Mr. McCracken, thank you for your words of support. I'll gladly share your encouragement and well wishes with my fellow Sailors and Marines out here aboard USS Fort McHenry. For the record, I don't know if there is a right or wrong answer regarding this issue. Is it worth causing a grief-stricken family more pain in order to educate the public? Is the truth worth the fallout? I honestly don't know, and I certainly don't envy those who have to make those decisions. Unfortunately for me, being both a photographer and a father has caused me to stand on both sides of the fence. Now there's a double standard.

Mr. McCracken, thank you for your words of support. I'll gladly share your encouragement and well wishes with my fellow Sailors and Marines out here aboard USS Fort McHenry. For the record, I don't know if there is a right or wrong answer regarding this issue. Is it worth causing a grief-stricken family more pain in order to educate the public? Is the truth worth the fallout? I honestly don't know, and I certainly don't envy those who have to make those decisions. Unfortunately for me, being both a photographer and a father has caused me to stand on both sides of the fence. Now there's a double standard.

"As for me, while I would agree to photos of the casket arriving, I would not agree to the publication of a photo that showed my son mortally wounded in combat. And if it was published against my will, I would use every lawful resource to punish whoever published it." To me, this revolves around the question as to when you sign up for the military, do you sign away your rights to privacy in such a situation? In the private sector, when you sign a contract to gain employment, you agree to certain terms that may impact your privacy or private life, some aspects of which you may not agree with, but remain enforceable as long as you remain employed with that employer. And in such a case, the employees parents have no say, whatsoever, on what happens to their adult child under the contract. They have no legal traction. So do we consider signing up for the military to be the same as signing an individual employment contract? And if so, wouldn't the "employer" (the American taxpayer) be the decider? Why would parents be bestowed any legal traction to alter that decision? How does military service and the ultimate sacrifice compare in importance to private sector employment and its impact? Without a military, we wouldn't have an economy.. But without an economy, we wouldn't have the ability to defend ourselves, and by extension, we wouldn't need the military.

Mr. Wilson, first let me thank you for your service to our country. May GOD Bless you and your fellow warriors and keep you safe. I look forward to the day when you and all of our men and women in the military arrive home safe and sound. As for your post, I do agree that photographs are a window to the world that lets us see events where we can’t be at the time. And they can and often do change the course of history. Your mention of Eddie Adams is a powerful example. But I also wonder how many know how Mr. Adams felt after the picture was taken. His picture of South Vietnam General Nguyen Ngoc Loan shooting a captured Viet Cong during the Tet Offensive was one of the main catalysts for the changing of American opinion concerning the war in Vietnam. And though it won him a Pulitzer Prize in 1969, it was one that Mr. Adams wished that he had never taken. In interviews with Time magazine and National Public Radio, Mr. Adams stated “The general killed the Viet Cong; I killed the general with my camera. Still photographs are the most powerful weapon in the world.” He went on to say “photographs do lie, even without manipulation. They are only half-truths. I'm not saying what he did was right…..This picture really messed up his life. He never blamed me.” When the general died, Mr. Adams sent flowers and a card that said “I'm sorry. There are tears in my eyes.” I guess I am trying to say two things here. One is while a picture is worth a thousand words; sometimes those are just not enough words to fully explain the picture. The second thing is that as a father, while I could approve the story being told, I personally could never give permission for a picture of my mortally wounded child to be published. A double standard? Perhaps. Selfish? Yes. But the pain and loss that such a picture would evoke every time I saw it would be too great a burden for me.

Unfortunately, due to our ship's bandwidth out here in the Persian Gulf, I haven't been able to see the images being discussed. I think this is one of those ethical gray area issues that make photo editors cringe, much like the WTC "falling man" photos from 9/11 and Kevin Carter's Pulitzer-prize winning photo of a vulture stalking a dying girl. No matter how powerful the photo, there's still the chance that it could simply be too much for the viewers to digest. The ultimate question is will the photos of wounded or dead American servicemembers open the public's eyes to the horrors of war and show exactly what is happening over there, or is the photographer simply trying to cash in by glorifying death? For years newspapers ran front page photos of mangled bodies in auto accidents and such, for no reason other than they knew that those pictures sold issues. Fortunately media has gotten away from profitting from photos of the deceased. However there are still times when using photos of death is the only way that printed media can truly show the public what's happening in a given situation, particularly war. Matthew Brady showed the world the human cost on the battlefields of the Civil War; Robert Capa showed us the brutality of the Spanish Civil War; Larry Burrows opened the public's eyes to what was truly happening in Vietnam; James Nachtwey continues to show the human toll everywhere. These men showed the world death, but not in a tasteless or profiteering manner. As a deployed Sailor in the Navy, I don't want to see photos of dead servicemembers any more than anyone back at home does. But as a military photojournalist, I also understand that there is a place and a need for those photos in media today, if such photos are shot and displayed in good taste. The world needs to know what's going on over here. To deny the public the ability to see the ugly side of war on all sides is to deny that the ugly side of war exists. That was the military's defense for years in regards to not allowing photos of returning caskets at Dover AFB. They felt that such photos were demoralizing to the American public. They didn't restrict photography out of respect to the families, they restricted photography because they didn't want Americans to see their own coming back in boxes. The policy was basically a pro-war form of propaganda by controlling media and not allowing the public to physically see the cost of war. But I digress. I don't like seeing photos of death, particularly when it's a fellow soldier, sailor, marine or airman. I especially can't fathom how difficult it would be for a family member to see such a photo. However, if the photo was tasteful and served more to educate the public than to glorify war and death, then I personally would agree to its publication. Like it or not, these are the types of photos that can change policies and even history. Just ask anyone familiar with Eddie Adams.

I am a proud Marine dad whose son one day may have to go to Afghanistan so this is an issue dear to me. As I understand it, the AP told the family about the picture and the father opposed the release of the picture. That should have been the end of the matter right there and the AP should not have published the photo. If the family had agreed, then I think it would have been ok to publish the photo. This is the policy for pictures of military caskets arriving at Dover AFB and I think it should also apply in this case. As for me, while I would agree to photos of the casket arriving, I would not agree to the publication of a photo that showed my son mortally wounded in combat. And if it was published against my will, I would use every lawful resource to punish whoever published it.