Updated July 18, 2019
Hazing in the Armed Forces
Background
Initiation customs have long been part of the culture in the
United States Armed Forces as a method to welcome new
members and mark rites of passage. However, several high-
profile incidents have raised congressional concern that
some of these traditions may subject service members to
harmful or humiliating acts.
Hazing may pose a threat to trust, cohesion, safety, and the
health of members of the Armed Forces. Congress has
oversight of this issue under Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S.
Constitution, which grants Congress the authority to raise
and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, and to
make rules relevant to their organization and discipline.
Therefore, an understanding of the context of this issue and
recent actions taken to counteract it may help Congress
decide whether to address hazing in the military through
oversight and legislation.
Hazing Definition
One of the main obstacles to effectively counteracting
hazing is its similarity to other forms of unwelcome
behavior, including harassment, bullying, and
discrimination. The term applied to conduct cited in
reporting can affect investigations and adjudications. DOD
makes distinctions between these behaviors to maintain a
comprehensive policy across all services. Current policy
(DODI 1030.03) defines hazing as,
A form of harassment that includes conduct through
which Service members or DoD employees, without a
proper military or other governmental purpose but with a
nexus to military Service, physically or psychologically
injures or creates a risk of physical or psychological
injury to Service members for the purpose of: initiation
into, admission into, affiliation with, change in status or
position within, or a condition for continued membership
in any military or DoD civilian organization.
This may include, for example, branding or tattooing,
forcing someone to consume food, alcohol, drugs or other
substances, or orally berating someone with the purpose of
belittling, or humiliating. Policies and definitions of hazing
with respect to cadets and midshipmen at the service
academies are codified in 10 U.S.C. §§7452, 8464, & 9452.
Perceptions of Hazing
Initiation rituals commonly follow a path of separation,
transition, and incorporation, which brings members into a
new role. Within the military, esprit de corps, or the
capacity of a group’s members to maintain belief in their
mission, is considered a sacred value and is produced
through various trials. Some believe that shared experiences
of hardship during initiation rituals lead to greater group
commitment and dependency. On the other hand, some
contend that these rituals waste time and reduce a service
member’s ability to perform at his or her psychological and
physical peaks. When taken to extremes, certain activities
may also result in permanent injuries or death.
As Armed Forces personnel often undergo physically and
mentally rigorous training, particularly as new recruits, the
line between acceptable behavior and reportable behavior
(i.e., hazing) can quickly blur. Some members may even
seek to participate in certain activities that are prohibited by
policy (e.g., blood-winging/blood-pinning) in order to prove
that they belong. Proponents of these rituals justify them by
pointing to the differences in military and civilian culture.
The services have established formal, community-specific
indoctrination processes. For example, military members
must meet certain standards in terms of conduct, physical
fitness, competence, and marksmanship in order to be
accepted and retained.
Estimated Prevalence and Reporting
Rates
Efforts to discern accurate hazing prevalence rates have
faced challenges. In 2016, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) found that each service branch has different
data tracking requirements and that formally tracked reports
were often limited to cases investigated by military criminal
investigative organizations, rather than allegations handled
by the chain of command or inspector general. Moreover,
the Department and the services used inconsistent methods
for counting cases and had decentralized points of contact
throughout. However, an estimate of prevalence can be
obtained from command climate surveys that include
questions related to hazing and demeaning behaviors. Table
I describes the degree to which service members perceive
hazing and demeaning behaviors within their own units.
Table 1. Active Duty Prevalence of Hazing and
Demeaning Behaviors
