On the morning of November 30, 2010, CNN ran the headline, “Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military” with the tagline, “little risk to repealing DADT ['Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell'].” Later that day, the Department of Defense released the “Report of the Comprehensive Review of the Issues Associated with a Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’” In the few hours between CNN’s headline and the release, there were thousands of online comments and articles posted for public consumption. Rather than reading others’ opinions, I decided to read the lengthy report myself (which is supplemented by appendices and a Support Plan for Implementation). Given the amount of press and heated commentary on both sides of the repeal issue, DADT is an issue of national interest and social importance. But, in my reading, I wondered how repealing DADT would impact our nation’s colleges and universities?

(Photo right: ROTC members at the University of Washington stand at attention for a joint review. Source: Curtis Cronn, Flickr.)

DADT is of special interest to me since I entered active duty as a U.S. Army officer in 1993—the year DADT was implemented. I remain proud to have participated in ROTC during college, received a commission, and served my country in the Army. The U.S. military is amazing in many ways and provides opportunities to so many; I am grateful for what I learned in the Army and would not trade those years of service. But, I must admit that it would have been nice to have been open and proud during college and on active duty.

For those lacking time to read a 200+ page report, the Executive Summary is a quick read and addresses the bottom line: “Based on all [the committee] saw and heard, our assessment is that, when coupled with the prompt implementation of the recommendations we offer below, the risk of repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to overall military effectiveness is low.” It notes that “with a continued and sustained commitment to core values of leadership, professionalism, and respect for all … the U.S. military can adjust and accommodate this change, just as it has others in history” (italics added in both quotes). Keep in mind that the authors were asked to assess the impact of DADT repeal and how to implement the repeal should it occur, but were not asked whether to repeal DADT.

Read the rest after the jump...

What does the Report Include?

The report is well written and informative, as well as interesting. The report reveals those nations that currently exclude gays and lesbians from “open service” in the military; in addition to the United States, 5 other nations are mentioned: Bulgaria, Jordan, Poland, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates (disappointing ilk, some would argue). Most interesting to me were the parallels drawn to other historic challenges, e.g., integrating race and gender. Although the authors noted “fundamental differences between matters of race, gender and sexual orientation,” they nonetheless admitted the relevance to these integration challenges. In some ways, the report was positive to the LGBTQ community, noting that separate bathroom and shower facilities would stigmatize gay and lesbian troops, as “separate but equal” treatment stigmatized those of color before the 1960s. In other ways, the report may disappoint. For instance, the authors did not recommend that sexual orientation be included with race, color, religion, sex, and national origin as a protected class under the Military’s Equal Opportunity Program. Further, the report recommends not revising military regulations to define same-sex committed relationships of dependent and family member for purpose of extending eligibility to certain types of benefits (e.g., base housing).

How does the Report Address Colleges and Universities?

The report, however, pays little attention to colleges, i.e., the impact to ROTC programs and the military academies. Worried I had missed a portion, I performed a word search (ROTC, college and university) to scour the reports and its appendices. There is no lengthy discussion about how a DADT repeal might impact college campuses. Included was some discussion about college campuses, e.g., sharing housing and bathroom facilities with gays and lesbians (an obvious concern for some) is already occurring in “hundreds of thousands of college dorms [and] college gyms … around the nation.” ROTC programs were mentioned briefly in parts, e.g., a repeal would not likely increase the number of ROTC candidates or recruiters’ access to college campuses (although it could increase ROTC acceptance on some campuses) and there “may be minimal gain,” of access to institutions currently prohibiting ROTC programs. With regard to the military academies, the report notes that those institutions and ROTC programs will remain competitive to meet officer recruitment goals. The support plan references the importance of military academies’ “white papers” and scholarship on the topic of military service by gays and lesbians given that the current “legal and legislative landscape is unclear.”

Impacts to Colleges and Universities

The key impact to colleges and universities, it seems, will be in terms of campus leadership. The authors acknowledge that military academy and ROTC students are our future military leaders who will be asked to lead all future changes. Given the lack of depth regarding specific impacts to college campuses, however, college and university leaders must also begin to think about developing their own support/implementation plans should the repeal occur. If DADT were repealed, then presumably openly gay and lesbian ROTC and academy cadets would be able to enroll, train, graduate and serve. Once on active duty, military policies govern, but what about campus policies while cadets are in school as students? Military academies are highly regulated environments, but ROTC cadets in civilian colleges live in two worlds—military and civilian.

Recommendations to College and University Leaders

College leaders with ROTC programs should begin now to ask many of the same questions the report’s authors asked—how should we deal with openly gay cadets on campus? For example, should campus counselors develop new skills, will facility use and housing policies change, will judicial rules be impacted, what new clubs might be requested, and are other campus policies in need of review to address issues involving the unique needs to openly gay cadets who live in two worlds? Default thinking will lead some to conclude that gay cadets will simply be governed by the institution’s existing policies for all LGBTQ students and offered the same types of services. But, gay and lesbian ROTC cadets living in two worlds may need different levels of support and resources to ensure their success as college students and future military leaders. It might be a good idea to review the report and launch a survey now to all ROTC cadets asking many of the same questions posed in the report surveys, but adding more specific questions about what new or unique services this specialized student population may need in the future. In this way, campuses will be as prepared as the military for a new day.