The armed forces were under fire yesterday as it emerged that at least four servicewomen have had breast enlargement operations at a military hospital since the start of the year.
The women went under the knife for implants at the Services' Royal Hospital Haslar in Hampshire, the Ministry of Defence confirmed. It defended the operations, which can cost thousands of pounds, saying they were medically necessary.
However, Iain Duncan Smith, Conservative shadow defence secretary, said the situation was ''ridiculous'' and brought a whole new meaning to the phrase ''second front''.
He said: ''This is happening at a time when money is short in the armed forces and there are shortages in soldiers, air crew and ships' equipment. This Government seems to be squandering money on things that will have little effect on fighting capability even if they enhance morale.''
But an MoD spokesman said: ''We are not treating our servicewomen any differently than they would be treated as civilians by the NHS. These are only done for medical reasons not for aesthetic reasons. If they have got some sort of deformity or psychological reasons these are taken into account and it is only done if recommended by a doctor.''
The true number of breast enlargement operations among servicewomen is likely to be even higher.
''We have got no central records of them,'' an MoD spokesman said.
Last month Lance Corporal Roberta Winterton, 20, was given her marching orders by the army when she posed topless for a tabloid newspaper, the first serving soldier to do so.
Meanwhile, it was reported that women with breast implants are up to three times more likely to die from lung or brain cancer than those without. The findings come after a US study of 13,500 women who received implants
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article