Well that sounds about right, or as close to making sense from a big army liability standpoint. I remember guys that got injured during jumps being assigned to 'bitchwork' at the company as punishment. Would have thought someone testing positive for HIV/AIDS in an Infantry battalion would have been grounds for separation.Well, with it being cool for the DoD to pay for gender re-assignment to make the soldier non-deployable...I ain't surprised by this. I never met anyone that tested positive for HIV/AIDS. But supposedly they get reassigned on post and sit in a room where they can't injure themselves and possibly expose others? (Or so the story went at BOLC).
I remember guys being booted after the surge, for no other reason than having had a criminal record prior to enlisting. It just seems counterproductive that the branches would keep some one with an illness such as HIV/AIDS. Maybe combat arms is different or used to be different, though I don't even know what goes on the support side.
I'm probably going to sound like a troglodyte, but bear with me. Are service members with HIV open about their status or do they keep it hidden? It just seems like a service member being HIV positive is akin to playing with fire, from a personnel standpoint.I don’t know what the rules are for HIV pos service members as far as assignments. But I have treated a few of them. There’s a certain demographic of males where it’s more prevalent. I don’t think they’re easily deployable though.
I’ve been told in the Navy they can only be stationed at San D or Virginia but I don’t have the NavAdmin on that though, I’m sure I could get some information when I get back from leave.