He would not rate convalescent leave as he is not recovering from illness nor injury. He could, with the command’s permission, extend into regular leave beyond the baby leave.

Maybe not enough so. People shouldn’t be required to be married to receive these kinds of benefits. It’s demeaning and demoralizing for people who are in a committed relationship who are having a child to be told that the man doesn’t have this right or privilege adjust to new parental responsibilities. They are no less a parent if they aren’t married, and equally have needs that need to be addressed upon the birth of a child. We don’t really need the military (the Navy in this case) telling us that our child is “out of wedlock” and therefore doesn’t matter or have the same needs. It’s just another one of those situations where the government is trying impress it’s morals (it has those?) on a group of people, in this case defining what a “family” is.

The member has to be married to the woman who is giving birth to his child in order to qualify for the baby leave.