A Family affair?

[RobertScorpio]

My wife and I were watching BOBW last night, (Part two tonight) and I have come to the conclusion that I don't think families should be allowed to live on Starships. I see no real need for it. I served in the military, and some times in very nervous areas of the world. I couldn't imagine having babies running around the ship while at Battle Stations, or GQ, or whatever.

And anyone willing to put their children in the line of danger by having them on a ship needs to have their heads examined. The old "Earth could get attacked just as easily as a ship, so whats the difference" line just doesn't hold water. Earth, as best as I can tell, even figuring in the new TREK XI, was only really attacked a few times, and even then only the BREEN really caused much damage at all (TREK 11 not with standing)

I have to agree with Captain Kirk, and William Shatner, on this one...There is no place for families on a Starship.

Rob
scorpio

 

[USS Kongo]

The Galaxy Class vessels were originally supposed to be deep-range, exploration ships that were expected--and equipped--to go far out of Federation space without any backup. That was mainly why families were aboard, so that the crew members would not be without their loved ones. Although their dependants were still being put at great risk.

But, as we see in the Deep Space Nine pilot, even Sisko's ship, which was a more run of the mill type vessel, had familes--which really didn't make much sense. Especially considering when they knew they were going into battle against the Borg, they should have at least dropped off the families at a starbase.

I agree with Kirk, as well. Dragging civilians along with you into battle does seem a bit dopey. Didn't the Enterprise-E correct this by not having any dependants on board?

Sean

 

[Myasishchev]

I dunno, the Earth has been attacked or nearly destroyed or threatened with destruction a number of times in "recorded" history.

199x: Eugenics Wars. Apparently destructive.
206x: World War III. Possibly the same conflict as a date-retconned Eugenics Wars.
2067: Borg attack.
215x: Romulans invade/defend themselves/whatever. Earth is likely threatened if not actively attacked.
2260s-present: Klingon and Romulan threat acute. Since the development of cloaked warships, the risk of a first strike against population centers cannot be denied.
2272: V'Ger attack.
2275ish: Probe attack.
2365ish: Infiltration of Starfleet Command by parasitic creatures.
2366ish: Borg attack.
2373ish: Borg attack.
2373ish: Founder infiltration and attempted Starfleet coup.
2375: Breen attack.
2379: Attempted Reman/Romulan attack.

Now, Earth has been saved every time (sometimes after significant damage has been inflicted, especially after the Probe attack). But any specific starship out of thousands or tens of thousands might well be much safer than any planetary surface in the event of a surprise attack on the core worlds. Of course, in times of war, where the ships are expected to sustain combat operations for months or years, families should not be aboard.

 

[greenmystik]

I dunno, the Earth has been attacked or nearly destroyed or threatened with destruction a number of times in "recorded" history.

199x: Eugenics Wars. Apparently destructive.
206x: World War III. Possibly the same conflict as a date-retconned Eugenics Wars.
2067: Borg attack.
215x: Romulans invade/defend themselves/whatever. Earth is likely threatened if not actively attacked.
2260s-present: Klingon and Romulan threat acute. Since the development of cloaked warships, the risk of a first strike against population centers cannot be denied.
2272: V'Ger attack.
2275ish: Probe attack.
2365ish: Infiltration of Starfleet Command by parasitic creatures.
2366ish: Borg attack.
2373ish: Borg attack.
2373ish: Founder infiltration and attempted Starfleet coup.
2375: Breen attack.
2379: Attempted Reman/Romulan attack.

Now, Earth has been saved every time (sometimes after significant damage has been inflicted, especially after the Probe attack). But any specific starship out of thousands or tens of thousands might well be much safer than any planetary surface in the event of a surprise attack on the core worlds. Of course, in times of war, where the ships are expected to sustain combat operations for months or years, families should not be aboard.

I don't think it would be all that much safer. Exploring creates its own kinds of risks. You never know what your going to run into out in deep space. Voyager had a hell of a time in the delta quadrant, luckily there were no families aboard. E-D ran into its share of troubles while exploring, though they never lost lives.

Earth still seems safer when you factor in the unkowns in space (ie: anomolies, new races, hell even ship defects.) and the fact that Earth has only been attacked a dozen times in the last 400 years makes it look good.

 

[EmperorTiberius]

They don't come home every 6 months, whether it's Galaxy class or not. Would you go without your family on a 5 year mission without seeing them once?

There is no reason for ships to go to Earth, and when they do, it's for a couple of days, so if I was an officer aboard Enterprise, I'd sure as hell want my wife there with me.

 

[kent]

Modern 24th century starships largely have the ability to travel in deep space for a lot longer than sihps from Kirk's era could. Take the Galaxy class. That can be in space for 10 years without support or more even. If you have a 5 year old at home, then you've just missed the most important years of your kids lives, and all of a sudden you have a teenager that doesn't consider you a father or mother at all, just a figure somewhere out there.

Even if you're gone for 5 years in deep space, there is no gaurentee that your next shore leave or updates for the ship will be earth. It could be a starbase, or a different place than where your kid is. Could be hundreds of lightyears away. Starfleet's territory was a lot smaller in the 23rd century, and a TON bigger in the 24th century.

While I agree that space is dangerous, it's not fair to ask your officers to go out into deep space, hundreds or even a thousand lightyears from home, AND sacrifice a basic human need: to start a family. If Federation space was smaller, and mission durations a lot shorter like in the old days, I'd say leave the families at home. But that's not the case anymore.

Also being in the modern military is different than being thousands or hundreds of lightyears away from familiy. At that distance, real-time communication could be impossible, and shoreleave WHERE your family is a once in every god knows how long. It's not like being a phone call away, or only a few thousand miles away. You're away, and largely for good in the 24th century.

 

[RobertScorpio]

They don't come home every 6 months, whether it's Galaxy class or not. Would you go without your family on a 5 year mission without seeing them once?

There is no reason for ships to go to Earth, and when they do, it's for a couple of days, so if I was an officer aboard Enterprise, I'd sure as hell want my wife there with me.

I don't think its ever stated that most of the people on these star ships live on Earth...so that is pretty much a guess. I think many of them live many places in the FED..

Rob

 

[SFRabid]

Of course we are only seeing the exciting points in time with battles, conflicts, and the hostile unknown.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Modern 24th century starships largely have the ability to travel in deep space for a lot longer than sihps from Kirk's era could. Take the Galaxy class. That can be in space for 10 years without support or more even. If you have a 5 year old at home, then you've just missed the most important years of your kids lives, and all of a sudden you have a teenager that doesn't consider you a father or mother at all, just a figure somewhere out there.

Even if you're gone for 5 years in deep space, there is no gaurentee that your next shore leave or updates for the ship will be earth. It could be a starbase, or a different place than where your kid is. Could be hundreds of lightyears away. Starfleet's territory was a lot smaller in the 23rd century, and a TON bigger in the 24th century.

While I agree that space is dangerous, it's not fair to ask your officers to go out into deep space, hundreds or even a thousand lightyears from home, AND sacrifice a basic human need: to start a family. If Federation space was smaller, and mission durations a lot shorter like in the old days, I'd say leave the families at home. But that's not the case anymore.

Also being in the modern military is different than being thousands or hundreds of lightyears away from familiy. At that distance, real-time communication could be impossible, and shoreleave WHERE your family is a once in every god knows how long. It's not like being a phone call away, or only a few thousand miles away. You're away, and largely for good in the 24th century.

Again..we don't really know where these people live. And, sorry, Starfleet should just tell these people who plan to have children that they may be gone for a long time..or..relocate your family on to a world closer to where you are deployed. Which is why many american soldiers live in Japan and Europe because THAT is where they are deployed..

Its a wrong headed idea that apparently they seemed to have done away with in later movies...I hope so..

Rob

 

[iguana_tonante]

I think it would have worked as TNG was originally designed, a city-ship in a deep space exploration journey. In that case, the ship would have been more than just a vessel, it would have been a community of pilgrims and explorers in the outskirts of known space for years and years. In that case, bringing families aboard would have been a good idea, for practical and storytelling purposes, just like the famed Wagon Train to the Stars. However, as it was realized, the Enterprise ended up around Earth every six months or so, so it was just a bad idea, getting people into thinking that Starfleet put their personnel's families in the line of danger.
About Sisko's family aboard the Saratoga, I don't know if it was ever established if Jennifer was an officer or at least a civilian contractor working for Starfleet. In that case, I could almost understand the presence of Jake. If she was just a civilian kept around for nothing, it was inexcusable. For run of the mill starships, kept families at home. Make shorter tours of duty, if you want to let you officers be with their families more often.

 

[Myasishchev]

^You know, that's kind of a good point, re the Siskos. For that matter, why didn't Ben pack them off on an escape pod before he engaged the Borg? This was no ad hoc encounter but a task force operation. He knew precisely what he would be engaging--a powerful, dangerous super-vessel that had previously and literally cut the Federation's most powerful ship to pieces.

Sisko: bad parent?

 

[EmperorTiberius]

^You know, that's kind of a good point, re the Siskos. For that matter, why didn't Ben pack them off on an escape pod before he engaged the Borg? This was no ad hoc encounter but a task force operation. He knew precisely what he would be engaging--a powerful, dangerous super-vessel that had previously and literally cut the Federation's most powerful ship to pieces.

Sisko: bad parent?

May be, if he was in command of the vessel. Who knows if the cap'n would have let him use the escape pod.

 

[jamestyler]

^ Why would they need to waste a escape pod? It couldn't have taken too long to drop civilians off on Earth or a nearby colony.

The whole 'they'll still be in danger on Earth' argument always seemed very limited to me. It's not as if thats the only place humns are living. There are other worlds out there, and most of them aren'r as safe as the homeland.

 

[cb31]

No, no families on Starships...then we wouldn't have had to listen to Alexander whine episode after episode!

 

[Drake]

Lose a starship, lose a family. Two or three generations wiped out in one swell foop.

 

[Stewey]

I think it was logical in the case of the Ent-D because it had the ability to seperate, so that in times of danger the civilians would be kept away from the fighting. My only concern was that the saucer had no minimal warp drive so it could get further away.

Anyway I'm getting far from the point, I think generally families should only have been on ships that are assigned a mission with a long duration, certainly not on a ship with short missions.