• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Crewmember Children on the Enterprise?

In regard to birth control, a subcutaneous transporter that detects the ejaculation and transports the semen away as it exits.



"Best to put it into orbit, just to be sure."
 
I think the panspermia theory was a bit less straightforward originally...

I suspect it's more likely they wanted to just survey what could be seen or found from just outside the edge and then returned to report.

I guess so. Or more exactly, they might be trying to find out if travel past the energy barrier was viable at all. Kirk even explicitly says he has to brave the barrier:

Piper: "The only fact we have for sure is that the S.S. Valiant was destroyed." Kirk: "That's probably the best argument to continue the probe. Other vessels will be heading out here someday and they'll have to know what they'll be facing. We're leaving the galaxy, Mr. Mitchell!"

The existence of the barrier itself doesn't seem to come as a surprise for our heroes. Only its nature, as revealed by closer scanning, raises eyebrows.

Timo Saloniemi
 
On the OT, canon dialogue seems to indicate that the woman would leave the service upon marriage/pregnancy.

Tomlinson tells his fiance when she says he's not "off her hook" yet: "Until I do [marry her], I'm still your superior officer..." indicating that at least she would be stepping down from her posting.

McCoy in another ep says (this time of Carolyn Palalmas): "Someday the right man will come along and there she'll go...out of the service..."

I could see families being posted to starbases (at least planetside ones), but not on ships of that era.
 
Why would it be era-specific, though?

Starships of every Trek century are capable of supporting passengers, civilian specialists and all sort of basically idle people such as ship's historians. Just because our TOS heroes are single, divorcees or widowers doesn't mean there wouldn't be married heroes there as well - and if they are married to people qualifying for a shipboard role, then they'd probably want to spend time together.

Whether Starfleet would allow married couples, or siblings, or parents and children, to serve together is a different matter. In the TNG era, this was never a problem unless the personnel themselves decided it would be. In TOS, the issue never arose.

Tomlinson tells his fiance when she says he's not "off her hook" yet: "Until I do [marry her], I'm still your superior officer..." indicating that at least she would be stepping down from her posting.

Or then simply gaining in influence, so that the rank difference would no longer protect Tomlinson from Martine's orders, demands and whims.

The Palamas example is a better one. Even there, though, we could well argue that a science specialist would be likely to marry from her area of expertise, and leave Starfleet because her husband would be a civilian. McCoy might well have been aware of Palamas' general career plans...

Timo Saloniemi
 
^^ Isn't also possible that a ship's particular mission profile could influence whether or not a family or civilians could be aboard for a period of time?
 
Starships of that era required large operational crews. There simply would not be room for children on them. I could see married personnel being allowed to cohabit though, as long as pregnancy did not become an issue.
 
^^ “Fell pregnant”? First time I've heard the verb “to fall” used in that sense. Must be a Brit/Aussie thing.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top