Military Gender Roles
Marriage and divorce are common occurrences for many young adults. However, military members marry and divorce at different rates than the general civilian population. These trends may give some insight into why enlisted women divorce at higher rates than all others. One study reported military members marry at higher rates than civilians; 60% of high school educated military members ages 23-25 were married compared to 37% of their civilian peers. The rates decrease with education but still remain higher for military members; 40% of military members with a college education were married compared to 25% of civilians (Hogan & Seifert, 2010). As a whole, military members divorce at lower rates than civilians (Kanzler et al., 2011). This number
…show more content…
cannot be taken at face value as it may not be representative of the actual divorce rate in the military. Military members may leave the military before ending their relationships and the civilian population may not be a representative comparison group. Military members are a subgroup of the general U.S. population that has different life situations and stressors that may affect their relationships and families (Karney & Crown, 2007). Additionally, the low divorce rate is not representative of all those who serve; this data does not include reserve, guard and LGBT personnel. The most current data on military marriage and divorce predate the 2011 reversal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing same sex marriage in all 50 states.
While the military marriage rates appear higher and the divorce rates appear lower than the civilian divorce rate, within the military there is a discrepancy between gender and ranks. Karney & Crown (2007) reported military women are less likely to be married than military men. As of 2005, 42.8% of enlisted women and 51.0% of female officers were married compared to 51% of enlisted men and 72.5% of male officers. Military women marry younger than civilians; but as they age they are less likely to get married for the first time (Adler-Baeder et al, 2005).
The military divorce rate overall is half of the civilian divorce rate. When that data is separated by gender and rank there is a significant discrepancy; 7.3 % of enlisted women, 3.6% of female officers, 2.8% of enlisted men and 1.5% of male officers are divorced (Karney & Crown, 2007). Women who have made the military their career are more likely to divorce or never marry than women who do not serve for twenty years (Adler-Baeder et al., 2005). Military women are more likely to marry another military member as evidenced by 52.3% of enlisted women and 43.6% of female officers are in dual-military marriages. This trend is not present in military men; 8.2% of enlisted men and 6.1% of male officers are in dual-military marriages. This trend may not be not surprising as 8.4% of enlisted women married to civilian men divorce and that risk is slightly reduced in dual-military marriages falling to 6.2%. However, the risk for divorce increases for enlisted men from 2.7% when married to a civilian to 5.1% for men in dual-military marriages. The officer statistics are even lower for both men and women suggesting education and age may be a factor (Karney & Crown, 2007).
Military members marry, divorce and remarry younger than civilians. In a data analysis of military records from 1999; Adler-Baeder et al. (2005) found that about a third of married military members are remarried. In addition to divorcing more frequently, enlisted women are more likely to remarry than all others and remarry multiple times. Furthermore, military men are more likely to remarry than civilian men, which may be due to the perception that marriage is incentivized.
Theories for Why Enlisted Women Divorce More Frequently
There are several hypotheses exploring why enlisted women divorce at higher rates than other military members and civilians. Many of these theories are specific to unique relationship stressors and situations only found in a military lifestyle. It has been suggested that a military lifestyle is more stressful due to frequent deployments and job stress. Military individuals may experience role strain and have differences in opinion regarding gender roles. Additionally, it has been suggested that marriage is incentivized, female military members may be more accepting of divorce, and male civilian partners do not receive the same institutional support as female civilian partners receive (Kanzler et al., 2011; Karney & Crown, 2007). Civilian research has suggested factors such as educational attainment, age, economic stress, race, prior divorce, children in the home, and various adverse family of origin environmental factors that may have led to decreased communication, relationship skills, and disrupted relationship attachments (Adler-Baeder et al., 2005; DiLillo et al., 2007; Dilworth, 2004; Fergusson, McLeod, & John Horwood, 2014; Hearn Escaravage, 2014; Whisman, 2006).
Incentives to marry earlier. Several researchers have suggested marriage has been incentivized through the many benefits the military offers, which may result in decreased relationship quality (Hogan & Seifert, 2010; Kanzler et al., 2011; Karney & Crown, 2007). Karney & Crown (2007) believe variables such as increased stress from deployments and high levels of work stress may be unrelated to the high prevalence of divorce. Their theory is marriage is incentivized for young, vulnerable individuals who may put less considering in finding a compatible partner and the lack of compatibility is why the relationships are at risk. Incentives for married members include increased pay in the form of additional housing allowance, cost of living allowances and family separation pay. Additionally, young service members may move off base and out of the dormitories if they marry.
Frequent moves are common in the military which may add pressure to get married. If a member gets an assignment, generally the couple can stay together if they are married. They can apply for a joint-spouse assignment or the civilian partner can be sponsored to wherever the member needs to go. Marriage is incentivized in training environments as well; academy cadets must marry within 60 days to stay with their partner and enlisted members must marry before their technical training is over. This could contribute to the higher divorce rates in enlisted women as technical schools last six weeks to one year (Kanzler et al., 2011; USAF, 2015). However, some couples will be geographically separated even if they are married, military members in different service branches may not have the option to be stationed together (Karney & Crown, 2007).
Civilian partners receive extensive benefits such as free comprehensive healthcare and most military instillations have multiple support services for families at little to no cost. Historically these services are focused for stay at home mothers and are offered during the duty day making it difficult for military members and employed partners to attend. There are also support services such as spouses clubs and support for spouses from the member’s unit while the member is deployed (Kanzler et al., 2011). These services may bolster the marriages of military men married to civilian women, but are likely to be of limited benefit for dual-military couples, and military women with civilian male partners.
Military lifestyle stressors. The military has unique stressors not found in civilian life that may increase a couple’s risk for relationship problems. Some well known stressors include long hours, shift work, deployments, stressful jobs, and frequent moves away from family and support networks. A 2015 Washington Times article discussed the strain military women and their families experience and stated it has led to decreased retention of women and less women achieving higher ranks. There is a reported ongoing effort to create an environment allowing more flexibility for military members and their families. There will be more promotion opportunities for women, increased flexibility in job changes and duty hours to accommodate those who need services like childcare (Kilmas, 2015). One potential reason enlisted women married to civilian men are more likely to divorce (Karney & Crown, 2007) is it is difficult for civilian partners to maintain careers. They must accommodate their partner’s military obligations which may result in childcare difficulties and frequent moves (Kilmas, 2015). This may be less of an issue in a relationship that closely resembles traditional gender roles with a partner who chooses to stay at home with children, but is likely to adversely impact military women and their male partners who may want careers. The military is considering giving members more input into their assignments and offering the option to stay at one assignment longer in hope to retain personnel (Kilmas, 2015). Deployments are another unique stressor for military couples. The member may be required to leave their family on short notice for six to 12 months at a time. Men and women deploy at similar rates and to combat zones. Deployments cause hardship on families through decreased communication and the domestic duties fall onto the individual left at home. Deployments are not necessarily a risk factor for divorce for male service members, but female service members who have been deployed are more likely to divorce than those who have not deployed (Karney & Crown, 2007). In the past the military has tried to negate the stressors related to deployments through financial incentives and in July 2015, they expanded their efforts. The Air Force recognized the crucial need for mothers to spend the first year of their child’s life with them and extended the dwell time after childbirth before being eligible to deploy from six months to one year (USAF, 2015). It was intended to alleviate some of the hardship military women face and improve retention. While it has been suggested that marriage is highly incentivized. These incentives likely benefit military men with traditional relationships to civilian women but they may fall short for military women. Military women have access to healthcare, pay and various benefits without being married. A civilian woman may not have the same access and financial freedom to leave an unhappy relationship that a military woman has. The freedom and financial security military women enjoy may contribute to the higher divorce rate as they may be choosing to leave unhappy relationships (Kanzler et al., 2011).
Gender roles.
Karney and Crown (2007) posited military women are likely to identify with the least traditional gender roles while military men are likely to identify with the most traditional gender roles. Kanzler et al. (2011) discussed women who do not work full time and identify with traditional gender roles are less likely to be divorced. A concept that supports Karney & Crown’s (2007) data analysis concluding military men married to civilian women are the least likely to divorce. Traditional gender roles may be difficult for military women to balance with their military requirements. Dilworth (2004) stated “marital satisfaction in women has been connected to a perceived equity of domestic labor”(p. 247) supporting Kanzler et al.’s (2011) theory that military women fare better with a partner who has egalitarian views of gender roles and accommodates the demands of their occupation and lifestyle. Without an egalitarian partner, they risk a gender role mismatch potentially leading to conflict and dissolution of the …show more content…
relationship.
It has been suggested that role strain from balancing military duties and family life may contribute to why military women divorce at higher rates. Role strain has been linked to excessive drinking, depression and psychological distress; all of which can cause relationship difficulties. Men tend to let work stress into their home life and women tend to let home stressors into their work life (Dilworth, 2004). Women are more likely to feel distress about balancing their work and personal lives than men do; however military women who are involved in job, marital and parental duties are likely to feel less distressed than those who have fewer roles and miss out on the benefits of what each role provides (Kanzler et al., 2011). In addition, how one’s partner perceives the demands of the military lifestyle and the member’s workload is directly linked to relationship satisfaction. If their partner wants the member to be helping at home more but they are at work, the relationship will likely suffer. However, if the partner expects the military to be demanding, time consuming and a priority; the relationship does not suffer. Partner expectations of marital and domestic roles are generally informed by gender roles, supporting the theory that traditional gender roles are less likely to be compatible in relationships for military women (Dilworth, 2004; Karney & Crown, 2007).
Emotional factors. Stress can contribute to relationship difficulties. Military women may feel more stress from experiencing higher levels of discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual assault in the work place than their male counterparts (Kanzler et al., 2011). Karney and Crown (2007) state the military’s recruiting criteria will result in more vulnerable individuals entering the military leading to an increase in divorces. Those with more individual vulnerabilities are at higher risk to cope poorly with stress and develop mental health conditions from their military service requirements, which may contribute to additional relationship problems. The more personal vulnerabilities an individual has correlates with a greater likelihood they have fewer relationship opportunities and an increased likelihood to stay in less satisfying relationships for longer (Karney & Crown, 2007).
It is likely that all the previously discussed theories contribute to the higher divorce rate for enlisted women. However, there has not yet been a definitive conclusion made about the impact of any one theory previously discussed. Additionally, research has come short of exploring the impact of adverse family of origin environments on relationship functioning for military women. This will be explored more in depth to determine how this factor contributes to relationship dysfunction in enlisted women.
More common in military personnel. Financial status has a significant impact on the quality of a child’s life. Children from low-income families are likely to have a lower quality education and their parents are less involved in their education. Furthermore, low-income parents likely speak to their children less often and provide less social support (Evans, 2004). Low-income families are more likely to be involved with social services and the parents are more likely to be divorced or a single parent (Evans, 2004; Hearn Escaravage, 2014). As a result of these experiences children from low-income families may feel less connected to their community, develop fewer relationship skills, and have less educational attainment (Evans, 2004).
Karney & Crown (2007) stated enlisted members are “the most vulnerable of the eligible population in terms of age, ethnicity and potential for career advancement in the civilian market” (p. 65). When enlisted men were asked what their top motivations for enlisting are; a large majority cited a desire to serve their country. However, a large majority also indicated they enlisted because they needed college money, had a lack of better options, needed to provide for their family, the military was the best employment available and some were going through a divorce, job loss or having financial problems (Woodruff et al., 2006). Another study exploring reasons individuals chose to enlist found enlisted women are more likely to come from divorced or single parent homes and their parents are not college educated. They are more likely to have achieved lower grades than those who chose not to enlist, suggesting enlisted women may have had fewer opportunities after high school (Segal, Segal, & Bachman, 1998).
Blosnich et al., (2014) suggested that military members are more likely to have experienced adverse childhood experiences (ACE)s than civilians. They compared the prevalence of ACEs between men and women who served in the Vietnam era and now. This study was flawed due to their attempt to compare two vastly different populations and they had a vague definition of military service. Most studies define military service by active duty service and this study was inclusive to anyone who served in any capacity for any amount of time. However, the data they collected has utility. They conducted a phone survey of 426 women, ages 18-55 who self-identified as veterans. The veterans reported high rates of emotional (43.4%), physical (29.1%) and sexual abuse as defined by being touched sexually (25.9%), being forced to touch others sexually (15.8%), and childhood rape (10.2%). Additionally, 27.5% reported having a family member in the home with mental illness, and high rates of substance abuse in the home as defined by drug abuse (17% ) and alcohol abuse (33.9%). Furthermore, 27.7% reported their parents were divorced. In another study, female veterans reported experiencing more occurrences and severity of sexual abuse than civilian women. 49% of veterans reported experiencing child sexual abuse compared to 22% of civilian women; the veterans reported the abuse lasting 12 months longer and 38% of the veterans reported childhood rape compared to 16% of civilian women. In addition, 92% of the veteran women indicated their parent was the perpetrator compared to 68% of civilian women in the study (Schultz et al., 2006).
Childhood abuse. Some types of adverse events have been linked to impairment in certain areas of functioning. For example, physical childhood abuse has been linked to adult relationship disruption and increased likelihood of engaging in physical intimate partner violence (Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2009; Whisman, 2006). Sexual abuse results in lower relationship satisfaction and interpersonal functioning. More specifically, childhood rape is related to lower relationship satisfaction and increased risk of relationship disruption (DiLillo et al., 2007; Whisman, 2006). Children of divorced parents are at an increased risk for being a victim of sexual abuse (Fergusson et al., 2014).
DiLillo et al. (2007) assessed for the impact of childhood physical, emotional, and sexual abuse and physical and emotional neglect on adult relationships. They measured current psychological functioning, level of emotional intimacy, sexual functioning, conflict management and frequency of intimate partner violence. The researchers found that 42% of the individuals in this study indicated some history of childhood maltreatment measured by any report of maltreatment from a low-moderate range on the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) as a positive response for maltreatment. This threshold is lower than the ACE that requires an “often” or “very often” response to be considered a positive response for maltreatment (Felitti et al., 1998a). Female participants in this study reported their relationships were lacking closeness, personal disclosure and they experienced more psychological distress. They were also at an increased risk for being physically aggressive to their partner compared to women without a history of maltreatment. Male participants reported experiencing fewer events than the female participants and did not appear to experience any impact on their adult relationship functioning as a result of childhood maltreatment.
Parental marital status. Parental divorce as an isolated factor does not have a huge impact on future relationship functioning, but it does increase the risk for adverse outcomes. Increased family transitions like multiple divorces or remarriages create an increased risk for several relationship problems. These problems include: experiencing less emotional intimacy, relationship conflict, increased likelihood to date a substance abuser or someone with mental health concerns, and an increased likelihood of engaging in intimate partner violence (Fergusson et al., 2014). Adult children of divorced parents reported not seeing their parents as a positive relationship role model. Consequently they reported experiencing more negative communication, less emotional intimacy and commitment than those whose parents stayed married. Additionally, individuals whose parents never married reported the lowest relationship quality and the greatest likelihood to engage in intimate partner violence (Rhoades et al., 2012).
Intimate Partner Violence. Intimate partner violence is a modeled behavior and children raised in homes with domestic violence are likely to be impacted as adults. Those who reported witnessing violence between their parents were more likely to be physically aggressive themselves (Fritz et al., 2012; Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2009; Rhoades et al., 2012). Additionally, individuals from lower income families are more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence (Fritz et al., 2012).
Impact on adult relationship functioning. Researchers agree that adult relationship functioning is shaped through modeling by parental relationship functioning and early childhood experiences (Fritz et al., 2012; Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2009; Rhoades et al., 2012). Experiences such as living in a home with a high expression of conflict, parental divorce, and child maltreatment may cause significant functional impairment in adult romantic relationships. An adverse family of origin environment can lead to decreased relationship functioning, commitment, satisfaction and effort (Rhoades et al., 2012). Additionally, women with these experiences may struggle to develop a secure attachment with their partner and as a result experience decreased intimacy, more jealousy, lower levels of affection, less relationship satisfaction and feel emotional distress (Knapp, Norton, & Sandberg, 2015). Significant exposure to adverse childhood events is linked to poor health outcomes, increased risk for suicide, depression, alcoholism and poverty in adulthood (Felitti et al., 1998b; Frederick & Goddard, 2007; Murphy et al., 2013). Several theories have been suggested as explanations for why enlisted women divorce at higher rates and there is data to suggest they may be plausible explanations. There is a significant amount of research supporting adverse family of origin environments adversely impacting adult relationship functioning. Karney and Crown (2007) support this theory through the suggestion the military recruits individuals who are vulnerable from their backgrounds and incentivizes marriages resulting in less carefully selected partners. They also suggest that young military couples in their first marriage without children are at an increased risk for adapting poorly to the military in comparison to remarried couples or couples with children. Young couples lack the emotional resources and commitment that older and more established couples have. When considering the demographic makeup of those who enlist, the impact of adverse family of origin environments and military risk factors; it supports the hypothesis that adverse family of origin environments may contribute to decreased relationship functioning and in turn a higher divorce rate for enlisted women.
Participants will be recruited as part of a large longitudinal study called “Up-Armoring At Risk Military Couples: A prospective study of committed romantic relationships in transition to their first permanent duty station”. The volunteers will be recruited during in processing for their technical training at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. The goal is to recruit at least 50 female and 50 male participants. It is expected more males will be recruited as females make up about 15% of the Air Force’s population. It is expected a majority of the participants will be ages 18-30. To participate, the airmen will be active duty, attending technical school and in an intimate partner relationship for the past six months.
Measures
The participants will be administered a comprehensive survey that will take about 30 minutes to complete.
The survey is anonymous, however some demographic data will be collected. This data includes: rank, age, ethnicity, education level, relationship status, length of relationship and if there are children in the home. The survey includes questions that will not likely be used in this analysis. The questions not being used measure various constructs such as: posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression symptoms; recent stressful life events; anger management techniques; substance use; mental health history, social support and religious coping mechanisms. The focus of this analysis and questions will be on adverse family of origin environments and relationship
functioning. To determine the family of origin environment two measures were used, the FES (Moos & Moos, 1974) and the ACE (Felitti et al., 1998a). There are three items not selected from any measure inquiring about the structure of the participants’ family and childhood home. Two are yes or no questions: “are your biological parents currently married?” and “were they ever married?”. The next question instructs the participant to indicate which relative they grew up with from the options of “both biological parents”, “biological mother and step father”, “single mother”, “adoptive parents”, “biological father and step mother”, “single father” and “other”. Five items from FES’s Cohesion and Conflict subscales were included. FES is widely used to understand an individual’s environmental perception of their childhood home. The items selected assess the level of anger expressed in the home and support expressed between family members. The questions are in a true or false format. The questions from the Cohesion and Conflict subscales have been found to be answered in a comparable manner between partners and have a 0.76-0.77 reliability (Chipuer & Villegas, 2001).
The ACE questionnaire is a reliable and well known measure for determining negative events experienced during childhood. 17 items from the ACE questionnaire were included to assess for a history of child abuse, trauma, domestic violence and family dysfunction such as mental illness, substance abuse, incarceration and parental divorce. A majority of the items are on a likert scale measuring the level of exposure to adverse events ranging from never to very often and a few questions are in a yes or no format (Felitti et al., 1998a). For this survey there were some modifications. First being the questions were modified from a likert scale to only include “often” and “very often” to a yes or no question. The second modification was to update the question assessing domestic violence towards a stepmother and mother to be more inclusive and representative of modern families. The question now states “Sometimes physical blows occur between adults. In your home, how often did one of your parents, guardian or their partner do this to their partner?”.
To measure for current relationship functioning, several measures were selected. Five items from the Negative Spillover scales for home to work and work to home will be used (Grzywacz & Marks, 2000). This scale uses the word spillover to describe this study’s definition of role strain and measures the amount of negative spillover on a five point likert scale from never to very often over the past three months (Dilworth, 2004). It was modified for this survey to the past one month as the participants have been in a training environment. Two role strain questions from the Army PREP program addressing spillover will be used (Stanley et al., 2005). The questions include: “at home, I am so tired or preoccupied with work that I don’t have much time or energy left for my marriage or family” and “stress at work sometimes make it harder to get along with my spouse/partner”. Participants will respond on a seven-item likert scale from almost never to almost always. Participants will be asked about relationship satisfaction as measured by the MSI-B and the MSI. The MSI-B is an adaptation of the Marital Satisfaction Inventory-Revised (MSI-R). The MSI-B includes ten questions in a true or false format selected from the MSI-R subscales: Global Distress, Time Together, Sexual Dissatisfaction, Affective Communication, and Problem Solving Communication. Five items from this measure are included on the survey. Additionally, the MSI-B has good reliability (0.78 and 0.80) and good validity (0.93 and 0.94)(Whisman, Snyder, & Beach, 2009). In addition, one item was selected from the marital status inventory (MSI). The MSI is a 14-item measure designed to determine the likelihood couples will end their relationship. The questions are in a true or false format (Weiss & Cerreto, 1980).
Communication is a key element of relationship functioning, to measure this the Communication Danger Scale and the CPQ-CC will be used. Markman et al. (2010) created The Communication Danger Sign Scale in the book Fighting For Your Marriage to help couples determine if they are at risk for divorce. Markman et al (2010) boasted an 82-93% accuracy of this scale in predicting which couples will divorce based on their communication patterns. All seven items from this measure were used. The scale assesses current communication functioning within the relationship. The items are in a true or false format. The CPQ-CC measures communication patterns between couples during conflict, eight items were included and answered in a true or false format. CPQ-CC defines this construct of communication as the presence and frequency of criticism between partners, blaming and accusations, mutual verbal threats, and verbal aggression to include name calling and yelling. These items were modified from a nine point likert scale from not at all to a lot, and are now measured by true or false. This measure has 0.84 and 0.81 reliability for self-report and a 0.72 validity for self-report to observed behavior by one of the researchers (Heavey et al., 1996).
The final construct of relationship functioning is the presence of intimate partner violence. Ten items from the Physical Assault subscale of the CTS2 were used, it measures the frequency of physical aggression between partners are on a scale from never to more than 20 times over the past 12 months. This measure can be modified to include time periods of since the relationship started, a stage in treatment, over the previous month and past six months. This survey modified the time measured to the past six months and included an optional selection of “not in the past 6 months, but has happened in the past”. Additionally the survey asks “more than 10 times” instead of more than 20 times; likely due to the shortened assessment period from one year. The CTS2 internal reliability ranges from 0.79-0.95 (Straus et al., 1996).
Procedure
The researchers were included in the potential participants in-processing schedule and will recruit the potential participants in a classroom at their dormitory. Upon arrival the researchers are introduced to the group and explain why they are there. Potential participants are separated from their technical school class by asking those on active duty and in a committed romantic relationship for the past six months or longer to raise their hands. The others are invited to take a break from their in-processing and allowed to leave and go to their dayroom. Those who choose to participate are given a standard script and all the forms are explained. The participants are given a manila envelope containing: a pen, consent form, contact form (a required form for the larger study this data is part of), a handout to take home explaining the study and the actual survey. The survey has a randomly assigned participant ID code on the first page. The researcher is present for the completion of the survey to answer questions as they arise. When the participants have completed the survey they will return their survey in an unmarked manila envelope to the researcher. At any time the participants can opt out of the study and hand their manila envelope to the researcher.
Design
This study is a between-subjects design using a linear multiple regression and Pearson correlation. There will be several analysis conducted. First, a Pearson correlation will be conducted to determine if there is a relationship between any of the adverse family of origin environment factors and each construct of relationship functioning. If a relationship is found between these areas; a multiple linear regression will be used to calculate the impact of adverse childhood environment factors on each construct of relationship functioning. Each gender will be analyzed separately. The purpose of this is to determine if men and women experience adverse family of origin environments at different frequencies and detect any differences in relationship functioning as a result of an adverse family of origin environments. The resulting correlation coefficient will be tested for statistical significance at the .05 level. If it is found significant, the value of the coefficient of determination (r2 ) will be computed to interpret the significance of the relationship.
Chapter 4
Results
It is be expected to see a higher prevalence of adverse childhood experiences endorsed by female participants than male participants. Felitti et al. (1998b) conducted a study on 8,506 respondents and found 24.9% reported experiencing one event, 12.5% experienced two events, 6.9% experienced three events and 6.2% endorsed experienced four or more events. A gender breakdown of those numbers found 8.5% of women and 3.9% of men reported experiencing four or more experiences (Felitti et al., 1998b). It would also be expected to see the female participants endorse less satisfaction in their relationships as a result of role strain than male participants this comparison. In Dilworth (2004)’s analysis of role strain between married men and women; women experienced less relationship and family life satisfaction when they worked more.
Chapter 5
Discussion and Implications
Summary
This study will be conducted to explore a long neglected research area. There is limited research about military women in general and even less about their relationship functioning. This is an important area requiring research as relationship problems are linked to issues with performance (Karney & Crown, 2007), retention (Klimas, 2015), emotional wellbeing and suicide in military personnel (Hyman et al., 2012). The research that has been conducted to date has determined enlisted women divorce, and remarry at higher rates than others in the military (Adler-Baeder et al., 2005; Hogan & Seifert, 2010; Karney & Crown, 2007). There have been many proposed reasons for why military women appear to have lower relationship functioning. These reasons varied from stress specific to a military lifestyle, concern the military incentivizes marriage, possible gender role mismatch between partners and enlisted members may be a more vulnerable population (Kanzler et al., 2011; Karney & Crown, 2007). This study will explore the following hypotheses: (1) a higher proportion of women entering the military compared to men will report experiencing adverse family of origin environments, and (2) women with adverse family of origin environment experiences will report overall lower relationship functioning compared to men with similar experiences. The goals of this study are to (1) examine some of the already proposed explanations for the enlisted female divorce rate (2) determine the impact of family of origin events on relationship functioning, and (3) identify if a specific family of origin event or environmental factor has more impact on relationship functioning than others.
Limitations
This study has a few limitations with the measures used, it is not expected for them to drastically affect the outcome of the study. A majority of research on relationship functioning has been on civilian couples. This resulted in difficulty to find measures that are widely used and well validated that capture the hardships of military relationships. Some of the measures used are not as well validated as would be preferred; such as the questions from the Army PREP (Stanley et al., 2005). Additionally the modified format of the ACE questions on the survey may result in underreporting as it is not as inclusive as the original survey. It was streamlined for convenience of the participant and only two items from the five-item likert scale were incorporated to include often and very often. This format excluded participants who may have endorsed rarely or sometimes. Responses of often and very often are counted as ACEs, however it would have been useful data and allowed a fuller understanding of the early childhood environment for women who serve. The CPQ-CC responses were changed from a nine point likert scale to a true or false response which may alter some responses as it will not capture the frequency of adverse communication patterns only the existence of them. The modifications made to some of the questions are outside of the researchers control as the survey is part of a larger study.
Implications
Individuals with adverse backgrounds prior to the military can have very positive outcomes in their lives after serving. The military may offer resources and an opportunity for individuals who have experienced trauma in the past to gain “maturity, personal growth, new skills and improved economic opportunities” (Karney & Crown, 2007, p. 43). For these individuals to fare well they needed outside support from family and friends. There is a research gap exploring issues related to military women and their relationships. Military women are a vulnerable population for divorce, a minority in the military and there is sparse research conducted on their relationship experiences. Hopefully this study will help gain understanding as to why enlisted women experience more relationship difficulties. Once that is accomplished targeted interventions can be created and with early and appropriate interventions the consequences of adverse childhood environments on adult wellbeing and relationship functioning may be mitigated. This may improve the quality of life for enlisted women, lower the frequency of divorce, potentially help improve the military’s ability to retain women and potentially help reduce the risk for suicide (Klimas, 2015; Hyman et al., 2012).
cannot be taken at face value as it may not be representative of the actual divorce rate in the military. Military members may leave the military before ending their relationships and the civilian population may not be a representative comparison group. Military members are a subgroup of the general U.S. population that has different life situations and stressors that may affect their relationships and families (Karney & Crown, 2007). Additionally, the low divorce rate is not representative of all those who serve; this data does not include reserve, guard and LGBT personnel. The most current data on military marriage and divorce predate the 2011 reversal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing same sex marriage in all 50 states.
While the military marriage rates appear higher and the divorce rates appear lower than the civilian divorce rate, within the military there is a discrepancy between gender and ranks. Karney & Crown (2007) reported military women are less likely to be married than military men. As of 2005, 42.8% of enlisted women and 51.0% of female officers were married compared to 51% of enlisted men and 72.5% of male officers. Military women marry younger than civilians; but as they age they are less likely to get married for the first time (Adler-Baeder et al, 2005).
The military divorce rate overall is half of the civilian divorce rate. When that data is separated by gender and rank there is a significant discrepancy; 7.3 % of enlisted women, 3.6% of female officers, 2.8% of enlisted men and 1.5% of male officers are divorced (Karney & Crown, 2007). Women who have made the military their career are more likely to divorce or never marry than women who do not serve for twenty years (Adler-Baeder et al., 2005). Military women are more likely to marry another military member as evidenced by 52.3% of enlisted women and 43.6% of female officers are in dual-military marriages. This trend is not present in military men; 8.2% of enlisted men and 6.1% of male officers are in dual-military marriages. This trend may not be not surprising as 8.4% of enlisted women married to civilian men divorce and that risk is slightly reduced in dual-military marriages falling to 6.2%. However, the risk for divorce increases for enlisted men from 2.7% when married to a civilian to 5.1% for men in dual-military marriages. The officer statistics are even lower for both men and women suggesting education and age may be a factor (Karney & Crown, 2007).
Military members marry, divorce and remarry younger than civilians. In a data analysis of military records from 1999; Adler-Baeder et al. (2005) found that about a third of married military members are remarried. In addition to divorcing more frequently, enlisted women are more likely to remarry than all others and remarry multiple times. Furthermore, military men are more likely to remarry than civilian men, which may be due to the perception that marriage is incentivized.
Theories for Why Enlisted Women Divorce More Frequently
There are several hypotheses exploring why enlisted women divorce at higher rates than other military members and civilians. Many of these theories are specific to unique relationship stressors and situations only found in a military lifestyle. It has been suggested that a military lifestyle is more stressful due to frequent deployments and job stress. Military individuals may experience role strain and have differences in opinion regarding gender roles. Additionally, it has been suggested that marriage is incentivized, female military members may be more accepting of divorce, and male civilian partners do not receive the same institutional support as female civilian partners receive (Kanzler et al., 2011; Karney & Crown, 2007). Civilian research has suggested factors such as educational attainment, age, economic stress, race, prior divorce, children in the home, and various adverse family of origin environmental factors that may have led to decreased communication, relationship skills, and disrupted relationship attachments (Adler-Baeder et al., 2005; DiLillo et al., 2007; Dilworth, 2004; Fergusson, McLeod, & John Horwood, 2014; Hearn Escaravage, 2014; Whisman, 2006).
Incentives to marry earlier. Several researchers have suggested marriage has been incentivized through the many benefits the military offers, which may result in decreased relationship quality (Hogan & Seifert, 2010; Kanzler et al., 2011; Karney & Crown, 2007). Karney & Crown (2007) believe variables such as increased stress from deployments and high levels of work stress may be unrelated to the high prevalence of divorce. Their theory is marriage is incentivized for young, vulnerable individuals who may put less considering in finding a compatible partner and the lack of compatibility is why the relationships are at risk. Incentives for married members include increased pay in the form of additional housing allowance, cost of living allowances and family separation pay. Additionally, young service members may move off base and out of the dormitories if they marry.
Frequent moves are common in the military which may add pressure to get married. If a member gets an assignment, generally the couple can stay together if they are married. They can apply for a joint-spouse assignment or the civilian partner can be sponsored to wherever the member needs to go. Marriage is incentivized in training environments as well; academy cadets must marry within 60 days to stay with their partner and enlisted members must marry before their technical training is over. This could contribute to the higher divorce rates in enlisted women as technical schools last six weeks to one year (Kanzler et al., 2011; USAF, 2015). However, some couples will be geographically separated even if they are married, military members in different service branches may not have the option to be stationed together (Karney & Crown, 2007).
Civilian partners receive extensive benefits such as free comprehensive healthcare and most military instillations have multiple support services for families at little to no cost. Historically these services are focused for stay at home mothers and are offered during the duty day making it difficult for military members and employed partners to attend. There are also support services such as spouses clubs and support for spouses from the member’s unit while the member is deployed (Kanzler et al., 2011). These services may bolster the marriages of military men married to civilian women, but are likely to be of limited benefit for dual-military couples, and military women with civilian male partners.
Military lifestyle stressors. The military has unique stressors not found in civilian life that may increase a couple’s risk for relationship problems. Some well known stressors include long hours, shift work, deployments, stressful jobs, and frequent moves away from family and support networks. A 2015 Washington Times article discussed the strain military women and their families experience and stated it has led to decreased retention of women and less women achieving higher ranks. There is a reported ongoing effort to create an environment allowing more flexibility for military members and their families. There will be more promotion opportunities for women, increased flexibility in job changes and duty hours to accommodate those who need services like childcare (Kilmas, 2015). One potential reason enlisted women married to civilian men are more likely to divorce (Karney & Crown, 2007) is it is difficult for civilian partners to maintain careers. They must accommodate their partner’s military obligations which may result in childcare difficulties and frequent moves (Kilmas, 2015). This may be less of an issue in a relationship that closely resembles traditional gender roles with a partner who chooses to stay at home with children, but is likely to adversely impact military women and their male partners who may want careers. The military is considering giving members more input into their assignments and offering the option to stay at one assignment longer in hope to retain personnel (Kilmas, 2015). Deployments are another unique stressor for military couples. The member may be required to leave their family on short notice for six to 12 months at a time. Men and women deploy at similar rates and to combat zones. Deployments cause hardship on families through decreased communication and the domestic duties fall onto the individual left at home. Deployments are not necessarily a risk factor for divorce for male service members, but female service members who have been deployed are more likely to divorce than those who have not deployed (Karney & Crown, 2007). In the past the military has tried to negate the stressors related to deployments through financial incentives and in July 2015, they expanded their efforts. The Air Force recognized the crucial need for mothers to spend the first year of their child’s life with them and extended the dwell time after childbirth before being eligible to deploy from six months to one year (USAF, 2015). It was intended to alleviate some of the hardship military women face and improve retention. While it has been suggested that marriage is highly incentivized. These incentives likely benefit military men with traditional relationships to civilian women but they may fall short for military women. Military women have access to healthcare, pay and various benefits without being married. A civilian woman may not have the same access and financial freedom to leave an unhappy relationship that a military woman has. The freedom and financial security military women enjoy may contribute to the higher divorce rate as they may be choosing to leave unhappy relationships (Kanzler et al., 2011).
Gender roles.
Karney and Crown (2007) posited military women are likely to identify with the least traditional gender roles while military men are likely to identify with the most traditional gender roles. Kanzler et al. (2011) discussed women who do not work full time and identify with traditional gender roles are less likely to be divorced. A concept that supports Karney & Crown’s (2007) data analysis concluding military men married to civilian women are the least likely to divorce. Traditional gender roles may be difficult for military women to balance with their military requirements. Dilworth (2004) stated “marital satisfaction in women has been connected to a perceived equity of domestic labor”(p. 247) supporting Kanzler et al.’s (2011) theory that military women fare better with a partner who has egalitarian views of gender roles and accommodates the demands of their occupation and lifestyle. Without an egalitarian partner, they risk a gender role mismatch potentially leading to conflict and dissolution of the …show more content…
relationship.
It has been suggested that role strain from balancing military duties and family life may contribute to why military women divorce at higher rates. Role strain has been linked to excessive drinking, depression and psychological distress; all of which can cause relationship difficulties. Men tend to let work stress into their home life and women tend to let home stressors into their work life (Dilworth, 2004). Women are more likely to feel distress about balancing their work and personal lives than men do; however military women who are involved in job, marital and parental duties are likely to feel less distressed than those who have fewer roles and miss out on the benefits of what each role provides (Kanzler et al., 2011). In addition, how one’s partner perceives the demands of the military lifestyle and the member’s workload is directly linked to relationship satisfaction. If their partner wants the member to be helping at home more but they are at work, the relationship will likely suffer. However, if the partner expects the military to be demanding, time consuming and a priority; the relationship does not suffer. Partner expectations of marital and domestic roles are generally informed by gender roles, supporting the theory that traditional gender roles are less likely to be compatible in relationships for military women (Dilworth, 2004; Karney & Crown, 2007).
Emotional factors. Stress can contribute to relationship difficulties. Military women may feel more stress from experiencing higher levels of discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual assault in the work place than their male counterparts (Kanzler et al., 2011). Karney and Crown (2007) state the military’s recruiting criteria will result in more vulnerable individuals entering the military leading to an increase in divorces. Those with more individual vulnerabilities are at higher risk to cope poorly with stress and develop mental health conditions from their military service requirements, which may contribute to additional relationship problems. The more personal vulnerabilities an individual has correlates with a greater likelihood they have fewer relationship opportunities and an increased likelihood to stay in less satisfying relationships for longer (Karney & Crown, 2007).
It is likely that all the previously discussed theories contribute to the higher divorce rate for enlisted women. However, there has not yet been a definitive conclusion made about the impact of any one theory previously discussed. Additionally, research has come short of exploring the impact of adverse family of origin environments on relationship functioning for military women. This will be explored more in depth to determine how this factor contributes to relationship dysfunction in enlisted women.
More common in military personnel. Financial status has a significant impact on the quality of a child’s life. Children from low-income families are likely to have a lower quality education and their parents are less involved in their education. Furthermore, low-income parents likely speak to their children less often and provide less social support (Evans, 2004). Low-income families are more likely to be involved with social services and the parents are more likely to be divorced or a single parent (Evans, 2004; Hearn Escaravage, 2014). As a result of these experiences children from low-income families may feel less connected to their community, develop fewer relationship skills, and have less educational attainment (Evans, 2004).
Karney & Crown (2007) stated enlisted members are “the most vulnerable of the eligible population in terms of age, ethnicity and potential for career advancement in the civilian market” (p. 65). When enlisted men were asked what their top motivations for enlisting are; a large majority cited a desire to serve their country. However, a large majority also indicated they enlisted because they needed college money, had a lack of better options, needed to provide for their family, the military was the best employment available and some were going through a divorce, job loss or having financial problems (Woodruff et al., 2006). Another study exploring reasons individuals chose to enlist found enlisted women are more likely to come from divorced or single parent homes and their parents are not college educated. They are more likely to have achieved lower grades than those who chose not to enlist, suggesting enlisted women may have had fewer opportunities after high school (Segal, Segal, & Bachman, 1998).
Blosnich et al., (2014) suggested that military members are more likely to have experienced adverse childhood experiences (ACE)s than civilians. They compared the prevalence of ACEs between men and women who served in the Vietnam era and now. This study was flawed due to their attempt to compare two vastly different populations and they had a vague definition of military service. Most studies define military service by active duty service and this study was inclusive to anyone who served in any capacity for any amount of time. However, the data they collected has utility. They conducted a phone survey of 426 women, ages 18-55 who self-identified as veterans. The veterans reported high rates of emotional (43.4%), physical (29.1%) and sexual abuse as defined by being touched sexually (25.9%), being forced to touch others sexually (15.8%), and childhood rape (10.2%). Additionally, 27.5% reported having a family member in the home with mental illness, and high rates of substance abuse in the home as defined by drug abuse (17% ) and alcohol abuse (33.9%). Furthermore, 27.7% reported their parents were divorced. In another study, female veterans reported experiencing more occurrences and severity of sexual abuse than civilian women. 49% of veterans reported experiencing child sexual abuse compared to 22% of civilian women; the veterans reported the abuse lasting 12 months longer and 38% of the veterans reported childhood rape compared to 16% of civilian women. In addition, 92% of the veteran women indicated their parent was the perpetrator compared to 68% of civilian women in the study (Schultz et al., 2006).
Childhood abuse. Some types of adverse events have been linked to impairment in certain areas of functioning. For example, physical childhood abuse has been linked to adult relationship disruption and increased likelihood of engaging in physical intimate partner violence (Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2009; Whisman, 2006). Sexual abuse results in lower relationship satisfaction and interpersonal functioning. More specifically, childhood rape is related to lower relationship satisfaction and increased risk of relationship disruption (DiLillo et al., 2007; Whisman, 2006). Children of divorced parents are at an increased risk for being a victim of sexual abuse (Fergusson et al., 2014).
DiLillo et al. (2007) assessed for the impact of childhood physical, emotional, and sexual abuse and physical and emotional neglect on adult relationships. They measured current psychological functioning, level of emotional intimacy, sexual functioning, conflict management and frequency of intimate partner violence. The researchers found that 42% of the individuals in this study indicated some history of childhood maltreatment measured by any report of maltreatment from a low-moderate range on the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) as a positive response for maltreatment. This threshold is lower than the ACE that requires an “often” or “very often” response to be considered a positive response for maltreatment (Felitti et al., 1998a). Female participants in this study reported their relationships were lacking closeness, personal disclosure and they experienced more psychological distress. They were also at an increased risk for being physically aggressive to their partner compared to women without a history of maltreatment. Male participants reported experiencing fewer events than the female participants and did not appear to experience any impact on their adult relationship functioning as a result of childhood maltreatment.
Parental marital status. Parental divorce as an isolated factor does not have a huge impact on future relationship functioning, but it does increase the risk for adverse outcomes. Increased family transitions like multiple divorces or remarriages create an increased risk for several relationship problems. These problems include: experiencing less emotional intimacy, relationship conflict, increased likelihood to date a substance abuser or someone with mental health concerns, and an increased likelihood of engaging in intimate partner violence (Fergusson et al., 2014). Adult children of divorced parents reported not seeing their parents as a positive relationship role model. Consequently they reported experiencing more negative communication, less emotional intimacy and commitment than those whose parents stayed married. Additionally, individuals whose parents never married reported the lowest relationship quality and the greatest likelihood to engage in intimate partner violence (Rhoades et al., 2012).
Intimate Partner Violence. Intimate partner violence is a modeled behavior and children raised in homes with domestic violence are likely to be impacted as adults. Those who reported witnessing violence between their parents were more likely to be physically aggressive themselves (Fritz et al., 2012; Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2009; Rhoades et al., 2012). Additionally, individuals from lower income families are more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence (Fritz et al., 2012).
Impact on adult relationship functioning. Researchers agree that adult relationship functioning is shaped through modeling by parental relationship functioning and early childhood experiences (Fritz et al., 2012; Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2009; Rhoades et al., 2012). Experiences such as living in a home with a high expression of conflict, parental divorce, and child maltreatment may cause significant functional impairment in adult romantic relationships. An adverse family of origin environment can lead to decreased relationship functioning, commitment, satisfaction and effort (Rhoades et al., 2012). Additionally, women with these experiences may struggle to develop a secure attachment with their partner and as a result experience decreased intimacy, more jealousy, lower levels of affection, less relationship satisfaction and feel emotional distress (Knapp, Norton, & Sandberg, 2015). Significant exposure to adverse childhood events is linked to poor health outcomes, increased risk for suicide, depression, alcoholism and poverty in adulthood (Felitti et al., 1998b; Frederick & Goddard, 2007; Murphy et al., 2013). Several theories have been suggested as explanations for why enlisted women divorce at higher rates and there is data to suggest they may be plausible explanations. There is a significant amount of research supporting adverse family of origin environments adversely impacting adult relationship functioning. Karney and Crown (2007) support this theory through the suggestion the military recruits individuals who are vulnerable from their backgrounds and incentivizes marriages resulting in less carefully selected partners. They also suggest that young military couples in their first marriage without children are at an increased risk for adapting poorly to the military in comparison to remarried couples or couples with children. Young couples lack the emotional resources and commitment that older and more established couples have. When considering the demographic makeup of those who enlist, the impact of adverse family of origin environments and military risk factors; it supports the hypothesis that adverse family of origin environments may contribute to decreased relationship functioning and in turn a higher divorce rate for enlisted women.
Participants will be recruited as part of a large longitudinal study called “Up-Armoring At Risk Military Couples: A prospective study of committed romantic relationships in transition to their first permanent duty station”. The volunteers will be recruited during in processing for their technical training at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. The goal is to recruit at least 50 female and 50 male participants. It is expected more males will be recruited as females make up about 15% of the Air Force’s population. It is expected a majority of the participants will be ages 18-30. To participate, the airmen will be active duty, attending technical school and in an intimate partner relationship for the past six months.
Measures
The participants will be administered a comprehensive survey that will take about 30 minutes to complete.
The survey is anonymous, however some demographic data will be collected. This data includes: rank, age, ethnicity, education level, relationship status, length of relationship and if there are children in the home. The survey includes questions that will not likely be used in this analysis. The questions not being used measure various constructs such as: posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression symptoms; recent stressful life events; anger management techniques; substance use; mental health history, social support and religious coping mechanisms. The focus of this analysis and questions will be on adverse family of origin environments and relationship
functioning. To determine the family of origin environment two measures were used, the FES (Moos & Moos, 1974) and the ACE (Felitti et al., 1998a). There are three items not selected from any measure inquiring about the structure of the participants’ family and childhood home. Two are yes or no questions: “are your biological parents currently married?” and “were they ever married?”. The next question instructs the participant to indicate which relative they grew up with from the options of “both biological parents”, “biological mother and step father”, “single mother”, “adoptive parents”, “biological father and step mother”, “single father” and “other”. Five items from FES’s Cohesion and Conflict subscales were included. FES is widely used to understand an individual’s environmental perception of their childhood home. The items selected assess the level of anger expressed in the home and support expressed between family members. The questions are in a true or false format. The questions from the Cohesion and Conflict subscales have been found to be answered in a comparable manner between partners and have a 0.76-0.77 reliability (Chipuer & Villegas, 2001).
The ACE questionnaire is a reliable and well known measure for determining negative events experienced during childhood. 17 items from the ACE questionnaire were included to assess for a history of child abuse, trauma, domestic violence and family dysfunction such as mental illness, substance abuse, incarceration and parental divorce. A majority of the items are on a likert scale measuring the level of exposure to adverse events ranging from never to very often and a few questions are in a yes or no format (Felitti et al., 1998a). For this survey there were some modifications. First being the questions were modified from a likert scale to only include “often” and “very often” to a yes or no question. The second modification was to update the question assessing domestic violence towards a stepmother and mother to be more inclusive and representative of modern families. The question now states “Sometimes physical blows occur between adults. In your home, how often did one of your parents, guardian or their partner do this to their partner?”.
To measure for current relationship functioning, several measures were selected. Five items from the Negative Spillover scales for home to work and work to home will be used (Grzywacz & Marks, 2000). This scale uses the word spillover to describe this study’s definition of role strain and measures the amount of negative spillover on a five point likert scale from never to very often over the past three months (Dilworth, 2004). It was modified for this survey to the past one month as the participants have been in a training environment. Two role strain questions from the Army PREP program addressing spillover will be used (Stanley et al., 2005). The questions include: “at home, I am so tired or preoccupied with work that I don’t have much time or energy left for my marriage or family” and “stress at work sometimes make it harder to get along with my spouse/partner”. Participants will respond on a seven-item likert scale from almost never to almost always. Participants will be asked about relationship satisfaction as measured by the MSI-B and the MSI. The MSI-B is an adaptation of the Marital Satisfaction Inventory-Revised (MSI-R). The MSI-B includes ten questions in a true or false format selected from the MSI-R subscales: Global Distress, Time Together, Sexual Dissatisfaction, Affective Communication, and Problem Solving Communication. Five items from this measure are included on the survey. Additionally, the MSI-B has good reliability (0.78 and 0.80) and good validity (0.93 and 0.94)(Whisman, Snyder, & Beach, 2009). In addition, one item was selected from the marital status inventory (MSI). The MSI is a 14-item measure designed to determine the likelihood couples will end their relationship. The questions are in a true or false format (Weiss & Cerreto, 1980).
Communication is a key element of relationship functioning, to measure this the Communication Danger Scale and the CPQ-CC will be used. Markman et al. (2010) created The Communication Danger Sign Scale in the book Fighting For Your Marriage to help couples determine if they are at risk for divorce. Markman et al (2010) boasted an 82-93% accuracy of this scale in predicting which couples will divorce based on their communication patterns. All seven items from this measure were used. The scale assesses current communication functioning within the relationship. The items are in a true or false format. The CPQ-CC measures communication patterns between couples during conflict, eight items were included and answered in a true or false format. CPQ-CC defines this construct of communication as the presence and frequency of criticism between partners, blaming and accusations, mutual verbal threats, and verbal aggression to include name calling and yelling. These items were modified from a nine point likert scale from not at all to a lot, and are now measured by true or false. This measure has 0.84 and 0.81 reliability for self-report and a 0.72 validity for self-report to observed behavior by one of the researchers (Heavey et al., 1996).
The final construct of relationship functioning is the presence of intimate partner violence. Ten items from the Physical Assault subscale of the CTS2 were used, it measures the frequency of physical aggression between partners are on a scale from never to more than 20 times over the past 12 months. This measure can be modified to include time periods of since the relationship started, a stage in treatment, over the previous month and past six months. This survey modified the time measured to the past six months and included an optional selection of “not in the past 6 months, but has happened in the past”. Additionally the survey asks “more than 10 times” instead of more than 20 times; likely due to the shortened assessment period from one year. The CTS2 internal reliability ranges from 0.79-0.95 (Straus et al., 1996).
Procedure
The researchers were included in the potential participants in-processing schedule and will recruit the potential participants in a classroom at their dormitory. Upon arrival the researchers are introduced to the group and explain why they are there. Potential participants are separated from their technical school class by asking those on active duty and in a committed romantic relationship for the past six months or longer to raise their hands. The others are invited to take a break from their in-processing and allowed to leave and go to their dayroom. Those who choose to participate are given a standard script and all the forms are explained. The participants are given a manila envelope containing: a pen, consent form, contact form (a required form for the larger study this data is part of), a handout to take home explaining the study and the actual survey. The survey has a randomly assigned participant ID code on the first page. The researcher is present for the completion of the survey to answer questions as they arise. When the participants have completed the survey they will return their survey in an unmarked manila envelope to the researcher. At any time the participants can opt out of the study and hand their manila envelope to the researcher.
Design
This study is a between-subjects design using a linear multiple regression and Pearson correlation. There will be several analysis conducted. First, a Pearson correlation will be conducted to determine if there is a relationship between any of the adverse family of origin environment factors and each construct of relationship functioning. If a relationship is found between these areas; a multiple linear regression will be used to calculate the impact of adverse childhood environment factors on each construct of relationship functioning. Each gender will be analyzed separately. The purpose of this is to determine if men and women experience adverse family of origin environments at different frequencies and detect any differences in relationship functioning as a result of an adverse family of origin environments. The resulting correlation coefficient will be tested for statistical significance at the .05 level. If it is found significant, the value of the coefficient of determination (r2 ) will be computed to interpret the significance of the relationship.
Chapter 4
Results
It is be expected to see a higher prevalence of adverse childhood experiences endorsed by female participants than male participants. Felitti et al. (1998b) conducted a study on 8,506 respondents and found 24.9% reported experiencing one event, 12.5% experienced two events, 6.9% experienced three events and 6.2% endorsed experienced four or more events. A gender breakdown of those numbers found 8.5% of women and 3.9% of men reported experiencing four or more experiences (Felitti et al., 1998b). It would also be expected to see the female participants endorse less satisfaction in their relationships as a result of role strain than male participants this comparison. In Dilworth (2004)’s analysis of role strain between married men and women; women experienced less relationship and family life satisfaction when they worked more.
Chapter 5
Discussion and Implications
Summary
This study will be conducted to explore a long neglected research area. There is limited research about military women in general and even less about their relationship functioning. This is an important area requiring research as relationship problems are linked to issues with performance (Karney & Crown, 2007), retention (Klimas, 2015), emotional wellbeing and suicide in military personnel (Hyman et al., 2012). The research that has been conducted to date has determined enlisted women divorce, and remarry at higher rates than others in the military (Adler-Baeder et al., 2005; Hogan & Seifert, 2010; Karney & Crown, 2007). There have been many proposed reasons for why military women appear to have lower relationship functioning. These reasons varied from stress specific to a military lifestyle, concern the military incentivizes marriage, possible gender role mismatch between partners and enlisted members may be a more vulnerable population (Kanzler et al., 2011; Karney & Crown, 2007). This study will explore the following hypotheses: (1) a higher proportion of women entering the military compared to men will report experiencing adverse family of origin environments, and (2) women with adverse family of origin environment experiences will report overall lower relationship functioning compared to men with similar experiences. The goals of this study are to (1) examine some of the already proposed explanations for the enlisted female divorce rate (2) determine the impact of family of origin events on relationship functioning, and (3) identify if a specific family of origin event or environmental factor has more impact on relationship functioning than others.
Limitations
This study has a few limitations with the measures used, it is not expected for them to drastically affect the outcome of the study. A majority of research on relationship functioning has been on civilian couples. This resulted in difficulty to find measures that are widely used and well validated that capture the hardships of military relationships. Some of the measures used are not as well validated as would be preferred; such as the questions from the Army PREP (Stanley et al., 2005). Additionally the modified format of the ACE questions on the survey may result in underreporting as it is not as inclusive as the original survey. It was streamlined for convenience of the participant and only two items from the five-item likert scale were incorporated to include often and very often. This format excluded participants who may have endorsed rarely or sometimes. Responses of often and very often are counted as ACEs, however it would have been useful data and allowed a fuller understanding of the early childhood environment for women who serve. The CPQ-CC responses were changed from a nine point likert scale to a true or false response which may alter some responses as it will not capture the frequency of adverse communication patterns only the existence of them. The modifications made to some of the questions are outside of the researchers control as the survey is part of a larger study.
Implications
Individuals with adverse backgrounds prior to the military can have very positive outcomes in their lives after serving. The military may offer resources and an opportunity for individuals who have experienced trauma in the past to gain “maturity, personal growth, new skills and improved economic opportunities” (Karney & Crown, 2007, p. 43). For these individuals to fare well they needed outside support from family and friends. There is a research gap exploring issues related to military women and their relationships. Military women are a vulnerable population for divorce, a minority in the military and there is sparse research conducted on their relationship experiences. Hopefully this study will help gain understanding as to why enlisted women experience more relationship difficulties. Once that is accomplished targeted interventions can be created and with early and appropriate interventions the consequences of adverse childhood environments on adult wellbeing and relationship functioning may be mitigated. This may improve the quality of life for enlisted women, lower the frequency of divorce, potentially help improve the military’s ability to retain women and potentially help reduce the risk for suicide (Klimas, 2015; Hyman et al., 2012).