In her 2004 New Yorker piece, Chest Out, Stomach In: Be All That You Can Be, Karen Schaler shed some light on the free cosmetic surgery benefit made available to active duty military personnel. Dependents, such as soldiers' spouses, and retirees can also take advantage of heavily reduced rates on these procedures, which range from breast implants to tummy tucks and nose jobs.

According to the Army, between 2000 and 2003 its doctors performed four hundred and ninety-six breast enlargements and a thousand three hundred and sixty-one liposuction surgeries on soldiers and their dependents. In the first three months of 2004, it performed sixty breast enhancements and two hundred and thirty-one liposuctions.

Responding to critics who suggest that the benefit is being used as a shameful recruiting tactic, the Department of Defense claims that the surgeries are more for the benefit of military plastic surgeons than for patients. Patricia A. Buss, M.D., a plastic surgeon and a captain in the Navy Medical Corps as well as deputy chief medical officer of the DOD's TriCare Management Activity explained that "prohibiting plastic surgeons from exercising the full range of their skills would make it difficult, if not impossible, to retain these surgeons in the military." She also notes that:

"We need to have plastic surgeons in the military, because we take care of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who are injured and who have things like facial fractures, burns, chronic wounds and skin cancers," she says. "We also use our plastic surgeons to take care of people who have breast cancer, dog bites, cleft lip and so many other things. If we want to keep a cadre of well-trained plastic surgeons wearing uniforms and serving their country, we need to allow them to practice the full scope of care that comes within plastic surgery."

I don't know if I buy it. Yes, the military certainly needs to maintain a high number of skillfully trained surgeons for crucial reconstructive surgeries during combat. But breast implants and tummy tucks? I'm not quite sure how they fit into the equation.

Yet another concern of mine is the ridiculous sum of money being spent on plastic surgeries (which, by the way, are being paid for with American taxpayer dollars) rather than on more pressing military needs during a time of war. In 2003 alone, approximately two million dollars went toward military cosmetic surgery. Why wasn't this money used to purchase more body and vehicle armor, as well as more ammunition? The DOD can claim that these procedure are necessary to keep surgeons "up on their skills," but it seems like a waste to me. And I'm not the only one:

Tom Schatz, Citizens Against Government Waste: "At a time when we’re looking for savings to offset the cost of these wars, at a time when we’re looking for savings to offset the cost of the hurricanes, this is one area where savings might be achieved."

President Bush, are you paying attention?