Health & Welfare Inspection

M

MSGHAWK

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
I have a buddy who is in the WTU at Ft. Sill, He told me today that the 1SG informed them this morning that she will conduct H&W inspections in their off post housing and if they don't agree to it then she will get DHS involved.
I have tried to find information online about the regs for H&W and from what I've read, only the commander can conduct and inspection and is limited to military property under his control. Am I missing something in regards to him being in the WTU that changes the rules?

Thought?
 
The way I have always read the regulation was that only the Commander can order a Health and Welfare, and the only authorized areas he/she can have inspected are areas that belong to his/her unit.

I thought for off-post housing they needed to have probable cause and/or a search warrant.
 
Last edited:
The way I was also told is if they are married- spouse can tell "No" and they can't enter. ( that only works if civ)
 
That's what I was told at Bragg, by a 1SG. That if the civilian spouse answers the door then the answer is NO. They cannot force a civilian, off post, to do anything.

Reference for these regulations will not be found in an AR, but in the manual for courts martial. Military Rule of Evidence 313-315 covers inspections and searches
As for off post housing, military commanders have no authority to authorize a search or inspection. See military rule of evidence number 315. It states explicitly who may authorize what searches. Competent military authority is limited to authorization of searches of military property. Civilian owned property located off of a military installation requires a civilian search warrant.
Official Regulation:
Rule 315. Probable cause searches
(a) General rule. Evidence obtained from searches
requiring probable cause conducted in accordance
with this rule is admissible at trial when relevant and
not otherwise inadmissible under these rules.
(b) Definitions. As used in these rules:
(1) Authorization to search. An “authorization to
search” is an express permission, written or oral,
issued by competent military authority to search a
person or an area for specified property or evidence
or for a specific person and to seize such property,
evidence, or person. It may contain an order directing
subordinate personnel to conduct a search in a
specified manner.
(2) Search warrant. A “search warrant” is an express
permission to search and seize issued by competent
civilian authority.
(c) Scope of authorization. A search authorization
may be issued under this rule for a search of:
(1) Persons. The person of anyone subject to military
law or the law of war wherever found;
( 2 ) M i l i t a r y p r o p e r t y . M i l i t a r y p r o p e r t y o f t h e
United States or of nonappropriated fund activities
of an armed force of the United States wherever
located;
(3) Persons and property within military control.
Persons or property situated on or in a military installation,
encampment, vessel, aircraft, vehicle, or any other location under military control, wherever
located;
You can read the regulation in full at http://court-martial.com/Media/military-rules-evidence.pdf under rules 313-315 pages 12-15.
I am sure there are different scenarios but these are the official regulations regardless.
 
The member should call the Soldier's Counsel ASAP. Let the lawyer tell the CC about article 138.
 
The government has a good many acronyms. What does DHS involved mean? Department of Homeland Security?
 
scoutCC said:
The government has a good many acronyms. What does DHS involved mean? Department of Homeland Security?
Click to expand...

Sorry, it means Department of Human Services in Oklahoma. It's a state agency that usually deals with child abuse or elder abuse. To me she's just using that as a threat. His house is over two hours away, he lives in the barracks during the week (which they inspect every day) and then goes home on the weekends which is the case for a lot of the people in the WTU there. I told him to talk to JAG because she is way out of her lane on this one. The only reason for trying to pull this crap that I can think of is as a reprisal, the soldiers blasted her in front of the Col. at a town hall for her lack of leadership.
 
So 1SG is saying if they don't agree to a house inspection, that she will report her Soldiers for suspicion of child abuse to force the inspection? Not a specific Soldier, but her entire formation? I just don't know how to respond to that. Its beyond ridiculous, and certainly outside the scope of anything I would consider ethical.
 
Anything to do with reprisal is call for the IG to be involved as well...
 
A H&W inspection cannot be conducted on only one individual.

As far as the home visits go in the WTU, it is called a quality of life inspection and is not meant to punish anyone. The triad of care considers it a tool to ensure that the soldier does not have any needs for care that are going unmet.

There is a specific standard of living that the soldier is to be provided and it is the responsibility of the leaders to ensure that it is being met, if the servicemember has any deficiencies the command must see that they are taken care of. Deficiencies would be not havig adequate laundry facilities, hot water, climate control, access to the residence that is compliant with the physical needs of the soldier etc.

The way you are describing it does not appear to be lawful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top