Scroll below this comment for a response from BeforeYouSignUp.info

Comment

You seem to have singled out the Armed Forces for bullying.   Civilian employers use psychological bullying and denial of skills development, promotion to “hem in the undesirables”.  If they do not mistreat employees, why are there many Trade Unions out there to protect employees rights?  How do you as pacifists feel about the use of force, which involves killing to liberate somewhere like Buchenwald or Belsen?  Surely without the sacrifice of UK, US, Canadian, ANZAC and Soviet soldiers, using violence, millions more would have died.  Is it correct to help these people, or simply let their captors gas them?  If any recruit (apart from the Medical sphere) thinks that joining the Armed Forces cannot result in him or her having to kill, or partake in the process then he or she is seriously deluded, and believe me would not be given a second interview.  Surely if your end aim is peace then maybe moving your attentions to the causes of conflict may bear more fruit.

The Armed Forces give practical education and instil a moral outlook (self discipline, awareness of right and wrong and self pride) lacking in today’s society, and not taught by schools or corrupt religions.  A look at the yobs representative of a large number of UK youth, committing crime on a daily basis, fathering unwanted children and causing mayhem tells me that the Armed Forces do teach young men and women values that are not taught by the (some) irresponsible parents.  Maybe you should be de-arming / moralising the feral street yobs before criticizing their former peers and others who have bettered themselves?  I am not saying that your intentions are disruptive or intentionally misleading, but “signing on” is something an individual will have thought about at length!  A look at the big picture may be in order rather than trying to dissuade young people from starting a rewarding career.  Remember you are in a country that gives it citizens far more freedoms than many others.  Granted, I’ll give you that under Labour those have diminished, but those rights are protected by those whose intelligence you seem to have questioned.

Another concern is the BBC quoting the Rowntree Trust as some sort of respected body.

I will leave you with this thought:

It is the Soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press,
It is the Soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Soldier, not the activist, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the Soldier, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the Soldier, who salutes the flag.
It is the Soldier, who permits the protester even to burn the flag.
It is the Soldier, who serves under the flag and whose coffin the flag drapes.

Response from Before You Sign Up

A new page that describes common comments made about the web site responds to some of the above points.

The risks of civilian careers.  Accepted that civilian careers carry significant physical risks; the web site now mentions this in the relevant articles on risk of physical harm.  However, the web site is not attempting to exaggerate the risks of forces careers, only to quantify them.  A difficulty is that risk can quickly change if a military emergency such as the Falklands crisis emerges.  See the article on the physical risks of army careers and the article on the psychiatric risks of army careers.  The psychiatric risks of forces careers are higher than in civilian life in general: see Jones et al (2006) 'The Burden of Psychological Symptoms in UK Armed Forces' Occupational Medicine, vol. 56, p. 326. However, there is also some evidence that deployment can also be beneficial to mental health.  The picture is further complicated by evidence that the risk of contracting PTSD and associated symptoms rises with the number of firefights experienced, according to a US study.  We are now reviewing some of the more recent literature on this and will update the web site if necessary.

Bullying.  We do not have statistics for bullying in the civilian workplace in order to make a comparison but will look into this.  A problem with comparisons is that behaviour experienced as bullying in civilian life might not be experienced as bullying in the armed forces, where the lifestyle can be more physical and tough (according to evidence from a military family to the Defence Select Committee).  Even so, a comparison with civilian levels of bullying would still be useful.  The web site does not state that bullying in the armed forces is high or low, for these are subjective terms.  Among soldiers, for example, it currently runs at 8% (according to soldiers themselves).  See the article on bullying in the army.

<< Back