possible. In the US military, every medical encounter is viewed as an opportunity to confirm whether or not a military member wishes to conceive in the year ahead. If the answer is no, various ways to decrease the chances of an unintended pregnancy are reviewed. If the answer is yes, a pre-conception counselling medical appointment is booked.

The purpose of a pre-conception counselling session is to maximize a woman’s general health and ability to successfully conceive. Whereas these medical sessions are recommended at least three months prior to conception in civilian healthcare, they are recommended a year ahead for military personnel. Topics to be reviewed include past reproductive history, family history, diet, exercise, folic acid supplement, weight, nicotine use, alcohol use, prescription drug use, cannabis, pets, relationship status, and any anticipated near-term needs for dental work, vaccinations, x-rays and /or surgery. 

Unique to military pre-conception counselling, a full workplace reproductive hazard review is also conducted for both current and possible future hazard exposures. Hazard exposures include chemical (gas hut, pesticide exposure), biological (Zika virus, COVID-19, live vaccines, partner’s potential workplace exposures), physical (noise, radiation, hypobaric oxygen, egress training), ergonomics (prolonged standing, shift work), psycho-social (stress levels, available social supports, risk for gender-based violence), and anthropometrics (need for specialized uniforms or equipment while pregnant that might need to be ordered far in advance). Some of these exposures come with medical recommendations to wait as long as a full year before a planned conception. 

To optimize the safety of pregnancies, military women (and men) need more Canadian research and workplace awareness about reproductive hazards, risks, and mitigation strategies. One of many, windows of opportunity for the employer is to ensure the screening and education of all military members before planned conceptions. Other militaries provide generic reproductive information through open-source phone apps (e.g., the US Navy’s “Pregnancy and Parenthood” app), followed up with specific individualized information at pre-conception medical counselling sessions.

Is there a reason Canada couldn’t do the same?

DO MILITARY WOMEN NEED SPECIAL WORKPLACE CONSIDERATIONS?

Exercise during Operation REASSURANCE on HMCS Halifax

Photo Credit: Cpl Trudeau, CAF/DND

Esprit de Corps Magazine June 2020 // Volume 27 Issue 5

Let's Talk About Women in the Military – Column 15

By Military Woman

Question:

Do we still need special workplace considerations for military women?

Answer:

Laws have been in place in Canada for a long time to prevent employment discrimination based on biological sex. So, it's fair question to ask, do military women still need "special" considerations?

In the 1980s and '90s, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) was seen as a world leader in military gender integration for having opened up all previously closed non-traditional work roles to women. CAF initially applied all the same male salaries, benefits, research findings and resulting policies "equally" to the newly incoming women. This "gender-blind" integration strategy was often hailed as acknowledging equality of the sexes.

Unfortunately, there were unintended consequences to this "add women and stir" approach to gender integration. Particularly for operational settings, opportunities to identify and address biological sex differences, and their implications for work, work safety, and health outcomes, were not provided.

Since women only began to have full careers in operational military roles in significant numbers around 30 years ago, little was already known about how these types of workplaces might impact women's health. Medical conditions, such as work-related cancers, can take decades to manifest. This means service-related exposures to carcinogens, that could result in women specific cancers (breast, uterine or ovarian), may only now be getting identified as a risk; assuming such type of women's health issues are being tracked and researched at all.

Basic research about military specific workplace hazards has been completed for men but is still sadly lacking for women-both in terms of funding and prioritization. This begs the question of whether military women-specific topics should be viewed as "special" versus as standard and integral for all taxpayer funded military and veteran research.

One example of a biological sex difference relates to urination. When a fighter pilot has to "cross the pond" (ocean) in a jet, and refuel along the way mid-air, there is no gas station bathroom to quickly pop into. Pilots are instead issued a urinary relief device to confidently use without fear of a "liquid accident" amongst the complex electrical circuitry tightly surrounding their strapped-in bodies. Is being provided a urinary device that doesn't require a penis for its successful use, a "special" consideration, or an obvious basic necessity?

Furthermore, because women have a shorter urethra than men (the tube between the bladder and the outside of the body), woman are predisposed to stress incontinence. "Crying tears" down your leg after a sneeze, cough, and/or belly laugh, is a not an uncommon condition after one or more vaginal deliveries. Military women may notice the same leaking problems during their PT jumping jacks but resulting from repetitive lifting and carrying tasks such as sandbagging and rucksack marches, versus pregnancies. So, should stress incontinence be discussed in all medical exams and prevention/treatment physiotherapy programs offered as something "special", or as standard military practice?

Another biological sex difference relates to pregnancy. Pregnancy is a normal physiological condition-not an illness or injury. Pregnancy does, however, increase the risk levels for specific illnesses and injuries, including sudden incapacitation and death when compared to the non- pregnant state. Military leadership must always try to identify and mitigate risks to a soldier's health and wellbeing, while concurrently achieving operational mission success. To balance these sometimes-competing needs, especially for complex situations like pregnancy, requires specialized training, policies, and research.

Is the development of pregnancy related occupational workplace safety expertise a "special" consideration, or a legally and ethically mandated employer due diligence?

In the end, one can argue that NO – military women do not need "special" workplace considerations. However, what is needed is a paradigmatic shift away from the assumption that all soldiers are men or people that are interchangeable with men as their "biological equals". What military women do need is a willingness to acknowledge their differences from men, but only when those differences impact effective, efficient, and safe workplaces for all.

"It is not our differences that divide us.

It is our inability to recognize, accept, and celebrate those differences."

~ Audre Lorde