Following the Flag: Marriage and the Modern Military

Following the Flag: Marriage and the Modern Military

Betty L. Alt

PRAEGER SECURITY INTERNATIONAL

FOLLOWING THE FLAG

Praeger Security International Advisory Board Board Cochairs Loch K. Johnson, Regents Professor of Public and International Affairs, School of Public and International Affairs, University of Georgia (U.S.A.) Paul Wilkinson, Professor of International Relations and Chairman of the Advisory Board, Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence, University of St. Andrews (U.K.) Members Eliot A. Cohen, Robert E. Osgood Professor of Strategic Studies and Director, Philip Merrill Center for Strategic Studies, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, The Johns Hopkins University (U.S.A.) Anthony H. Cordesman, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy, Center for Strategic and International Studies (U.S.A.) Th´er`ese Delpech, Senior Research Fellow, CERI (Atomic Energy Commission), Paris (France) Sir Michael Howard, former Professor of History of War, Oxford University, and Professor of Military and Naval History, Yale University (U.K.) Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy, USA (Ret.), former Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Headquarters, Department of the Army (U.S.A.) Paul M. Kennedy, J. Richardson Dilworth Professor of History and Director, International Security Studies, Yale University (U.S.A.) Robert J. O’Neill, former Chichele Professor of the History of War, All Souls College, Oxford University (Australia) Shibley Telhami, Anwar Sadat Chair for Peace and Development, Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland (U.S.A.) Jusuf Wanandi, co-founder and member, Board of Trustees, Centre for Strategic and International Studies (Indonesia) Fareed Zakaria, Editor, Newsweek International (U.S.A.)

FOLLOWING THE FLAG Marriage and the Modern Military

Betty L. Alt

PRAEGER SECURITY INTERNATIONAL Westport, Connecticut • London

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Alt, Betty Sowers. Following the flag : marriage and the modern military / Betty L. Alt. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0–275–98962–3 (alk. paper) 1. Families of military personnel—United States. 2. Military spouses—United States. 3. Sociology, Military—United States. I. Title. UB403.A46 2006 306.85088
35500973–dc22 2006022874 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available Copyright © 2006 by Betty L. Alt All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2006022874 ISBN: 0–275–98962–3 First published in 2006 Praeger Security International, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881 An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. www.praeger.com Printed in the United States of America

The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984). 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

For all spouses of United States military personnel—past, present and future.

CONTENTS Introduction 1. The Enduring Family

ix 1

2. On the Road Again

20

3. Another Resume

36

4. Being Alone

58

5. Trouble at Home

76

6. Going in Harm’s Way

90

Epilogue

99

Glossary

101

Notes

105

Bibliography

121

Index

133

INTRODUCTION A military installation is a small town. Within its confines are located the necessities to sustain and enhance everyday life—a commissary, an exchange, barbershops, beauty parlors, day care and recreational facilities, medical facilities, schools and housing for both enlisted and officer personnel, a police force, and a judicial system. Like Roman forts, many of these facilities surround the administration headquarters as well as those buildings housing and supporting the base’s operational mission. However, unlike the small town, the military population is composed almost entirely of younger people in the age group eighteen through forty-five; today, over two-thirds of them are married and have a family. Whether these families reside outside or within the confines of this military town, they will be affected by changes within their milieu and within the society. While the purpose of Marriage and the Modern Military is to present a brief history of the American military family and discuss past and current problems, information is also provided on changes in the armed forces over the past four decades. An all-volunteer military came into being after the end of conscription in 1973. Women have joined the force in ever increasing numbers, many of them married to civilian men who become “dependent spouses.” Service personnel, including dual-career military members, are again involved in combat situations around the world. Reserve and guard units (jokingly known as “weekend warriors” by some) have been activated and deployed overseas for lengthy tours of duty. With all of these changes, the lives of military spouses have scarcely been altered over the past 200 years. In the best of times, spouses can follow where the service member is assigned. In the worst of times, they must maintain the family alone while awaiting his or her return. At all times, they must

x

Introduction

remember that the needs of the service always take precedence, making the needs of the family number two to the needs of Uncle Sam. However, Marriage and the Modern Military is not simply a book of “gripes” about the hardships of military life nor is it written as a guide to those men or women who choose to marry military personnel. It is a combination of the history of the military spouse, together with an examination of some of the problems that spouses encounter—continual mobility, career adjustments, adequate childcare, long separations. In addition, the book takes a look at some military marital problems—domestic violence, infidelity, divorce. It also examines the reactions of spouses of Reserve and National Guard members who unexpectedly are being activated and deployed. To help the reader understand the evolution of military society, research includes some of the writings of authors considered to be authorities on the armed forces (Edward Coffman, John Simon, and Charles Moskos). Letters and diaries of Elizabeth Custer, Martha Summerhayes, and Elizabeth Blackwood Baldwin also present the early history of the military family as wives accompanied husbands into the unsettled American frontier. Writings of authors who provide a guide or offer advice to today’s military spouses (Nancy Shea, Karen Pavlicin, Meredith Leyva, and Lydia Sloan Cline) add information on traditions and emphasize the duties still expected of those women and men. Given the highly mobile lifestyle of the military family, children’s education is a prime consideration for all families. Some critics, including parents of military children, have challenged the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DoD) schools versus schools in local communities. This issue is examined in the 2001 Vanderbilt University study “March Toward Excellence,” the 2005 Donahue Institute of the University of Massachusetts study, and an independent panel of school finance experts authorized by the defense department. Changing schools every few years is stressful for most military children as they always seem to be “the new kid on the block.” The numerous problems faced by mobile spouses wishing to maintain a career are discussed, utilizing material from the Rand National Defense Research Institute (2004) and the military’s Blue Ribbon Panel. New sources to help spouses find jobs are mentioned, including the Army Spouse Employment Partnership, the Department of Labor, and a Fall 2005 Army Web site containing over 26,000 job vacancies. Still, the careers of military personnel are paramount, and spouses who accompany military members must resign themselves to repeatedly seeking new ways to find employment. Although statistics on military divorce and domestic violence are scarce and vary from source to source, 2005 Defense Department data provides information on reported cases of severe violence in all branches of the armed forces. Reasons for domestic abuse are difficult to pinpoint; however, research from the Miles Foundation, a non profit organization, various psychologists, and an article in the Duke Law Journal give some insight into

Introduction

xi

this problem. Various sources, including an Army psychologist and a 2004 study by the Boston Globe/Kaiser Foundation/Harvard University, indicate that divorce rates tend to be rising for both officers and enlisted personnel. Whether this is due chiefly to deployment of more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan is still speculative. On the other hand, Marriage and the Military does not emphasize only the problems faced by the family; it also presents current actions being taken by the military to ameliorate some of the concerns voiced by both spouses and military members. These include the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence (2001) that visited installations around the world and made recommendations to the Secretary of Defense for aiding victims. In 2003, President Bush signed the Defense Authorization Act for 2004 which required a review of every military death known or suspected to be caused by domestic violence. Family Service Centers provide counseling for issues such as abuse, divorce, stress, finances, and education. Parenting classes are available, and child care facilities on bases aid the working spouse and the dual-career military couple. Possibly the best sources to learn about changes (both positive and negative) affecting the military family are The Military Officer, Stars & Stripes, and weekly newspapers from the Times Publishing Group—the Army, Navy, and Air Force Times. These publications keep abreast of all current legislation. In addition to research, interviews with Military Family Service Center personnel and numerous military spouses, both male and female, provide interesting case histories as they add their opinions on the problems facing the military family today. (Where possible, the real names of individuals have been provided. When this was not possible, a false name or simply “military spouse” has been used.) The author would like to thank the women and men who consented to be interviewed or provided research material for the book. Thanks are also given to the author’s husband, Bill, and to Sandra K. Wells for their reading of the completed manuscript; to the research staff at Colorado State University, Pueblo; to the author’s agent Mary Sue Seymour; and to her editor Elizabeth Demers.

CHAPTER 1

The Enduring Family Everything changes, and everything stays the same. —Anonymous The statement above is certainly true of the military. The military remains much as it has always been. It protects the nation, and the mission takes precedence over all personal needs. On the other hand, change has occurred. The biggest change may be that today there are more females in uniform than ever before, a great change from the all-male military of centuries past. Many times the spouse of this female member is a civilian male. Also today, a large number of Reserve and National Guard units are being called to active duty outside the United States. Most are being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan to supplement or replace active duty forces. For the wives of military men, however, little has changed. Most still face continually packing and moving, continually worrying about their children’s education, continually waiting for the return of deployed troops, and, if interested in a career, continually applying for jobs. To understand the changes that have occurred and that continue to occur in regard to the military family, an overview of its history is needed. THE EARLY YEARS: 1700–1859 While still a part of the British Empire, when needed, most of the men living in the thirteen colonies had participated in a volunteer militia. During the Revolutionary War, the military consisted of both volunteers and those conscripted for service in time of crisis. Until the 1970s, this set the pattern for obtaining America’s military personnel.

2

Following the Flag

The armed forces were never designed to accommodate families. However, from the time of the Revolutionary War, when men left, some wives packed up and followed. Many did so because they had no other option as the men were their sole support. Wives of a few noncommissioned officers (NCOs) and lower ranking enlisted men actually were recruited to serve in Continental Army camps as laundresses and, along with washing and mending the troops’ clothing, foraged for food and cared for the wounded. Under official orders they were warned that they were not to toss soapsuds on the parade ground, were to be sure and make use of the latrines, and were to walk instead of ride in the baggage wagons when the troops moved. These laundresses were paid a “campfollower’s stipend of half rations for themselves and quarter rations for each child.”1 Apparently, there was not much restriction on the wives of a few highranking officers tagging along, and some of these men were accompanied by their spouses. In December 1775, General George Washington invited his wife, Martha, to come to him while he and the army were in Cambridge, Massachusetts. She also joined him at Morristown, New Jersey, and in winter quarters at Valley Forge, which she considered to be “a dreary kind of place.”2 (A primitive drawing in American Army Life shows three women among the soldiers at Valley Forge and General Washington, with Martha clinging to his arm.)3 A few other officers’ wives were also in residence with the Continental Army, including those of General Nathaniel Greene, General Henry Knox, General Horatio Gates, and Colonel Clement Biddle. The officers and their ladies met in each other’s quarters where the evenings were spent “over a dish of tea or coffee . . . no dancing, card-playing or amusement of any kind except singing. Every gentleman or lady who could sing was called upon in turn for a song.”4 The women also gathered to knit stockings for the soldiers and to help with nursing the wounded—the beginning of the military wives’ clubs. However, while it appeared to be acceptable for wives of a few officers to stay with their husbands, Washington was concerned about the multitude of other women and children who accompanied the enlisted men. After a victory at Bennington, the general had been persuaded to parade the army through the streets of Philadelphia. Hesitant to have the citizens of that town see the “campfollowers,” he “earnestly” recommended that his officers “use every reasonable method in their power to get rid of all such as are not absolutely necessary . . . the multitude of women in particular, especially those who are pregnant and have children.”5 After the Revolutionary War ended, most of the soldiers in the Continental Army returned to civilian life. The Congress in 1784 discharged almost all the men as it was afraid that the military might become “an active agent in establishing despotism.”6 (This trend of rapidly discharging soldiers would continue after all of America’s wars.) From 1790 to 1860, the army would number “less than 10,000 officers and men throughout those years.”7

The Enduring Family

3

Those few soldiers who remained in the military fought in the War of 1812 and then moved with settlers into the Ohio Valley and beyond the Mississippi as westward expansion flourished. Although the soldiers were not fighting any international wars, there was always the job of constructing frontier posts and battling with Indians.8 By 1845, the United States was involved in the Mexican War, and troops were moving into that country. Even then, spouses were following their warrior husbands into Mexico, continuing the campfollower tradition. On his voyage from New Orleans to Texas, a Captain Ephraim Smith wrote to his wife and mentioned the wives on board the ship: . . . I was informed that Mrs. Roth (a camp woman of my company) was sick. . . . I gave her my stateroom, and by morning she was delivered of a son. This was the second birth en route. The Mothers are now both well, and doing their regular washing for the men.9 THE CIVIL WAR AND BEYOND: 1860–1899 During the Civil War, wives also followed the soldiers. Often taking up residence in encampments, they cooked for their husbands and nursed the wounded. Some regiments were mustered already equipped with laundresses. The Zouaves, troops from Louisiana who fought for the Confederacy, had vivandieres, women in feminized uniforms who carried kegs of liquid refreshment to the troops, most of whom were their husbands.10 When the armies were in winter quarters, quite a number of wives visited their officer husbands. Historical photos often show them sitting at a picnic table or resting before their husband’s tents, their hoop skirts billowing in front. Mrs. James B. Ricketts, whose Union Army husband retired as a major general, accompanied him and made out his Muster Rolls & Reports11 ; apparently she had done this task from the time they were married. General Ulysses Grant’s wife arrived at his quarters numerous times, occasionally accompanied by their young son. In fact, the general sent a letter in June of 1863, inviting her to join him at Vicksburg. Dear Julia: . . . You may start down as soon as you receive this letter. If Vicksburg is not in our hands then you can remain on board the steamer at the landing with the prospect of my calling to see you occationally [sic].12 Of course, wives sometimes could become a nuisance and a problem for the regiments. Driving a wagon, Mrs. John B. Gordon followed so closely behind her Confederate Army husband’s division that she was almost captured in Virginia by the Union soldiers. The Confederate commander, Lieutenant

4

Following the Flag

General Jubal A. Early, was not happy with the accompanying wives and remarked about Mrs. Gordon that it was too bad “the Yankees hadn’t bagged her.”13 After the war ended in 1864, the population continued to move westward, and the Army was needed to protect the growing number of trappers, miners, and settlers. Forts of one sort or another continued to spring up all across the West. Generally, those installations in the eastern part of the United States that had been established earlier in America’s history were better able to accommodate the women and children whose lives were tied in with military men. For the few families moving west with the soldiers, frontier living might occasionally be exciting but it was almost always difficult. It is interesting to note that much of the history written about the part the military played in westward expansion includes only a brief mention of women or children. For example, in Frontier Military Posts of Arizona, considered to be a complete listing of all of that state’s military posts, author Ray Brandes provides detailed lists of both men and commanders of Camp Bowie (later changed to Fort Bowie). He does indicate that few posts could accommodate wives or even washerwomen, but none are named. He does write of a Pvt. Nicolas Maringer being struck by lightening which did not injure “children playing within 5 feet of him.”14 It must be assumed that these children belonged to at least one military family. From an account of officers’ quarters leaking and in unsatisfactory condition in 1866, Brandes cites an 1887 issue of Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper that commented on the improved appearance of the officers’ living conditions. “Buildings of adobe, others of wood, greatly improved in appearance and point of convenience. Water piped to all the buildings, the premises of the officers’ quarters inclosed [sic] by neat fences.”15 Again, Brandes never mentions whether any women were living in these greatly improved buildings, although families were in residence at many other army posts at that late date. Fortunately for the military historian, Alice Kirk Grierson, wife of General Benjamin Grierson, kept up a running correspondence with her husband, her children, and other relatives as the family moved from post to post on the frontier. Beginning shortly after the Civil War, when her husband was a newly promoted colonel, the letters continued to shortly before her death in 1888 and contained a record of both the fortunes and the misfortunes experienced by any family housed on the frontier.16 Sometimes a “house” turned out to be little more than a hole in the ground. Alice Baldwin was terribly depressed in 1867 when she discovered that her future at Fort Harker, Kansas, was a dug-out containing one squalid room and a four-pane glass window, “dirty, dim and curtainless.”17 Alice may have been fortunate to be with her husband, however, and no matter how depressing, at least she had housing.

The Enduring Family

5

Apparently, the army had rules about the size of the family quarters for officers. Regulations stated that a lieutenant’s quarters would be one room and a kitchen, and a captain’s allowance would be two rooms and a kitchen. By the time a man reached the rank of colonel, he and his family would be allotted “a fairly good house.”18 However, at Fort D. A. Russell in 1868 Wyoming, the post did not provide houses; it consisted only of tents. Eventually, drafty frame quarters of planed boards without plaster would be constructed, but, as one officer’s wife wrote in her diary, this house was not for her family alone. She and her husband shared their quarters with two lieutenants. Original housing of log and adobe huts for the laundresses (meant to be temporary) was still in use in 1879. Post surgeons complained about the unsanitary conditions of these quarters, which were said to be “totally unfit for man or beast.”19 Laundresses were still needed by the army, and at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, in the 1870s each troop of cavalry or company of infantry was allowed four laundresses. They lived east of the sewer in what was named “Soapsuds Row” or “Sudsville.” While the officer’s quarters were many times substandard, those of the enlisted wives were worse. Living in the squalor and dirt of the laundresses’ housing also lived their “shock-headed children, prowling curs, and scavenging chickens.”20 Dates on which families were living at posts varied greatly. While some families were in residence in the 1860s, as late as the winter of 1874–1875, the wives of Capt. W. H. Jordan, post commander, and Lt. J. M. Lee, a 9th Infantry officer, became the first women at Fort Robinson, Nebraska. However, a few more wives soon began to arrive at the fort,21 providing additional companionship for Mrs. Jordan and Mrs. Lee. One problem that frequently occurred in these earlier times and which caused unrest among wives was a practice known as “falling bricks.” For example, a captain’s family might be allotted quarters, furniture would be set in place, curtains hung, and, possibly, a garden planted. However, if a major’s family arrived, the captain’s home would be given to the ranking man, and he and his family were displaced. In some instances, the captain then “turned out” a more junior officer and took his quarters, hence the reference to falling bricks.22 A painful example of this process occurred when Martha Summerhayes arrived in 1874 at Fort Russell, Wyoming Territory. When she was informed that a man had to relinquish his quarters to the Summerhayes as his family was away from the fort, she protested. Quickly the major in command explained this tradition to Martha: You must not have too much sympathy; it’s the custom of the service— it’s always done—by virtue of rank. They’ll hate you for doing it, but if you don’t do it, they’ll not respect you. After you’ve been turned out once yourself, you will not mind turning others out.23

6

Following the Flag

Although falling bricks did not change for several decades, as westward expansion continued and more families accompanied military men, quarters improved somewhat. “Oh! What a lovely post!” Martha Summerhayes exclaimed in the autumn of 1882 as she arrived at Fort Halleck in Nevada. Mountains rose abruptly to a height of five thousand feet and “made a magnificent background for the officers’ quarters, which lay nestled at the bottom of the foot-hills.”24 In her recollections, Summerhayes mentioned that living at Fort Halleck was a pleasant epoch in her life where she and the other wives held small dinners and where she was once again able to ride horseback through the canyons and sage brush around the post. Writing in 1885 from Whipple Barracks, located close to Prescott, Arizona, Alice Kirk Grierson also was enthusiastic about her new quarters and the nearly unheard of amenities they offered the family. “Papa [Colonel Benjamin Henry Grierson] . . . had a couple of closets torn out . . . will be a great improvement when it is done.. . . The boys and I like this house very well, although it is frame, and has low ceilings. We are so glad to have Attic rooms again, and the bathroom with hot and cold water is a luxury . . . .”25 While there were amenities for officers, the lower ranks did not fare as well. The officers and their wives considered themselves an elite and carried into the West the hierarchy of the officer class, a “sharply graded caste stratification” system that had always existed in the U.S. Army. The enlisted strata included not only the regular soldiers but also the NCOs. The families of the officers and the enlisted soldiers were “as far apart as were officers and soldiers—and also just as near.”26 (Segregated housing exists in the military today, and fraternization of officer and enlisted personnel is discouraged to the extent that it was in the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries.) On the American frontier, any journey was hard for what could be called roads were more or less rough trails. Travel was arduous and it usually took weeks to go from one post to another. Elizabeth Burt, wife of then Major Andrew Burt, recalled in her diary a trek across Wyoming with the couple’s baby. At Fort Sanders, Montana, General John Gibbon had provided her with a bottle of gin to kill the pain of the baby when it had colic, but on the trip the bottle mysteriously disappeared. Although a Dr. Frantz thought it “monstrous” that Burt would take a baby on such a trip and was surprised at their survival, Burt explained how the baby had fared: You ask how baby bore this strenuous life? The little soul was the most comfortable member of the party. Rolled in furs she slept the hours away, never requiring the pain killer [the gin] . . . Dr. Franz said to me. . . .“How you had the courage to bring that tiny baby to this country at this time of year is a wonder to me. . . . It is amazing how you both endure the trip.”27

The Enduring Family

7

Elizabeth Burt and her child were extremely fortunate for illnesses, such as typhoid fever, cholera (so excruciating an illness it was known as a dog’s death), diptheria, and pneumonia, were a constant threat and carried off both children and adults. An 1890 report from the secretary of war informed the president that army troops had suffered 9,743 deaths that year. Many men became ill and died from dengue fever, an acute, infectious viral disease, which, luckily, seemed to attack men more often than women and children.28 (When a married soldier died, the wife usually left the post, moved into town, if there was one nearby, or returned to her family in the East. Since there was a scarcity of women on the frontier, many quickly remarried, usually to soldiers.) Of course, wives and children of the army men were also stricken. Two officers’ wives died of cholera at Fort Harker, Kansas, in 1867. Dr. McKay’s thirteen-year-old daughter became ill with typhoid fever and died at Fort McRae, New Mexico. The daughter of General Benjamin Grierson and his wife Alice died of typhoid in 1878 at Fort Concho, Texas. Typhoid was so prevalent in Montana in 1878 that an army doctor ordered military wives to leave the area. Even with the best care possible, the majority of the individuals who experienced the vomiting, severe diarrhea, and paralysis of the tongue brought on by cholera died—usually after infecting those caring for them.29 Sanitary conditions were deplorable. Latrines (slit trenches in the ground) were generally utilized although occasionally some privies existed. Patches of grease accumulated around many of the homes caused by the necessity of getting rid of cooking materials and dishwater. For example, when Elizabeth Custer’s cook needed to get rid of kitchen waste, she merely tossed the contents of the dishpan or garbage bucket out the door.30 Pregnancy and childbirth were another problem faced by all of the wives. Miscarriages were frequent; convalescence usually lengthy; regaining strength before another pregnancy difficult.31 Many times the announcement of a young woman’s wedding would appear in a newspaper, and a year later would appear her death notice, along with that of her child. Frontier living was harder on the enlisted wives than the wives of officers, who occasionally had pleasant diversions from a drab existence. Social activities in which the women could participate included picnics, dances, visits to Indian villages, and fossil hunting. Fanny McGillcuddy, wife of the post surgeon at Fort Robinson, kept a diary in which she indicated her enjoyment of the horseback rides into the surrounding countryside. Fanny even accompanied her husband and a detachment of troops on an expedition in the early spring into the Black Hills.32 Not all recreation was of the outdoor variety. Balls were held frequently and involved all ranks, particularly if there were visiting dignitaries. Katherine Gibson wrote of a party at Fort Lincoln, Nebraska, where wildflowers decorated a long table and handkerchiefs were utilized as doilies to hide bare

8

Following the Flag

planks.33 At Fort Union, New Mexico, Frances Boyd recalled that troops were welcomed back from patrol into a barren hallway transformed into a “beautiful ballroom . . . flags decorating the sides, and ceiling so charmingly draped as to make us feel doubly patriotic.”34 As in the modern military, holidays on the frontier were excuses to make otherwise drab living more palatable. According to Frances Roe, Christmas was always a festive occasion. At Fort Lyon, Colorado, army wives took homemade candy or cakes to the bachelor officers and, after church, went to the barracks to “see the men’s dinner tables.” The wives did not dine with the men, but Roe explained that in 1871, the men had Christmas dinner consisting of buffalo, antelope, ham, vegetables, pickles, pies, and large plum cakes.35 In addition, most of the officers’ wives had additional domestic help with the household chores, as would be the custom until the mid-twentieth century. “Strikers,” frontier enlisted men who worked for officers’ families during their off-duty hours, were available at many posts. Martha Summerhayes heaped praise on trooper Charles Bowen and stated that she “could not have survived her life on the frontier without the faithful ministrations” of that striker.36 Often an enlisted wife was the family’s cook or laundress, and Elizabeth Custer had many different servants over the years. The general did not like Elizabeth being involved in domestic chores, and she wrote that “domestic care sat very lightly on me.”37 Although enlisted wives might work for officers’ families and the children of enlisted troops might attend school with those of officers, if a school were available, social stratification was maintained. The two classes did not socialize together except on formal occasions. Problems also faced the career military man during this period. Stagnated promotion, the threat of pay cuts and allowances, the apprehension over possible reductions in force from Congress (as had occurred between 1869 and 1874), and years of constant warfare with the Indians took its toll on morale. Added to this was the view by many civilians that military people were second-class citizens. “Many turned inward; the army was their life and everything outside it was hostile wilderness.”38 During the 1890s, the American population continued its westward journey. Supporting this migration required more soldiers, and the number of Army families increased, forcing expansion of and improvements to quarters on forts and in camps. Wives of so many men in the 9th Cavalry arrived at Fort Robinson that the old log barracks as well as original laundresses’ quarters were converted for use by enlisted men’s families. A few new quarters for the families of NCOs were constructed, and photos show a more genteel lifestyle at that time, including one entitled “Lady and escort out for a ride on Christmas, 1896.”39 The woman’s manner of dress and the uniform of her escort indicate that she is obviously an officer’s wife.

The Enduring Family

9

In the late 1890s, America became involved in the Spanish-American War with soldiers going to Cuba and the Philippines. This did not deter families from following overseas. Elizabeth Helmick followed her husband to Cuba in 1898, and Maude Palmer arrived in 1900. Housing was in short supply, but Maude’s husband, a lieutenant, had obtained quarters in an old Spanish mansion. Unfortunately for Maude, fleas inhabited the brick floors and constantly bit her ankles. She would look back on the mansion fondly though, when after a few weeks, they had to give up their privacy and were moved to the regimental camp. There they were housed in two tents with several other officers’ families.40 Elizabeth Helmick also would accompany her husband to the Philippines, along with the couple’s children. In a letter to her mother, Helmick described their housing at Catabato: The charm of the house is its proximity to the river, which is very pretty. . . . All the windows are very wide, having . . . bamboo awnings and sliding, wooden shutters. When all are open it is like being on a broad piazza.41 In the early twentieth century, wives also would follow their husbands as the American military presence was seen in China, and posts were established in Hawaii and Alaska. In letters home and in diaries the wives wrote of the numerous problems they encountered: the red dirt always on white trousers and skirts in Hawaii; the toilets of rough boards; dengue fever and a cholera epidemic; the fleas in Alaska and the harsh winds off the Valdez glacier; the financial hardship of constantly having to entertain. On the other hand, they wrote of the beautiful wildflowers, of the proliferation of vegetable gardens, of a swim in the ocean, and of sweet-scented pineapple fields. In these faraway lands amid strange, new cultures, Elizabeth Helmick gave good advice: “We must make the best out of what we have, and not pine for what we can’t have.”42 1900–1940 By the early 1900s, a peacetime military was back in existence. However, as historian retired Colonel Ernest R. DuPuy pointed out, the army in the early years of the twentieth century continued to be chiefly a bachelor army, although many of the older officers had married. For a few of the older NCOs, quarters were sometimes provided or they could live off post and draw separate rations. Marriage of low-ranking soldiers especially were looked upon with disfavor, although there was no law or regulation against getting married. However, if an enlisted man married without permission of his company commander, he could be refused the right to separate rations and was not entitled to post quarters. In addition, he could be denied

10

Following the Flag

reenlistment.43 This rule did not usually apply to officers, although most junior officers, out of respect, requested their commander’s permission to marry. According to DuPuy, by 1904 the army officer’s wife led a “leisurely life in garrison.” Like many middle-class women of that era, she had a servant to help with household chores. Government quarters for officers were built at that time to accommodate help with “big kitchens, butler’s pantries and third-floor servants’ quarters. [The officer’s wife] didn’t have to spend hours in line to shop . . . much simpler to write the order out in the book she left on the back porch to be picked up by the Quartermaster (QM) messenger, who passed daily.”44 Some officers were heard to say that if they died and were reincarnated, coming back as an officer’s wife might not be too bad. For the enlisted family, life was not as elegant nor as leisurely, and even both families would have had to watch their pennies as military salaries were small and promotions to higher rank were extremely slow—almost nonexistent. In 1925, government policy was revised somewhat, permitting enlisted men to marry, although up until World War II an enlisted man “. . . could be discharged for the convenience of the government if he married without the written permission of his superior officer.”45 Of course, with the easing of regulations against marrying, not all men immediately took brides. However, the military began to see a gradual increase in married men, with families accompanying the troops causing a continual problem of providing adequate quarters. The military made an effort, but budget restraints kept little housing available and much of that was substandard. In 1927, General Charles P. Summerall, Army Chief of Staff, brought to the attention of the American public the problems with military housing. In a speech before the San Diego Chamber of Commerce, Summerall declared that the United States had the makings of the finest army in the world but in regard to housing had treated its married soldiers disgracefully. He indicated that the wives and children of both officers and enlisted were being housed in makeshift quarters constructed for temporary wartime use, not for permanent residence. “Our Army housing system is a national disgrace,” he stated, “and the deplorable condition will require constant effort.”46 Several newspapers, including the Dallas News, the Washington Post, and the Columbus Dispatch, carried articles decrying the poor military housing. They called for permanent construction at all posts, a willingness to scrap the emergency housing constructed in 1917, and a reminder to Congress of the wretched conditions in which many military families lived. President Coolidge was quoted in the Nashville Tennessean as saying that he was glad Summerall had brought the problem to the public’s attention, adding that $8,000,000 had been appropriated by Congress for new construction.47 This would be of some help to military families in the 1920s and 1930s for what was basically a small, peacetime army.

The Enduring Family

11

However, as late as March 1938, at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Major General Herbert Brees reported that 15 percent of the lower enlisted ranks and their wives, with 899 dependent children between them, were living in conditions “deplorable in the extreme” and “experienced want and suffering . . . due to lack of proper clothing, housing, food and sanitary conditions.”48 Since married men might be denied reenlistment opportunities, Brees further indicated that it was common practice for those soldiers to obtain divorces shortly after their enlistments expired in order to reenlist. During these previous years of military history, little was included about the enlisted wife as the term military wife had been almost synonymous with “officer’s wife.” This was to change shortly after Pearl Harbor, as almost every “able-bodied” man, single or married, served at least some part of the four years of war, either by enlisting or being drafted. From historically being a military of single men, a married military began to emerge, and large numbers of women began to follow their men across America to be near military installations. WORLD WAR II AND BEYOND From the Revolutionary War on, the United States has had a strange relationship with its military. During times of war, its men have been hailed as defenders of freedom and protectors of its citizens. With the ensuing peace, the military has been seen as an unnecessary drain on the nation’s economy. America, it would seem, can envision only all-out war or all-out peace and, therefore, sees its military only as self-sacrificing heroes or selfserving villains. As a result, during times of peace the nation’s armed forces have always had to fight for their existence against the cries of peace and parsimony that have stirred the nation’s heart.49 Just prior to the United States entering World War II, the American military continued to be extremely small. For example, the active duty army numbered only 174,000 men, with a quarter of these stationed overseas. Supporting these regular army troops was the National Guard, numbering approximately 200,000. In addition, although existing only in mobilization blueprints, was a pool of over 100,000 trained officers, chiefly graduates of the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC).50 As the German blitzkreig swept across Europe, the gravity of the situation and the possible threat it posed to U.S. security brought about a demand for increased military strength. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Selective Service Act (familiarly called “the draft”) on September 16, 1940, and Congress authorized large sums of money for personnel, equipment, and training. All over the country, men between the ages of 21 and 35 began registering under this new law and would eventually be

12

Following the Flag

called to duty in all of the branches of the military. During the war, over 16.2 million Americans (one-sixth of the nation’s men) had been in uniform. Approximately 10 million aged 18 to 44 (later dropped to 38) were conscripted. By the end of four years of war, the American Armed Forces would number 12,350,000 men and a small number of women.51 Unlike most career enlisted personnel, many of the volunteers and draftees were already married; many who were not hastily married their sweethearts before going off to training camps. Soon, wives of the male personnel began to follow, creating huge problems for both the military and for civilian communities. Recognizing the economic problems for families of men inducted into the military, in 1942 Congress passed the Servicemen’s Dependents Allowance Act. This provided additional pay for enlisted men with dependents. Yank magazine explained to wives that they would receive a $50 monthly allotment. “The government takes $22 out of your [the soldier’s] pay, couples it with $28 from its own pocket and mails it to mama.”52 This was not automatic, however; married military personnel had to sign an application for the dependent’s allotment. Although small, this allowance supported those families when the “breadwinner” was gone. Throughout the war, many wives used their allowance to follow their husbands from camp to camp. A 1942 New York Times article refers to them as “gypsy wives.” However, “gypsy,” implying much mobility, but goes on to say that the army would provide finances for only one move. Some women traveled with other wives in “convoys,” which included numerous children, dogs, cats, and paraphernalia necessary to set up temporary housekeeping.53 Transportation was difficult as gasoline was rationed, busses and trains were jammed with soldiers and civilians, and struggling with luggage and tired children made for a weary journey. At the end of the trip, as there were no post quarters provided, families found that housing was extremely limited. Towns, especially small ones, were not equipped to handle the influx of military families. A bedroom with kitchen privileges was considered a luxury; often families “had to make do with semiconverted garages or henhouses.”54 Eula Hilton followed her army husband Sam, who had been in the service since 1933, to New York where any sort of housing was difficult to find. Although Sam had not requested permission from his commanding officer, the couple was married on New Year’s eve in 1935. It was a small wedding with only the preacher, the couple, Sam’s best army buddy, and Eula’s best girlfriend. After combat duty in the war, Sam made a career of the military, retiring as a colonel, and Eula and their children followed him to Germany, Alaska, and South Korea.55 When Lucille Ritzus arrived in Lafayette, Indiana, to be with her navy husband, who would shortly be shipped to the South Pacific, she found that

The Enduring Family

13

no apartments or even single rooms were available. She considered herself lucky when a kind woman who ran a small hotel let her sleep on a cot in the kitchen and share a bathroom. In 1945 Lucille would again join her husband when he was back in the States and hospitalized in California. I stayed in a hotel in San Francisco until I found a room with a Jewish woman in Oakland. I had a private bath and kitchen privileges. One other woman, who worked at one of the big department stores, also lived there. Each day I would take the bus to San Leandro where Steve was, although sometimes my landlandy was kind enough to drive me there. I stayed about six months until Steve was released from the hospital.56 In 1941, army wife Laura Chaney was rather unique—she had a university degree in chemistry. Prior to the war, both she and her husband, Dolph, who had his degree in journalism, were teaching in a public school. However, he went to work for the military, and Laura followed him and got a job as a bacteriologist for the army where she did tests on food to be supplied to troops. Eventually, Dolph was drafted, assigned as a correspondent to the Stars and Stripes newspaper, and later as an intelligence agent in Europe and China. Laura returned to her parents, “because we had our daughter by then, and there were no child care centers. If I wanted to teach, I needed to have some help with our child.” World War II wife Florence Ptacek emphasized the change her husband’s commission brought to the family. In just a few months, the army family was relocated twice. Although they had to leave most of their furniture and many of their son’s toys behind, Ptacek generally was optimistic about her experience roaming the country. She mentions reading an article by a woman whose husband had a nonmilitary job but which still necessitated moving their family frequently. This woman had “adopted the policy of living in each community as if she always expected to live there.” Ptacek tried to follow the same policy, joining neighborhood groups, doing Red Cross work, helping at a local church.57 While she felt this helped the family adjust to wartime living, Ptacek did not downplay her husband’s upcoming deployment. “Do not think for one minute that we are living in a fool’s paradise in which we fail to see ahead to the day when the family will have to be separated. We are perfectly aware that that day must come.”58 Ptacek did emphasize that the family spent a great deal of evenings and weekends together, storing up memories that would help them when deployment orders came. After World War II, the United States Armed Forces would experience a rise in the numbers of active duty personnel who were married with children. By 1953, of the 3,343,900 males still on active duty, 1,279,295

14

Following the Flag

or 38.3 percent had wives.59 The Armed Forces were rapidly becoming a “married military.” Now, the Korean War was waiting on the horizon. The draft was still in effect and Reserves were being recalled to active duty. The Dependents Assistance Act (1950) required men “to allot a portion of their basic pay—the ‘Q’ allotment—to their spouses.”60 This was of considerable help to families who had to make a big adjustment in their lives. While some remained at home, others again followed the men. In 1952 Julia Vean did both. She saw her husband of two years, Forrest, off to that battle and initially accompanied him to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, for his few months of training. Then, like many other wives, she decided to return to her parents’ home and continue her education at a junior college. Once that was completed, however, Julia moved to Denver, entered Denver University, and waited for “Forrie” to return. “I didn’t like his being gone,” she said, “but at least I had my family for support.”61 Ginger Sullivan and her young son accompanied her air force husband, Whitney, to Long Beach, California. After only four or five days, and before they could get settled into quarters, Sullivan was reassigned to an installation near Stockton, California. Only ten days later, he received orders for Korea, and Ginger began the trek back home.62 Of course, the end of the two wars in the middle of the twentieth century did not mean the end of American troops in Asia and Europe. Military personnel would continue to be stationed in England, Germany, Spain, Korea, Japan, Okinawa, and the Philippine Islands. Just as in earlier times, families accompanied the troops into Allied or occupied countries, finding living accommodations ranging from elaborate mansions to “wrestling with French plumbing, the need for adapters between their AC American electrical appliances and foreign DC electrical systems, the reek of Korean and Japanese rice paddies fertilized with human feces. . . .”63 Most were resilient and adapted to their new surroundings and new cultures. Although many of the service men would be accompanied by American wives, many others would marry women from a foreign country and eventually bring them to the United States. For Okinawan Kiku Sowers, who married Marine Gunnery Sergeant Cecil Sowers in 1960, leaving her home and coming to America must have brought about a certain amount of culture shock as she had to learn a new language and adopt new customs and values. However, with the support of her husband, she made the adjustment to life in California and Washington. Then, as happens with most military personnel, the sergeant was assigned to a year of sea duty. Kiku, with an eleven-month daughter, went to live with her mother-in-law. “It was fine, very good. No trouble,” Kiku indicated, although most Americans would find living with in-laws extremely difficult. “Her mother wrote to her,” Gunnery Sergeant Sowers stated in a recent interview, “and told Kiku to always

The Enduring Family

15

do what her mother-in-law—“mama-san’’—told her to do, to always be respectful. That’s what Kiku did.”64 For families of those called to serve in Vietnam during the 1960s and early 1970s, it was a different kind of war. During World War II, men were away from home sometimes for four years or more. Communication was sporadic between spouses with letters taking weeks and sometimes months to reach their destination. When the war ended, the men who returned were strangers and discovered that wives and children were strangers, too. The Vietnam era was different in that most wives did not follow their husbands. However, for the waiting wives, communications were better than they had been in the previous two wars. Mail was more regular. Occasional phone calls could be made from Military Affiliate Radio stations (MARS) to families in the states. R&R (rest and rehabilitation) became household words as wives journeyed to Hawaii, Australia, Taipei, and Hong Kong to spend a week with husbands. For those who could, the bonds of family life were kept more intact. Of course, the R&R trip had to be financed by the couple, and some wives could not afford to make a trip. Also, although most employers were sympathetic, because of work commitments, some wives could not get time off. One air force wife, who was unable to meet her husband on R&R, recalled that she was very anxious when she went to meet her returning husband at an airport in the Midwest. “I hadn’t seen him in over a year, and people change in that length of time. I was afraid I might not recognize him. That would have been very embarrassing.” For many service wives, having a husband in an unpopular war caused them problems with those individuals who were not always in agreement with government policy. Some women mentioned prowlers around their home, anonymous telephone harassment, being told that their husband was a murderer. Mildred Schwab Martinez recalled being humiliated when bystanders tossed eggs on army men as they marched in a 4th of July parade. Other wives spent years not knowing if husbands were still alive as many became prisoners of war (POW) or were declared Missing in Action (MIA).65 Then, with the close of the Vietnam era and the end of conscription in 1973, a tremendous change occurred. As it had been for other portions of its history, the American military again became an All Volunteer Force (AVF). A major concern to critics of the plan was that, with the end of conscription, the middle class would abandon the military. The claim was that the United States would have an army of the poor and disadvantaged; minorities with little education would fill the ranks in numbers disproportionate to their numbers in the population.66 If the above were true, Sharon Parkis and her husband, Steve, did not fit the disadvantaged category when he enlisted in 1975. Sharon was a tenured teacher in California; the couple owned their home and also had rental property. She continued teaching while her husband went for basic training

16

Following the Flag

in Texas and then went to an assignment at the Air Force Academy in Colorado, joining him during holidays and summer vacation. Her biggest problem was not financial; it was social. I was nearly 30, and the other enlisted wives were in their teens. At an initiation for enlisted wives, the woman talking to us was probably younger than I was. I kept looking around at the other wives and thought, “Why aren’t they in high school?” Once when I was visiting Steve in Texas, we had a couple over for dinner. They were very nice, but she was only fifteen—closer to our daughter Holly’s age than mine—and he was eighteen. We just didn’t have anything in common to talk about. That’s when I encouraged Steve to apply for OTS. I felt we would be with people more our own age if he were an officer. At least for us, finances were not the issue.67 Parkis didn’t think the young couple they had invited were necessarily disadvantaged or from the lower class; they were just young. Of course, still in their teens, they would not have had the education level of the older couple, and his enlistment in the air force may have been the young man’s first full-time job. They were just beginning to enter into America’s economic class system. Janice L. and her husband would also have been considered middle class. The couple both had junior college degrees. Both were in fairly good-paying civilian jobs, she as a secretary for a real estate firm and he as a manager trainee at Sears. They decided his enlisting in the army would provide them with a guaranteed career for him plus medical benefits and, eventually, a good pension. However, the question of whether the AVF was or is still a military of the poor and disadvantaged continues to be debated. A recent study by the Massachusetts-based National Priorities Project (a nonpartisan citizen watchdog group) continues to state that the Department of Defense (DoD) is using its poor to fill its ranks and that the current generation of troops is “one of the least-qualified groups of enlistees in a decade.” Other critics also indicate that recruiters are “scraping the bottom of the national barrel.”68 Not so, according to Pentagon officials. Bill Carr, acting deputy undersecretary of defense for military personnel policy, indicated that the number of enlistees from poor or lower-middle-class areas was falling. A Heritage Foundation analysis of DoD enlistments for 2003 showed that voluntary recruits were more likely to come from higher-income areas. The report also showed “that enlistees come from households with similar median incomes of the civilian population.”69 Another problem with the AVF was the considerable skepticism about whether the necessary manpower could be maintained. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the armed forces were undermanned, and the test scores

The Enduring Family

17

and levels of education were at an all-time low. Career personnel in large numbers were rapidly leaving the military for civilian jobs. However, by 1983, according to Caspar Weinberger, secretary of defense at that time, and Lawrence Korb, undersecretary of defense, all branches of the armed forces had met their recruiting objectives.70 Recruiting objectives continued to be met in the ensuing years. (However, some consider 2005 to be the worst year for military recruiters since the AVF began. For instance, army recruiting was in a slump, missing its recruiting goal for the first time since 1999. “The Army has become a ‘thin green line’ that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.”)71 Although numerous books and articles were written on the AVF in the late 1970s and 1980s, few provided any information on military families. Even though most of the recruits were young, many were already married or contemplating marriage. In that first decade of the AVF, about three-fifths of the male military personnel had one or more dependents to support.72 As always, taking care of families continued to be a major issue. With the end of the cold war, the mission of the armed forces began to change. There was a decline in wars between nations and a rise in war within nations. America’s military became involved in peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, separating belligerents, resettling refugees, delivering food and medical supplies, etc. According to military writer Charles Moskos, for many, these would not be considered military in the traditional sense.73 Still, for the military family, the new mission meant that spouses probably would be away from home for lengthy periods of time as they were deployed to political hot spots around the world. Perhaps one of the most significant changes in the past five years has been the increase in the number of personnel in the “fringe” areas of the military deployed to the Middle East as the National Guards and Reserves were recalled to active duty in Afghanistan and Iraq. DoD statistics indicated that 292,000 of the 463,000 Reserve and Guard members in all fifty states have been activated since September 11, 2001, in response to the war on terror. By comparison, those Reserve and Guard forces called to active duty during the Vietnam War totaled 37,643.74 In 1973, the DoD adopted the total force policy, which meant that reserve forces were no longer to be forces of last resort as they had been historically. Title 10 U.S.C. 12301 “provides that, in time of war or national emergency declared by the Congress, the entire membership of all reserve components or any lesser number can be called to active duty for the duration of the war or national emergency plus 6 months. . . .” Under Title 10 U.S.C. 12304, if the President determines that it is necessary to augment active duty personnel, under the Presidential Selected Reserve Call-Up (PSRC) authority “up to 200,000 members of the Selected Reserve can be called to active duty . . .” for a period of 270 days.75 Suddenly, the normal routine of home and work can be interrupted as the Guard or Reserve members are called to active

18

Following the Flag

duty and, often, sent on lengthy tours. When this happens recruitment and retention are affected. While both Guard and Reserve rates were met in 2003, recruiters became concerned about retention.76 Concern for the families left behind during reactivation was a big issue as many were unprepared for this upheaval in their lives. In a July 2004 joint hearing before the Subcommittee on Children and Families, which investigated how the states and the Pentagon were responding to military family needs (especially for Guard and Reservists), it was noted that there were “approximately 400,000 spouses and over 500,000 children associated with activated members of the Reserves and National Guardsmen.”77 If these family members are unhappy, retention rates may plummet. In fact, a 2004 Web-based questionnaire called Status of Forces Surveys (periodically asked of 50,000 reservists) indicated that reservists’ intentions to stay in the military had significantly declined. Perhaps more importantly, the survey also showed declining support from spouses or “significant others” toward military service in general, with “figures lowest for Marine reservists and Army Guardsmen and reservists.”78 Deployment overseas appeared to be the major problem for spouses. (See Chapter 4.) Many families of the Guard or Reserves appear to have been shocked by the call-ups and overseas deployments. However, should they be? The Army Reserve on-line overview spells out what is required, and this is the same for all branches of the service. “As a Soldier in the Army Reserve, part of your job is to defend our country and uphold our freedoms. World events may create a need for you to be called into Active Duty.”79 In a letter to the editor regarding the responsibilities of reservists, Air Force Colonel (Ret.) J. Bruce Laubach was very unsympathetic with complaints from reservists and their families. Laubach wrote that he had both an active duty and Air National Guard background, expected to be called to active duty if and when needed, and bluntly indicated that the military needed to run off those reservists who couldn’t “accommodate so much mobilization.” . . . all Reserve and Guard personnel need to put that into the calculus when making the decision to sign up in the first place and whether to remain in. One weekend a month and two weeks in the summer doesn’t, itself, do much for national defense. The idea, as I understand it, is to be ready to go get shot at if the call comes.80 Laubach makes a good point; those joining any organization connected with the military should realize the commitment involved. However, the absence of a family member for an extended period of time can pose a great deal of stress on the family, which, in turn, has an impact on both reserve and active duty personnel remaining in service. Army Major Sue A., who has been in the Reserves for nineteen years and has a five-year-old daughter, is

The Enduring Family

19

very aware of the effect a disgruntled wife can have on the military. “There is the saying, ‘You enlist the soldier the first time,’” she stated. “You enlist the family the second time.”81 Nevertheless, regardless of the hardships, families are enlisting. They, like their predecessors, will see changes—some helpful, some detrimental. However, when all is said and done, the military of the twenty-first century has changed little from the military of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The call to duty is still there; the military needs are still paramount; the military family still endures.

CHAPTER 2

On the Road Again I was back again in the army. I had cast my lot with a soldier, and where he was, was home to me. —A lieutenant’s wife, returning from the East1

For over 200 years the American military was blunt in both voice and policy regarding its view on married men and the wives who moved around the world with them. The old adage, “If the military wanted you to have a wife, they’d have issued you one,” was not just a joke. Wives and families were not welcomed; they were only tolerated. However, with the transformation to the All Volunteer Force (AVF), the military has made significant strides to ensure that spouses and other dependent members become more a part of the “military family.” Without changes to support families, the AVF might never have succeeded, so the military was forced to make improvements in family lifestyles. For most soldiers in the nineteenth and the early twentieth century, and often this also included officers, the cost of moving a family and providing housing was simply prohibitive as the military made no provision for transportation costs and provided few quarters. Men were expected to remain single and most did. It would be the middle of the twentieth century before the military would be forced to change its view on marriage. Personnel, especially those who opted to make the military a twenty or thirty-year career, would move numerous times. If they were married, they had two major problems facing the family. As today, number one would be obtaining adequate military or civilian housing; next would be locating good schools for their children.

On the Road Again

21

HUNTING FOR A HOME Finding acceptable quarters for the wife and kids has always been a challenge. In earlier times wives had to take whatever was available. Occasionally, this must have been difficult for it was noted in one history, The Old Army, that apparently “the thought of suicide crossed Frances Grummond’s mind after her first night in a tent at Fort Phil Kearney in 1866.”2 However, it was in this same year that the need for helping some married military with housing was recognized. In the navy, “a quarters allowance was established in an amount equal to one-third of the pay for officers who were not provided with family quarters on shore stations.”3 It was assumed that the enlisted man was single. The advent of World War I saw two advantageous changes for military families. The allowance begun in 1866 was extended to married enlisted personnel if housing on the installation was not available. Then, legislation enacted in April 1918 accepted the responsibility of providing quarters for commissioned officers’ families.4 Apparently, this responsibility did not extend to the enlisted men. After World War I, although housing had improved significantly, generally quarters were in short supply, and there were still those which were almost unfit for human habitation. In December 1925, the Infantry Journal published a major article on housing conditions. Its author, E. B. Johns, told of enlisted men of the Second Division in Texas living in temporary barracks unpainted since the end of World War I. He also reported on noncommissioned officers and their families occupying “abandoned black laborers’ shacks at Fort Benning and of officers resigning rather than accepting the uninhabitable quarters offered them.”5 When, in early 1942, the United States upped conscription after the bombing of Pearl Harbor and men left for military service, many spouses and children traveled across the country seeking to keep the family partially intact until the men were shipped overseas. However, manpower in the military is cyclical. Numbers dropped after the Korean War, but with the advent of the “cold war,” and the need for continued occupation forces in the Far East and Europe, for the first time in its history, the United States needed to maintain a draft in order to sustain a sufficient military force to be a global power. Also, there continued to be an increase in the number of both married officers and enlisted troops. Reacting to pressure, the government was forced to become more involved in providing for the family in order to retain trained personnel and entice troops into lifetime military careers. In 1949, Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson noted that because of the lack of government quarters and scarcity of rental housing, many families had been living in disgraceful conditions in shacks, trailer camps, and overcrowded buildings. He stressed that there was “nothing more vital or

22

Following the Flag

pressing in the interest of morale and the security of America than proper housing for our Armed Forces.”6 For the first time meaningful improvements were initiated. On March 5, 1949, Senator Kenneth Wherry (NE) introduced a bill to provide for construction of military housing “on or around military installations.” This housing was to be built near a base under the Wherry plan with the developers (known as Wherry sponsors) constructing the homes, maintaining them, and giving rent priority to military families. Each sponsor would then turn the project over to the government at the end of a fortyyear period. Unfortunately, as with any project, there were a few problems. Houses were quite small and construction was sometimes shoddy. Government legislation plodded on with more bills working on the problem. Nevertheless, a total of 264 Wherry projects were finally constructed, totaling 83,742 units.7 Next came the Capehart Housing Act which was passed by Congress in August 1955. Unlike Wherry housing, the completed Capehart homes were under military control with the military setting rental prices. These houses were larger in size than the Wherry units, making them more desirable for occupancy. In addition, the homes provided more privacy and also tended to preserve the natural environment. By 1964, when the Capehart program ended, nearly 250,000 units of Wherry and Capehart had been constructed. Approximately 175,000 of the homes were still in existence at the end of 1994.8 With these two legislative programs, the government finally had made a major commitment and set a precedent to support the welfare of its military families. With the concept of the AVF looming on the horizon, it was none too soon. HOUSING AND THE ALL VOLUNTEER FORCE When soldiers were drafted or in times of war, families had no option except to adjust to the military’s needs for the duration of the man’s service commitment. With the end of the draft in the 1970s, the military had to take a new look at accommodating the family. Quality of life for the family was especially critical as the AVF needed to encourage individuals to join the services for a career, not simply a tour of duty as was the case in the thirtyyear period from 1940 to 1973. Also, unlike earlier eras, statistics indicate that today’s armed forces consists of approximately 65 percent married personnel with families.9 Like the rest of society in the twenty-first century, the military requires highly qualified, technical people. High turnover rates are both inefficient and expensive. Consequently, improvements to family life make good sense financially (and ethically). Keeping married personnel means keeping their families content. As one colonel said, “I always tell a new person coming on station to get his family settled before worrying about coming to work. If the spouse and kids are

On the Road Again

23

fairly happy, I know he’ll have his mind on his job, not his problems at home.” Getting a roof over the families’ head is of prime importance. However, geography can make this a tough job regardless of what the military does. Moving is hard work, and it is expensive. The military does what it can to alleviate the stress involved. For the permanent change of station (PCS), the move may be done through commercial movers hired by the military, a doit-yourself (DITY), or a combination of both. Obviously, the first choice is the easiest, as the moving company packs up all household goods and then unpacks them at the destination of the military personnel. Depending on the personnel’s pay grade, weight allowances are set for household goods. For some overseas moves, weight allowances may be less. Also in some instances, a certain amount of “government furniture” may be furnished. (For example, the only furniture the author and her husband had moved to Kadena Air Force Base on Okinawa were two recliners and their bedroom set.) The military will usually ship one automobile overseas, but it will not ship any cars for PCS moves within the Continental United States (CONUS). Most families today have more than one automobile, and families usually try to form a sort of caravan with both spouses driving. Since the military is well aware that it costs a great deal to move a family, it provides several types of reimbursements. The biggest is called a dislocation allowance (DLA) and a travel allowance to cover expenses incurred during the trip to the new location. Both of these can be taken in advance. Temporary lodging expense (TLE) is intended to cover lodging costs until a family can get base housing or find housing on the economy. Occasionally, a family may be in temporary lodging for several weeks, and many bases have government TLE facilities for families. Sometimes the lodging may be a hotel on the beach as was the case for a family who was reassigned to a joint command at Camp Smith, Hawaii. While it would appear that the military has covered all costs involved in a family’s move, this is never the case. As one spouse explained: We moved into this base house, an old but beautiful one, that had over 30 windows. Naturally, they were all different sizes. I knew how expensive it would be to drape all of the windows, so I shopped at a discount store. Finally, I got all of the drapes and curtains hung, and we got orders to PCS. We’d only been on base 11 months, and none of the curtains would fit the windows at our next station. It’s the things like curtains and carpet that you have to buy new that adds up when you PCS. However, this spouse had been extremely happy with most of the base housing her family had been allotted during the twenty-two years she accompanied her officer husband. This is not the case with all spouses.

24

Following the Flag

Depending on the assignment, military housing varies greatly as it did in the past. Some quarters are large and fairly new; others may be old and quite small. In addition, depending on the number of children in an area, noise can be a problem between neighbors. This is especially true if housing is a four- or eight-plex arrangement and can become a source of friction with neighbors. Moving to get away from a problem can be costly to a family as it usually means renting or purchasing a home on the economy, plus the cost of the move. In addition, some jobs are classified as “essential,” requiring that personnel live on base in case of recalls or other emergencies. Of course, requirements for base personnel depend on the branch of service and the installation’s mission, and, like the variation in mission, housing may vary greatly. It is thought by many that the air force provides the best quarters for its personnel. As army spouse Jim Lever said, “You know what they say. The Air Force builds its golf course and housing first. Then they run out of money for the runway and have to ask Congress for more. The Army takes care of its infrastructure and equipment first, and when they run out of money for housing, none is available.”10 Stephanie Perry made a similar comment. “The Air Force has better housing than the Army,” she said, indicating that she and her husband, an army lieutenant, were in a unit stationed at Peterson Air Force Base. “Our house is quite roomy—about 1600 sq. feet, I think. In fact, I think we’re actually in field grade housing. We’re very lucky.” Occasionally, if a base were located in a fairly remote area, civilian housing was utilized. For example, in Kirksville, Missouri, in the 1960s, only seven military houses were available. Therefore, housing in the town was leased by the government for the families whose spouses were assigned to a nearby radar site. This was of benefit to the military families who had housing readily available and to those who owned the homes. If there were a lapse in time between a family leaving to move to a new assignment, until another family arrived at the site, the home’s owners still received rent for the period of vacancy. Since there are seldom enough quarters on any military base for all personnel, those wishing them must get on a housing list and wait for availability as other personnel are reassigned. Sometimes the wait can be as long as a year, although a few months seems to be the usual time period. A basic allowance for housing (BAH) is paid to the service member based on rank and marital status and is deducted from the monthly paycheck. It covers all costs for those living in quarters on the installation, including utilities and any maintenance. However, the amount of money for family housing and operations has been reduced for fiscal 2006. The Army will get $9 million less for housing maintenance, the Air Force $54 million less, and the Navy and Marine Corps will have a $5 million reduction.11 (Although it may not be approved by Congress, the Air Force’s 2007 budget submission requests almost $2 billion to replace inadequate family housing by 2012.)12

On the Road Again

25

Those living off-post receive the same BAH as those on post, but this allowance may not cover all of their housing costs. BAH rates vary with the area to which one is assigned. The higher the rent districts, the higher the BAH. For example, the BAH for housing for an E-1 with dependents living at Lawrence, Kansas, would be $791 while the same individual would be eligible for $1,614 in the District of Columbia. A colonel residing in the Boston area would receive $2,924 compared with $859 in Montgomery, Alabama. (These allowances are based on an average 5.9 percent increase under a provision of the 2006 defense authorization bill and went into effect on January 1, 2006.)13 Some old traditions, like old soldiers, hang on for a long time. The military still frowns on fraternization and builds its quarters segregated by rank. The higher the rank, the better and often larger the quarters. While there are exceptions, junior officers often live in multiplex units, field grade officers in single-family units, and senior grade officers in much larger houses. (See Appendix for ranks.) As was mentioned earlier, however, this can vary from facility to facility and with the different branches of the service. At Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, generals were in expansive old homes situated on the water. Colonels were housed in large duplexes, each side containing two solariums, a large living and dining room, three bedrooms with two baths and maids’ quarters with a bath—a holdover of the time when many officers’ families employed a maid. In addition, the quarters contained a large basement and attic that some families remodeled and converted to additional living space. On Little Creek Naval Base in Norfolk, Virginia, officers with the rank of lieutenant commander and commander were quartered in similar white frame cottages nestled among tall trees and located on a lake. Although the homes were fairly small, they were situated in such a manner that each family had an element of privacy, and the area provided seclusion from most base traffic. Maureen Swain recalled that she and her husband, an E-4, had “very nice” housing when they were stationed in San Antonio, Texas, at Kelly USA (formerly Kelly Air Force Base). “We were in a two-bedroom townhouse with one and a half bathrooms. The housing area had families living there from all branches of the service—Navy, Army and Air Force.”14 Generally, there are two or three sections of housing on any installation, and, as in any town, some sections have more “snob appeal” than others. For example, on Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, the housing for colonels on an elevated part of the base was considered more prestigious than a location across the base. Nicknames for various housing areas depending on rank illustrate how some view their status. Douglas Valley housing for officers at the Air Force Academy is called “Smug Valley” by some, and for enlisted families living in the Pine Valley area the name is “Swine Valley.”15 In the 1970s at Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts, officer housing

26

Following the Flag

consisted of small single-family units for some and eight-plex units for others. Many of those officers, usually lieutenants and captains, in the eightplex homes laughingly referred to their address on Scott Circle as “Scum Circle.” Of course, there can be exceptions to the above segregation. At Woomera, South Australia, in the 1980s and 1990s, officer, enlisted, and civilian personnel were interspersed throughout the village. Housing was assigned on rank, availability, and family size. Therefore, a captain with one child might have a smaller house than a sergeant with three children. The site commander might live across from an Australian corporal who had quarters next to the Australian area administrator. In overseas areas, where base housing is often not available for everyone, renting on the economy is the only option. Lieutenant Ted Perry recalled that he, his wife Stephanie, and their daughter lived on the German economy. “We had a fairly nice apartment, two bedrooms and a bath. Outside on the landing were an extra bathroom and maid’s quarters. Actually the maid’s quarters were only about the size of a closet. The apartment building had been quarters for SS officers during World War II.”16 Where one lives may seem a trivial matter, but this is not the case. The family’s status is involved and can become an irritant to some wives. As one army spouse said, “I think now that my husband has been promoted to E-5, we should not still have to live in the housing area with E-3s and E-4s.” She felt that her husband had obtained a rank such that her family should be with other E-5s and E-6s. Similar to the civilian world, three things seem to be important to some housing occupants—location, location, and location. Sometimes a base house is simply not acceptable to a family, and they make the decision to find quarters on the economy. Rather than living on a military reservation, and giving up their BAH as rent, many families opt to purchase housing in the civilian sector. A 1999 Pentagon survey showed that 30 percent of active duty personnel owned a home. This ownership varied by rank and years of service with approximately 53 percent of personnel with twenty or more years of service owning a home compared with only 15 percent of those in uniform for five years or less. Most personnel, both married and single, still rely on their BAH to cover a portion or all of their house payments without out-of-pocket costs. However, BAH was designed to cover base housing or rent if quarters weren’t available, not mortgage payments. Defense officials warn of plans “to decrease BAH payments . . . for those moving into areas where rents have declined recently.”17 If the warning becomes reality, this will leave the military home buyer having to take money out of regular salary or savings to cover the discrepancy in mortgage payments. Certainly, owning one’s home can be satisfying for military families, but it can have both positive and negative effects. According to Olympia, Washington, real estate agent Rich Grow, a former army helicopter crew

On the Road Again

27

member, it may take as long as six years for a home to appreciate in value so that it covers the original price, its appreciation in value, commission, and closing costs.18 Other realtors indicate that a home needs to be kept at least three years before the property may appreciate significantly in value for resale and only then if the housing market remains good. Stories abound of those who “have made a killing.” Take the case of a colonel’s family who had purchased a townhouse in the Washington, D.C., area for $360,000. During their less than two years in the home, they had remodeled the kitchen and upgraded the deck. Still, they were pleasantly surprised—dumbfounded was the word the colonel used—to sell the townhouse for $556,000. This same military couple had previously built a new home in Tampa, Florida, and were able to sell it after three years at a sizeable profit. On the other hand, a family may have to remain behind when the military member is reassigned if the property cannot be sold without a substantial loss. Natalie G. explained that she and the two children were hoping to accompany her husband who had been reassigned from Colorado to Missouri. Unfortunately, three months had passed with no offers for their home. Her options were to either stay longer in Colorado, rent the house to incoming personnel, or considerably lower the price of the home. None of these options were appealing to Natalie and her husband. Still, renting one’s home may be the only option open if it does not sell and the family must move to a new location. There are both positive and negative aspects to this action. Keeping and renting a home near a base usually will ensure a steady pool of renters. Hopefully, they will share your values and concern about keeping the property in good shape. Of course, renters may damage the house to the extent that it will need extensive repairs, but when filing income tax returns, expenses to maintain the house as a rental are deductible to offset the rent income. Cmdr. Desley Parker and her husband, Captain Brance Parker (both USN-Ret) owned several rentals. However, Desley Parker points out, “If you can only manage to have one rental, keep one in the area you may want to retire to. Even if it is not the home you retire to, it will provide you a foot in the market.”19 Purchasing a home may be prohibitive for some military families, especially junior enlisted or officers. Recently, privatized housing has made this possible for many couples. In 1997, the Defense Department signed a tenyear contract with Dujardin Development Company for privatized housing in Everett, Washington. Chief Gunner’s Mate Jack Day and his wife purchased the home they had been renting in their navy privatized housing area. Day felt that “market growth is good out here, and we like the school district.” In addition, a big incentive was the $8,000 the Days were provided in incentives that they used for closing costs and upgrades to the house. The navy also gets a share of sales that will be put toward future military housing.20

28

Following the Flag

During the past few years, new military housing has been constructed by private companies. By early 2005, the military had awarded forty-three family housing privatization projects for a total of over 87,000 units. Cost of these projects to the government will be approximately $767 million. However, according to Philip Grone, deputy undersecretary of defense for installations and environment, if the government constructed the homes, as was the case in the past, the cost would be more than $11 billion.21 New housing has been built on the post at Fort Carson, Colorado by a private company who then leases the housing to the facility. Both officer and enlisted “villages,” as they are designated, are now occupied by families. Assignment to this housing also follows military rules—by rank and family size. At the present time Fort Carson has villages for those enlisted through E-5, from E-6 through E-9, and for junior and field grade officers. A tour of the various housing areas shows apartment, town homes, and single-family units very much like those in any new American suburb. Playground areas have been established for children, including some which are handicapped accessible. As well as street curb cuts and sidewalks that give easy access to equipment, the playground in Shoshoni Village at Fort Carson also has a new ADA-approved wheel chair swing.22 Yet, no matter how nice the house is, child care is still a vital part of family life, and the government has recognized this in a number of ways. A boon to some who live in privatized housing may be the addition of child-care facilities, a growing problem for dual-career and/or deployed parents (Chapter 3). According to Grone, “significant discussions” have begun on this option. Major questions about this proposal include whether the day centers would be run by the government, the housing developer, or a third party. Also, while the military subsidizes child care in installations and centers, who would pay for this care in the privatized areas.23 While privatized housing brings military housing into the twenty-first century, there is also a downside for families—utility use monitoring. Unlike the regular base housing, where all utility costs were covered by the government, utility meters will be installed. All personnel will receive a utility allowance based on the average use for their house. A baseline average for what utilities are expected to run for a particular type of home will consider such factors as location, number of bedrooms, energy-efficient features, age of the house, etc. Allowances are established from Department of Energy models.24 For some, this will mean that they will have to pay more than their monthly BAH because their usage is greater than average. For others, if they are conservative in usage, they can actually pocket some cash. Whether a family lives on an installation, rents off base, or opts to purchase a home, getting settled quickly is very important. However, even though housing needs are taken care of, adapting to a new environment is never easy for a family. Of great concern to parents and children is the prospect of finding and enrolling in a new school.

On the Road Again

29

CHANGING SCHOOLS Schooling for military children is not a new problem. In earlier times most for those families stationed in the West, educating their children plagued all of the families. Children were often sent back East for their education. However, this could prove costly, and some families were unable to meet the expense. In 1868, Alice Kirk Grierson took her and Colonel Benjamin Grierson’s son, thirteen-year-old Charles, back to her family in Illinois. No school existed at Fort Gibson where the couple was stationed, and both wanted Charles to attend school in Chicago.25 If a wife was herself somewhat educated, tutoring her children might be the only option. General Douglas MacArthur would recall that his mother instilled in him a “sense of obligation” as she tutored him in the three Rs while the family was stationed at remote Fort Selden, Arizona. Later, the family moved to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he entered second grade. About six months after his ninth birthday, the family was on the move again to Washington, D.C., and a new school for Douglas—the Force Public School.26 (Regardless, and maybe because of his mother’s efforts, Douglas seemed to do alright and ended up being one of America’s five-star generals.) What may have been a predictable and orderly way of life for the family suddenly changes abruptly when military orders are received. In The Military Family, Florence Kaslow and Richard Ridenour indicated that the effect of moves on children are “among the high stress-producing and potentially disruptive experiences of military family life.”27 Because of reassignments, children of military personnel (or “military brats” as they are often called) have to change schools frequently. This can be challenging as they must overcome what one youngster said was constantly feeling “like I never knew where the restrooms were.” Kaslow and Ridenour mention the 1978 Report of the President’s Commission on Mental Health, which reminds the nation that “children and adolescents are among the most underserved population requiring mental health services.”28 The authors emphasize that no mention was made in the report of the approximately 2.5 million children of active duty, retired, or deceased service members. While they are not claiming that all children have special mental health needs, they do emphasize the stress placed on the young, and the entire family, who have to move frequently. Another young woman whose father was a career air force officer remembered that she had been in public schools in Missouri, Mississippi, Massachusetts, Alabama, Colorado, and Virginia. “Just as I got to know some of the other kids well, we moved,” Melissa said. “Sometimes I was only in a school a year before I had to change to another one. I was lucky that I got to stay three years in the same school in Massachusetts and in Virginia.”

30

Following the Flag

Although military children must go along with the frequent moves and adapt to changing educational environments, there is always some fear involved—fear of trying to make new friends, fear of being behind in classes, fear of being unpopular, fear of always being the outsider. Traveling from school to school around the world can exact both a social and academic price. In her book, Military Brats: Legacies of Childhood Inside the Fortress, Mary Edwards Wertsch provides numerous comments from individuals whose educational experiences were less than satisfactory. One girl’s performance in school declined to the extent that she was not promoted to the next grade. Another was so concerned about achieving good grades that she threw tantrums out of fear of not being able to get things correct. An air force colonel’s son who had been moved to thirteen schools (four of them in the same year) stated: I’d go from one school where they were doing new math to another where they had a different variety. There was always an assumption when you were dumped in a class in the middle of the year that you could catch up. And of course you never really did catch up. Sometimes you were in the dark the whole year because they’d be talking about things you never heard of. I never have been able to deal with math. But I read a lot, so I was always good at English, history, and social studies.29 Moving can be particularly stressful for teenagers in high school as adolescence involves a search for personal identity. The move may disrupt the teens’ participation in extracurricular activities and disrupt relationships established within peer groups.30 It is especially difficult for children if they have only their senior year to complete. As one air force officer explained, “We hope we get to stay in Germany for the three years I’m scheduled to be there. That way my son can graduate from high school. Otherwise, if we stay only two years, he will have to finish at a new place. He’ll have to make new friends which is not always easy to do. He’ll be the new kid on the block.” Often, if reassignment occurs while sons or daughters are in high school, a family will decide not to accompany the military member to the new assignment. One wife decided to keep the family stateside when her husband was sent overseas because their daughter was a senior in high school and also heavily involved in ballet. The daughter of a navy lieutenant commander was relieved when her parents decided the family would not accompany him. She loved her father, but “it was easier to say goodbye to him for three years than to face being uprooted from high school.”31 Leaving wife and children behind has created the lone married serviceman known as a “geographic bachelor” (or bachelorette).

On the Road Again

31

Remaining behind is not always done for a child’s education. Gina Higgs and her army sergeant husband faced a major decision when he was transferred from Fort Carson, Colorado, to a post in Texas. Gina needed only one additional semester at a Colorado University to complete her teaching degree. She knew if she followed her husband immediately, she would lose quite a bit of course credit when transferring to another college. Even though Gina would be left behind with the total care of their three children for several months, the couple decided that was their best option.32 Gina’s case is not an exception. Many times when a civilian student changes schools, classes taken at a previous school are not accepted. A similar problem faces military children if they change colleges to be near families. Classes taken at one college, especially those awarded from colleges that offer classes overseas, may not be accepted at another institution, causing the military brat to lose credits or take additional time to graduate. Because a high school in Virginia declined to accept honors courses from South Carolina, a Marine Corps family who had been reassigned to Stafford County, Virginia, decided to send their son, Johnathan Snider, back to board with a family and complete high school in Beaufort, South Carolina. Not accepting the honors courses effectively cut the boy out of the National Honor Society, and, along with being too late to compete for a position on the football team, it was felt he might be prevented from getting into a military academy.33 Although many children attend schools in the civilian community, many also are in schools located on military reservations. These schools are managed by the Defense Department both in the United States and overseas— sixty-seven in the Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary School System (DDESS) with fifty-eight in the continental United States, nine in Puerto Rico and Guam. Overseas there are 153 schools operated as part of the Department of Defense Dependents’ Schools (DoDDS).34 In several articles Karen Jowers, staff writer for The Air Force Times, examined some of the issues presently facing continued military operation of public, including cost and quality of education. A study conducted by the Donahue Institute of the University of Massachusetts looked at data on operating costs, funding sources, and a variety of other educational factors for DDESS schools. Released in February 2005, the study called for closing or ceding management to local public school districts of forty-eight of these schools at fourteen installations across the United States. The DoD also utilized a separate, independent panel of three school finance experts from the University of Florida’s Institute for Educational Finance, the Department of Education Bureau of Impact Aid, and the University of Virginia. Unfortunately, some of the districts spend less per student than the military does, and Federal funds would be needed to supplement those districts in the form of “impact aid” from the Department of Education.35 The school remaining in the DDESS would do

32

Following the Flag

so because local schools were determined to be far below DDESS standards and financially might be unable to absorb a large number of military students. Opponents of transferring control of military schools to local communities can cite the case of Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. That school, located in a privatized housing development, was transferred to local Houston County in 2001. While under military control, the school, Linwood Elementary, was a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 1999. Four years later the school was rated as failing to make “adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act.”36 (The civilian school district administration protested that it was not measuring the same group of kids as when the military operated it and listed the fact that a number of civilian children from surrounding high-poverty areas were now in attendance as a possible reason for the low scores.) An editorial in the Air Force, Army and Navy Times was not in favor of the change from military-run to civilian-run schools, emphasizing that all schools in the DDESS system should be treated the same way. It indicated that by moving some schools out of the system, it was inevitable that DDESS would become a less efficient institution. It also pointed that although parents have been guaranteed schools would remain viable under new management, they would see the change “for what it really is: a cut in benefits.”37 The debate regarding military schooling on bases continues to raise several issues. While some feel these schools tie military life together as families move from one duty station to another, others say the schools are for the privileged few on post and an anachronism that dates back to segregation. Education standards have also been questioned. Army Colonel Keith Armstrong, who in 2005 was responsible as post commander for thousands of military children attending the post’s seven schools, felt the DDESS schools did an excellent job of educating the young. “I have a personal affection for these schools,” he stated. “They provide a great education for our kids. They are uniquely qualified to help our children deal with the issues they face.”38 Claire Smrekar, associate professor of education and public policy at Vanderbilt University would agree with Colonel Armstrong and indicated that the military school system worked well. Co-author of a 2001 study, “March Toward Excellence: School Success and Minority Student Achievement in Department of Defense Schools,” Smrekar found that the military environment contributed to student success. Among the factors that she stressed were the fact that children lived with one parent who had a stable job, housing was relatively safe, and crime was low. In addition, Smrekar felt that the military values of hard work and discipline rubbed off on the students, encouraging them to take responsibility and strive for good grades.39

On the Road Again

33

An article in Education World also lauded the success teachers and administrators at military bases had teaching a diverse population of children with a mobility rate of 35 percent and half living at the poverty line. In 2001, Debra Owens, a research associate at Vanderbilt University, along with other members of a research team, prepared a report entitled “March Toward Excellence: School Success and Minority Student Achievement in Department of Defense Schools.” Owens indicated that she was very surprised about the performance levels of the students involved. “I just had never heard any level of detail about their school system being exceptional. It wasn’t our expectation that they were doing so well in so many areas.”40 Owens found that the DoD schools had the attitude that all students could learn. Despite their mobility the students achieved high scores on standardized tests, with African-American and Hispanic students posting the highest scores in the nation. The achievment gap between white and minority students was also narrower than in U.S. public schools. It was further found that there were fewer discipline problems in the DoD schools and that small class size and good resources contributed to student learning.41 According to data, fourth-grade students in the stateside DDESS “have ranked no lower than eighth among state school systems National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading and math tests since 1998” and “minority students score even higher in comparison to civilian peers . . . [with] Hispanic fourth-graders in the top three in reading and top five in math.”42 To Claire Smrekar, these success rates showed that the military schools were doing something right. Still, with studies indicating continued success of students in these facilities, there are others who feel that their children are at a disadvantage in military administered schools, particularly those overseas. One mother felt that her two sons had difficulty in adjusting to a stateside school when the family was sent back to the United States from Europe. “They had not been given a good background in just simple math [in Germany]. When we got to Norfolk, the kids in their grade were way ahead of them. We had to get a tutor.” Another wife who had lived at Kadena Air Force Base on Okinawa stated that she didn’t think a great portion of the teachers were there primarily to teach the children but instead liked the salary and the travel involved. “I can remember that my two kids were always having substitute teachers as theirs were off to Korea or Singapore for shopping or some other holiday. I think getting good salaries and being able to travel around the world was the big draw for many of these educators. I may be prejudiced, but I think the job came second.” On the other hand, the article in Education World noted that teachers were happy working in the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools. Certainly, the good pay was an incentive to teach overseas, but plentiful instructional supplies and ample professional development

34

Following the Flag

were additional incentives. The study by Smrekar also mentioned the professional development and the strong emphasis on “training designed to address the individual needs of schools as determined by student performance on standardized tests.”43 As in civilian society, some parents desire to meet the educational needs of their children by home schooling. This type of schooling can provide a stable environment in the midst of frequent mobility of the parent. Those living overseas usually find fewer home school families and, at one time, had fewer opportunities for children to participate in extracurricular activities. Because of this, the School Legal Defense Association persuaded the U.S. House of Representatives, Armed Forces Committee, and the secretary of defense to “develop a clear, written policy on the department’s support of home schooling. . . .”44 The result was that home schoolers were permitted to become involved in extracurricular activities of overseas DoDDS schools. Upon request, the DoDEA will provide those who are home schooled with library materials and special education services. However, it is the responsibility of the children’s sponsor to provide materials such as textbooks, workbooks, computer software, etc. In addition, the sponsor must see that the children meet attendance requirements and any prerequisites for course work.45 The requirements to have specific classes and the permission for participation in extracurricular activities applies to DoD schools in the United States and abroad. In addition, with the DoDEA supporting the principle that all students would be successful, special education classes and services are provided to eligible students. To be eligible the student must have an identified disability that adversely affects his or her academic performance and must need a specially designed instructional program. Those eligible include, but are not limited to, autism, blind, deaf, hearing impaired, orthopedic impairment, and several forms of communication impairment. So that these students can have the opportunity to learn, instruction is geared to their strengths.46 For those parents not happy with either the public or military-operated schools, there is always the option of sending children to private schools. One family kept their daughter in Catholic schools because they felt she would get a better education. Also, as the family changed locations, they felt the schools would have a similar curriculum, making it easier to transfer classes. Army E-5 Frankeeta Brown and her husband Howard Clarke have their two elder children in a private elementary school and their youngest in private day care. Naturally it’s expensive, but they feel the private school provides “smaller class size, foreign language, computers—just a better education.”47 Of course, private schools are not always available, especially if bases military installations are in remote areas or located near smaller towns. In addition, private schools usually do not provide school buses, so transportation to and from these facilities may become a problem.

On the Road Again

35

For those families living overseas, getting high school seniors admitted to a college or university back in the states may be their biggest problem. “You certainly couldn’t visit campuses to see if the college offered what your kid wanted,” stated one wife whose husband was stationed in Germany. “It was just too costly. So you had your kid just apply to several places, hoped he’d get accepted at one of them, and let him go.” “I just hope we get to stay our three-year tour in Belgium,” spouse Jon M. said. “Our daughter is now a sophomore, and this would let her graduate from high school. Then we should have an assignment back to the U.S. in time for us to see about university. Her grades are good, and I think she can be competitive on the SATs, but it’s not like being back in America.” Certainly, the military is doing a tremendous job trying to meet the needs of today’s military family. During past eras, particularly when the country was at war and conscription was necessary, families could follow the soldiers but often at the risk of not finding suitable living conditions. The end of the draft and the implementation of the all volunteer concept has brought about the necessity of accommodating the military family’s need for housing and education. In addition, the fact that more spouses wish to have careers will greatly affect those who volunteer for military service. Recent statistics indicate that recruitment figures for all branches are down, possibly due to the war in Iraq and continuing deployment of troops to Afghanistan. The accommodation of family needs will become ever more important in the future for retention of manpower. In The United States Army in Transition, Zeb B. Bradford and Frederic J. Brown support the importance of supporting military families and propose that the physical amenities provided to married personnel, especially housing facilities, should be equalized. In overseas locations, for example, quarters are not provided for all married personnel. Although the authors realize that the military is not a democracy and that there are special amenities associated with senior ranks and experience, they feel there should be equity in provision of the basic requirements of life—food and shelter in particular. . . . Today, the term “family Army” must apply to all soldiers, and each grade should share overseas service equally. . . . The young soldier in a foreign culture . . . trying to start family life in marginal substandard local housing must not be left to his own devices when he most needs help. This strikes at the basis of professional integrity and credibility and cannot be tolerated.48

CHAPTER 3

Another Resume The duties for the good military wife are (1) to make a congenial home, (2) to rear a family of which he will be proud, and (3) to strengthen her husband’s morale . . . your whole scheme of life revolves around your husband, your children and a happy home. —Nancy Shea, The Army Wife1 Unlike the few laundresses in army history, traditionally, military wives were not supposed to be employed outside the home. Wives of all ranks, but especially those of officers, were expected to stay home, manage the house, and control the children. As Nancy Shea’s guidebook directed, wives were to be dutiful appendages to their husband’s careers. Shea emphasized the value and importance of the spouse in a supporting role. She provided advice to those married to military men on subjects ranging from military tradition to entertaining to decorating a home. She encouraged the wife to sew, to check the newspaper for food specials, to learn to cook the cheaper cuts of meat, and to present to guests the equivalent of gourmet meals. According to Shea, it would be unacceptable for a good wife to “ever veer over to the tearoom school of thought that puts a banana in a slice of pineapple with a cherry on top and calls it a candlestick salad. Heaven forbid!”2 Shea supplied minute details on how the military spouse could provide a good home for her husband, including lining dresser drawers with flowered paper and having matched closet accessories. According to Shea a “smoothrunning household always boasts a well-arranged linen closet. Shelves and towels are stacked in neat piles and arranged by size and color. The shelves themselves should be covered with a harmonizing shelf paper and edging.”3 Merely attempting to following Shea’s direction for the “good military wife”

Another Resume

37

would have been a full-time job but was one that many women dutifully strove to fulfill during the first six decades of the twentieth century. Like virtually all social entities in American society, the military establishment got caught up in the “Age of Aquarius” during the late l960s and l970s. Social rebellion was the “in thing,” and breaking or at least bending hide-bound traditional rules was the order of the day for many individuals. Young women who married service personnel at this time were a different breed than their earlier sisters. Better informed and often better educated, the “new” wife began to gradually assert herself. More women, especially the wives of officers, had or were completing community college and university degrees. Families also were beginning to realize that in order to maintain middle-class status, two incomes were a necessity. So, like her civilian counterparts, the military wife put aside her apron and dust pan, gave up her morning “koffee klatches” and afternoon bridge games at military clubs, and gradually began to look for work. Of course, this change was not acceptable to all elements of the military. Officers’ wives particularly were still considered an important adjunct to their husbands’ careers. For example, as late as the 1970s, the wives of most officers were not employed. One wife mentioned that she had always been the only wife among her husband’s colleagues who worked. “Wherever we were stationed, I could always get a job as a secretary. This gave us a lot more money than the other guys of my husband’s rank. Occasionally, he would get a comment to the fact that we could buy more or travel more than they could. He told me that he had said to one of them, ‘Well, get your wife off her butt like I did, and you’ll have more to spend.’” Doris, the wife of an air force captain also recalled the traditional attitude of the military toward employed spouses in 1975 as her husband was being considered for an assignment with an embassy. During the interview at the Pentagon, the duties expected of Doris were outlined in great detail. When she questioned how she could fulfill these obligations and work, she was told, “Oh, you can’t work. You will have many social events which you will need to host or attend.” After leaving the interview, the couple decided accepting the assignment would be financially devastating; they were aware, however, that their decision might have an adverse affect on the husband’s potential for promotion. Marianne, an army lieutenant’s wife, remembered taking a day off from her teaching job in 1979 so that she could join the other officer’s “ladies” and the colonel’s wife to go berry-picking. “They were all dressed in matching slacks and tops with cute little pails like you would take to the beach,” she laughingly recalled. “I had on jeans and a t-shirt and really looked out of place. But I went along as I felt it would look good for my husband. . . . None of the other officer’s wives in my husband’s unit worked . . . and sometimes it was very difficult for me to participate except in the evening . . . but I had to make sure that I supported the wives’ activities as much as possible.”

38

Following the Flag

Another instance that many times precluded the wife holding a job was when her husband got a command position. For a military officer in any branch of the service commanding a squadron, a group, or a ship is a key stepping stone to success. Rarely are officers promoted to senior rank if they have not successfully been a commander of one or more military organizations. Like it or not, spouses were and are key players in the success of a command. The larger the unit and the more senior the military member, the greater the importance of the spouse. As with men who are CEOs of big corporations or those in the clergy, diplomatic service, medicine, and politics, the wife of a military officer is considered an integral part his career—a husband/wife team. Those wives of higher ranking men who wished to be employed in full-time jobs were often told that they simply could not work. In 1988, Myra was specifically told that if her colonel husband were to become a base commander, she would have to relinquish her civil service position as she would not be able to work and fulfill her role as the commander’s wife. (At that time the air force even provided the Commanding Officer’s Wife (COW) with a book listing the expected duties.) Complaints from wives, who found themselves in a position similar to Myra’s, resulted in the military taking action. For example, in March 1988, a Blue Ribbon Panel on Spouse Issues was convened “to examine the complex issues of spouse employment and participation in activities supporting Air Force families.” This study indicated that the wife was essential to a command because “she sets the family atmosphere and tone for everyone in the unit.”4 The Blue Ribbon Panel further pointed out that the wife greeted the unit’s new members and got them oriented to the base and the services it provided for the family. Of course, to fulfill this job usually necessitated hosting numerous “hail” and “farewell” parties or dinners. The burden of entertaining generally falls on the wives, and can run the gamut from an intimate dinner party to a “coffee” for unit officers’ wives to a holiday open house for all unit personnel and their wives. “One commander in charge of submarine school ordered his men to have several parties and to invite him during their five and one-half months of officers’ training.”5 In addition to hosting home entertainments, the military wife was obligated to attend those social functions that were a part of her husband’s job. Of course, this obligation was not expected of the “new spouses,” those civilian or military men wed to female military personnel. One colonel’s wife, who, in the late 1980s noted this difference, explained her reaction: My husband’s unit had a general visiting, and as usual, all of the wives of his officers were in attendance, dressed in long gowns and smiling brightly. So was I. However, there were two female officers in this unit,

Another Resume

39

and their husbands were complete strangers. So, I just made a small comment to the effect that the male officers’ wives were expected to always put in an appearance, but the spouses of the female officers were exempt from this expectation. At the next formal function, the two men were there, smiling with “us girls.” Both military members and spouses interviewed by the Blue Ribbon Panel indicated that the “seeds of expectation to participate” in installation activities were “planted in pre-commissioning programs” at training schools for officers, through the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC), and military acadamies. They felt the expectations for them and their spouses were strengthened with courses specifically dedicated to the role of commander’s wives. For example, in the air force, “Wing commanders’ wives perceived that they were the eyes and ears of their husbands in the wing’s volunteer and service organization . . . need[ed] to be visible, to improve the quality of life of the people and to exhibit a caring attitude.”6 All branches of the service expected the wife to perform the same basic duties. A 1989 publication of the Navy Wifeline Association, “Guidelines for the Spouses of Commanding and Executive Officers,” specifically spelled out the role of the Navy COW: Ideally, she is a leader to the command families, both officer and enlisted, a director of the command community and an advisor to various organizations. Her husband may ask her to be the liaison between him and the community. . . . The civilian community considers her an important, vital contact and representative of the naval service and its families.7 However, due to the Blue Ribbon Panel’s findings, the military indicated it would initiate vigorous actions to implement a new policy. This policy statement is clear, brief and unequivocal. Spouse employment, an individual right, is simply not an issue to the Air Force . . . It is the Air Force policy that the choice of a spouse to pursue employment, to be a homemaker, to attend school, or to serve as a volunteer in Air Force or local community activities is a private matter and is solely the decision of the individual concerned. No commander, supervisor, or other Air Force official will directly or indirectly impede or otherwise interfere with this decision . . . the Air Force recognizes that voluntary service must be exactly that—voluntary—and must be so regarded by all Air Force members.8 The memorandum went on to point out that the decision of the spouse to work would not be a factor “used to affect the evaluation, promotion or

40

Following the Flag

assignment of the military member”9 and that the measure of merit for military personnel evaluations for promotion would be performance on the job. Change in the military is slow, if at all. In 1990, after the panel had issued statements stressing that there were no expected requirements for wives, at an air force gathering of COWs or those who would soon be the wives of commanding officers, a number of mimeographed sheets (with no references to authorship) were passed around. These listed some of the requirements of the job, gave direction on how to be a leader, how to run a meeting, how to insure that newcomers were greeted, how to provide consolation in the case of a death, and the importance of keeping a current roster of personnel in a husband’s command. One sheet of paper was entitled “Stress and the Commander’s Wife,” and contained a paragraph which brought a chuckle from some: Commander’s wife-ism: A unique form of schizophrenia known only to a unique body of women, caused by unwritten yet expected obligations that fuse two into one. Generally associated with stress. There is hope for this condition, however. It is treatable—and in the end—there is always the change-of-command! These wives must surely have thought about the adage, “Everything changes; everything stays the same.” This is not to say that the Blue Ribbon Panel was totally ineffective. Many wives felt less pressure due to its investigation. Still, the panel probably was another product of the All Volunteer Force approach and would not have been organized if conscription had continued. Without the draft to force military enlistments, the armed forces had to make concessions with “people programs” in order to fill the ranks. Like the “don’t tell” concept regarding sexual preference, the changes invoked by the panel were only partially successful. For some couples, the fact that the memorandum also contained a paragraph emphasizing that voluntary participation of spouses was essential for base support activities meant that it probably would be noticed if a wife were not active to some degree as a base volunteer. Many officers and their wives felt this notice might be detrimental to their husband’s promotion opportunities as there is an informal network that strongly affects these chances. If they did choose to work, most wives still remained members of the wives’ clubs and participated as much as possible in base functions and volunteer activities. The time commitment for the spouse to family, to work, and to military “duties” many times made for a stressful family situation. In fact, Mady Wechsler Segal, a sociology professor at the University of Maryland, contended that military wives would increasingly seek employment and that this would create considerable conflict in the marriage. According to Segal, the conflict would be between work and the demands

Another Resume

41

of the family on the men’s time, “especially for those in greedy occupations such as the military. For instance, we can expect pressures from wives on husbands to adapt their career decisions to family needs, including wives’ career considerations.”10 The military’s needs, of course, had to come before those of the spouse and the family. Still, by the 1990s the military was simply having to accept the fact that many wives were not or could not be the stay-at-home helpmates of Nancy Shea’s book. Increase in the cost of living necessitated that some wives work as their families simply were unable to make ends meet and provide for children’s needs outside the home such as school supplies, music lessons, or sports activities. Other families found that a second income, even from a part-time job, helped them hang on to middle-class status. However, for many wives of officers, it was not solely income that motivated them to seek employment. Interest in the wives’ clubs had waned to a large degree, although these groups are still functioning. Jim Lever commented that he was the sole male spouse in the club at Fort Carson, Colorado. “I said to the women, ‘I’m the reason you have to call it the Officers’ Spouses Club.”11 Lever indicated that officers’ wives of all ages participated in the club, although some indications were that those supporting club functions now were more often the wives’ of retirees. In addition, for the younger women, volunteering at the post thrift shop or gift shop had also lost its allure. These activities alone were not fulfilling. Theo Moffitt succinctly conveyed the new message: We’re breeding a different kind of woman. They’re not so interested in being a silent supporter. They’re educated. They’re independent thinkers. They’re building careers, and they don’t see why anything should get in the way.12 Still, for the military spouse, leaving the hearth for the workplace was not always a simple task. As the spouses attempted to enter the work force, they faced the usual problems encountered by civilians and a few not usually encountered by civilians. ANOTHER JOB INTERVIEW Mobility in the modern armed forces is viewed by the military family with mixed emotions. For the most part, the military member likes the variety and changes in the work environment. Relocation is often necessary to gain experience in a new area or to compete for promotion to a higher rank. Change of station merely means that military individuals will move to a new site with a position ready and waiting. Although there is always the excitement of being in a new place, meeting new people and, possibly, learning about a new culture, the working spouse is less likely to be thrilled

42

Following the Flag

about a move for it once again means the process of sending out resumes and hoping for job interviews and job offers. Occasionally, and this is a rare occurrence, a spouse may find a job waiting. When Linda, an army spouse, arrived at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, she had waiting for her a message to interview for an investments opening at a Kansas City bank. Even before the family’s houshold good shipment had arrived, Linda was hired.13 While she was unpacking the family’s household goods, the author received a call from Hawaii Pacific College to interview for a part-time teaching position. Explaining that she was dressed in a tee-shirt and soiled white slacks and wasn’t certain where other clothing was, the caller told her to come for the interview anyway. She did and was hired, but, again, being this lucky in finding immediate employment is not common for the military spouse. A 2004 research brief from the Rand National Defense Research Institute found that, although the majority of military spouses were employed, they were less likely to be employed, were usually employed at lower rates of pay, and earned less than civilian spouses. The study also indicated that most military spouses “believe that the military lifestyle—frequent moves, deployments and long hours that keeps service members from assisting with parenting, and living in areas with poor local labor market conditions—has negatively affected their employment opportunities.”14 About two-thirds of the spouses interviewed believed that these problems were unique to the military and emphasized the frequent and disruptive moves as the chief cause of the negative effect on their employment opportunities. Some also reported that educational opportunities suffered, again citing frequent moves and the absence of the service member. The inflexibility of the military workplace to make an attempt to accommodate military family needs was also mentioned.15 Lieutenant Colonel Casey Wardynaski, a researcher at the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, also states that military spouses do not fair well in the job market. Although statistics vary, Wardynaski, indicates that their unemployment rate is four times higher than for their civilian counterparts. He estimates that 66 percent of military spouses in the work force earn 25 to 50 percent less than civilian spouses.16 (Wardynaski also indicates that the spouse having a job—or lacking one—is a key factor in the military member’s retention.) The Rand National Defense Institute comparison of military spouses with civilians who shared the same age, education level, ethnicity, and frequency of moves tended to agree with Wardynaski. It revealed that the civilians usually did better than the military spouses and better than the civilian average. Overall, the military spouses were “employed at much lower rates and earned less than both the average civilian spouse and those who exhibit the same characteristics.”17

Another Resume

43

Several other problems may arise for the working spouse due to relocation. It may be difficult to find a comparable job. Those who are licensed professionals may encounter difficulty meeting different state standards and have to take tests or reapply for licenses after each move.18 Many times when individuals are hired into a new job, they may face a period of probation at a reduced salary before being assured of a position. Since the service wife may be at a position for a shorter period of time than a civilian worker, her “regular salary” may always remain near entry level. Unlike other employees who remain with a company for years, military wives seldom remain in a job long enough to become eligible for any sort of employer-offered pension plan. Of course, they will have contributed to social security. In addition to the above problems, spouses often face discrimination from employers who feel they will be relocated just as they become proficient in a job. The employer will again have the task and the cost involved in hiring and training a new person. Of course, this may not always be true as there is also quite a bit of transferring from one job to another in the civilian world. America appears to be “a job-hopping society” with the time now spent on a job by civilian employees averaging 3.5 years.19 Since many tours of military duty are set for three years, the military spouse should be somewhat competitive. One spouse felt the husband’s mobility could be used in a positive manner. She indicated that in interviews with prospective employers, she always was up front, mentioning that her husband would “. . . probably be moved to a new assignment in three to four years, but at least you know you probably won’t have to put up with me much longer than that.” She felt that occasionally employers get “stuck with people they would like to get rid of,” and they knew she would not become one of those employees. If a spouse is unable to find work, the family budget suffers. Therefore, some wives who moved with their husbands and were unable to find a job have been seeking unemployment compensation. However, states such as Maryland and Virginia (as well as the Pentagon and Labor Department) indicate that the spouses “are not eligible to receive unemployment compensation because they quit their job voluntarily.”20 Most states restrict eligibility to those who leave a job for a reason directly attributable to an employer. Rose Dolan, an army wife, and Ann-Marie Howdeshell did not feel their moves were voluntary and attempted to get compensation. Dolan was told that she could continue working and had the option to commute to her job; apparently the army didn’t realize she would be commuting between Florida and Maryland, her husband’s new duty station. Howdeshell, who had been employed for three years in Virginia was unsuccessfully trying to get interviews for jobs in California when she accompanied her husband there.21 Complaints about lack of unemployment benefits for military spouses have gotten the attention of the Pentagon and Labor Department. Officials

44

Following the Flag

in the Labor Department stated that fifteen states now grant unemployment benefits to spouses “who quit a job to accompany their sponsor to a new military assignment, if they meet all other qualifications.” These are Alabama, California, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Washington.22 As Labor Department officials point out, the service member must accept the change-of-station or face disciplinary action. Some states, such as Virginia, are trying to address the issue of the mobile spouse. A bill has been introduced in the state’s legislature to let spouses apply for unemployment benefits if the employee’s place of work is not “reasonably accessible” from the newly assigned change-of-station. Apparently, if the bill is passed, the impact on Virginia’s state unemployment insurance fund would cost about $1.2 million—still less than two-tenths of 1 percent of the total fund.23 Another problem spouses may face is underemployment. Too often, even if spouses can find work, they end up taking any available job simply to make ends meet in the household budget. Sometimes spouses must be flexible and take a lower paying position or one below their level of education and experience. Consider Pat who accompanied her air force husband to a new post and who had been working previously as a secretary. I kept taking tests for a civil service position as a secretary but to no avail. Finally, I asked why I couldn’t seem to get hired, even in one of the lower levels. Then it was suggested that I needed to get hired into the [Civil Service] system in any job. In that way I would have a chance to apply for the higher level positions, such as a secretary. So, I took a position as a waitress in the cadet dining hall at the Air Force Academy. Later on, I moved into a job in an office, and I’m now a GS 8.24 Obtaining a Civil Service job does not insure that when a person moves, they will be guaranteed another position. A vacancy has to be available. Also, if a position is available, it may be at a lower pay grade—GS5 instead of GS7, for example. The individual may wish to accept the lower rank, however, in order to keep time in service intact. For many jobs, a college degree is a prerequisite; however, many spouses feel this is not obtainable due to relocation. A solution to this obstacle is a program available for each branch of the military called Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC). This program was established in 1972 to provide educational opportunities to both service and family members. It is “a consortium of over 1500 colleges and universities across the U.S.,” each agreeing to accept credits in transfer.25 If a college degree is the answer, the individual will need to look at financial aid options in order to not burden the family with a huge debt. Federal

Another Resume

45

student loans have the lowest interest rates but must be repaid. Federal Pell Grants, awarded only to undergraduates, do not have to be repaid, and a student can also receive funds from other sources. Most schools have various scholarships available, and states also offer student loans, grants and scholarships, although states usually require that residence requirements be fulfilled before military spouses or children can obtain state financial aid. Those spouses following military personnel overseas, may find some educational assistance available. For example, dependent spouses in Europe, Korea, Japan, and Okinawa may qualify for postsecondary undergraduate education assistance through Army Emergency Relief.26 Women should also investigate the possibility of scholarships from installation wives’ clubs and from organizations not connected with the military, such as the American Association of University Women. There are also some educational assistance programs for military family members offered by the Armed Forces, and associated relief organizations, and military spouse clubs; however, these programs may differ from service to service.27 For some wives of junior enlisted personnel, employment may be nonexistent because of their lack of “enough” education or no previous work experience. Jennifer, had applied for work but had not completed her GED requirements and also had found that most employers required that their employees be eighteen years of age; Jennifer was only seventeen. Finally, she was able to get hired at McDonalds as “they take teenagers. . . . I really didn’t want to work at a fast-food place, but I said oh well, and I went anyway.”28 Dana graduated from high school and had a semester of college before marrying her husband, who then decided to join the army. Although Dana was able to find part-time employment as a veterinarian technician, the couple’s combined salaries dd not cover their monthly bills. Like Jennifer, Dana gets some help from Women, Infants, Children (WIC), a Department of Agriculture program that provides nutrition and education for pregnant, breastfeeding, and postpartum women. Participation in the program is based on need as determined by income. Among food items available with WIC are milk, cheese, dried beans, baby formula, etc.29 Dana and her husband applied for food stamps when he was an E-2 but were unable to qualify for them due to Dana’s wages, though they were small. Like Dana, Jennifer and her husband also applied for food stamps when he promoted to E-3 but were told that with his promotion they made too much money to qualify. “Everybody else was walking around with food stamps,” Jennifer said, “and they got Nikes and Air Jordans, $130 sneakers on. . . . Something is wrong here.”30 A retired air force colonel remarked that he had followed an Army Specialist 2 in his BDUs and his young wife through a grocery checkout line and noticed that the couple were using food stamps to pay for the food. To the colonel, this seemed wrong. “If this soldier is good enough to fight overseas

46

Following the Flag

wars,” he said, “it would seem that the military ought to pay him enough to feed his family without charity.” The above is not an isolated case, for in 2002, the Pentagon reported that 2,084 military households were using food stamps, chiefly junior enlisted with large families. Although this was down considerably from the 19,400 in 1991, it still shows that some military families remain impoverished. In 2000, Congress created the military’s Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance (FSSA), which, unlike food stamps, is available to families overseas; still,some families prefer food stamps. One of the problems appears to be that, if a family is living outside of base quarters and receiving a housing allowance, the allowance is counted as income when determining eligibility for food stamps. If a family lives in base housing, it is not counted as income.31 Like those making a career of the military, families with someone in the Reserves or National Guard usually experience financial problems when the military member is called to active duty and possibly deployed overseas. Having a spouse in the Reserves or Guard added to the family budget, and with a military commitment of only a few weekends a month or a couple of weeks each year, little impact was felt on a civilian job until the reserve units were called to active duty. Most of these recalled personnel earned considerably more at their civilian jobs than they will earn in the service, especially if they are at entry level.32 While the recently activated personnel are gone, the monthly household bills, mortgage payments, and insurance premiums continue. For many families, the chance of the reservist being recalled and deployed is seldom considered, and unless the spouse is also employed and at a fairly good salary, the family can find itself in a financial bind and seeking help. Some financial aid is available if Reserve and Guard families meet certain qualifications. Called-up Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve personnel are able to receive emergency loans from the Air Force Aid Society if they are away on active duty for fifteen days or more—if the emergency is related to their activation. Those Army Reserve and National Guard troops on continued active duty for more than thirty days (and their dependents) are eligible for aid from the Army Relief Fund.33 Various sources are also available for the other branches of the armed forces. Many families have to depend on a working wife or husband to see them through a call-up and deployment.

THE MALE SPOUSE While little consideration has historically been given to wives facing the problem of being constantly on the road and having to look for a new job, now male spouses of military females are facing the same challenge.

Another Resume

47

Some are not too happy about their situation as men are not accustomed to placing their careers second to those of their wives. In fact, one man found it interesting to see how some civilians reacted to his wife being the military member. “They will say to me, ‘Why don’t you join up and let your wife get out.’ It just doesn’t seem right to them that she is the one wearing the uniform.” James Ludson, who had quit his job to care for two toddlers when his wife was sent to the Middle East, received similar comments from friends and family, especially when his wife returned to the States. “Some of our friends, even our parents, kept asking when I was going to stop living off my wife and get a job,” he stated. He explained that the couple was following this pattern for the benefit of the children and that they had decided to continue having him stay at home until the kids reached school age.34 Jim Lever and his wife (now selected for promotion to colonel) decided when they were both captains that if they had children, one of them would leave the army. In 1991, when their daughter was born, Jim got out “so Katie would not have to be raised by others.” Becoming the full-time “mom” was not necessarily easy, however. Jim explained that there was the cut in pay, the loss of camaraderie, the usual time involved in caring for a new infant, and later the hours endlessly watching Sesame Street. He felt as James Ludson did—that society viewed a male caring for a child “as not our job. Women are not prepared for men to stay at home. Often, when I would meet other wives and mothers, they would say to me, ‘What do you do?’ I’d say, ‘I do what you do.’”35 Jim indicated that it was probably five years before he fully accepted the role of child caregiver. Sometimes he thought, “I gave up my beloved job, so I was gonna do this or else,” and he did. Life was not always easy, however, especially when his wife was reassigned to Korea. “It was an accompanied tour but not with concurrent travel. She went on ahead, and I followed with two dogs and two kids—a toddler and a third grader. Even though it was listed as accompanied, she lived about sixty-five kilometers away at Camp Casey while we lived in Seoul. That tour put a real strain on the relationship.” Howard Clarke indicated that occasionally civilians would wonder why he wasn’t the military family member instead of his wife Frankeeta. Clarke, who now works at a day-care center, got out of the army in 1999 and spent two years in the National Guard. Then, after discussing it at length, he and his wife made the decision that she would enlist in the army while he would stay at home and care for their three children, two daughters and one son. While Frankeeta was in basic training, he stayed behind and did what any parent is called upon to do. Asked how he styled the girls’ hair, he replied, “She [Frankeeta] showed me how to do it, and I guess I did okay.”36 The biggest problem with working and being the “main mom” of the family was time management, according to Clarke—time to do shopping,

48

Following the Flag

help kids with their homework, get their baths done, etc. Frankeeta plans to apply for Officer’s Candidate School (OCS) in March 2006. However, this will mean that Clarke is once again left behind as the sole caregiver for the children. Frankeeta stated that people tell her she’s “so lucky that Howard is so supportive of her career,” as this is not always the case with men who take on the care of the home and children.37 (Assuming that Frankeeta will be commissioned, Clarke then plans to reenlist.) As James Ludson, Jim Lever, and Howard Clarke commented, their decision to put their wives’ careers ahead of their own was not what society generally expected of a male parent and the “breadwinner” of the family. Yet, with approximately 13 percent of today’s military female (and many married to civilians), the husbands become the “dependent spouses” and must face the same issues as those faced by military wives. Their biggest problem is also the mobility of their wives and accommodating their civilian jobs to the needs of the military. Jon M., the husband of Erin, an air force colonel, commented on his employment as a pilot with a civilian airline and his wife’s assignments. She’s been in just a little over twenty years now and we’ve moved many, many times. I am assigned to fly out of a specific city, and her assignments have not been close to these airports. So, I get done with my flying and then hop a plane home—wherever home is. When she was stationed in Germany, I was usually flying from New York to San Francisco or Los Angeles. When I got off of my flight, I’d hop a plane to Frankfurt. Right now, she’s again in Europe, in joint command. My new route for the airline is from New York to Rome, Paris and Zurich. When I return to New York, once again I hop a flight to Europe. It’s an 8-hour flight, but, I usually am able to get at least four hours of sleep. I was formerly in the Air Force, so I know we now have to accommodate her requirements—not mine, and the benefits are good. I realize that many people have fairly long ways to commute to their jobs, but my commuter area right now is really lengthy. It’s the Atlantic Ocean.38 Another example, is Steve, who resigned his commission and is now out of the army; however, his wife is still on active duty—an army captain reassigned to Fort Hood, Texas. “I have a degree in Systems Engineering,” Steve stated, “so I guess I will be looking for a job in Texas. She still has a three-year tour.” He did indicate that he had no problem following his wife for a few years but “wasn’t sure he would want to do it forever.”39 By that he probably meant her possibly choosing a thirty-year career.

Another Resume

49

Another man, the husband of a lieutenant colonel who left active duty and is now in the National, was less agreeable about following his wife to new posts. I guess I didn’t realize how her career would affect mine. I followed her to two different places in the states, but when she felt she would be up for an overseas assignment, I put my foot down. I told her that two moves were enough and that she should try for a job in the Guard. That way we could be at a permanent location. I wanted to get established in a job that would be a career for me—for both of us. Moving every two to three years just doesn’t cut it.40 Of course, some male spouses decide to put their careers second and to follow their military wives as they foresee the retirement benefits to the family if the wife fulfills at least a twenty-year commitment—a good pension, continuing commissary and base exchange privileges, health benefits. Also, with a military career behind her and, possibly, a high-level security clearance, she could be very marketable in the civilian world. At the completion of her service commitment, the couple could establish a less mobile lifestyle. THE DUAL-CAREER FAMILY Until the late 1960s, the dual-career family—civilian or military—was rare, and if a wife worked, it was simply assumed that the man’s career was paramount. In the military, women could be terminated from serving if they were pregnant or if they were responsible for a minor child under the age of 18, including being a stepmother, foster mother, or guardian. Executive Order 10240, signed in 1951, “gave military officials a legal basis for discharging any woman who had a minor child living in the household for 30 days or more a year.”41 Those military couples opting for a career tended to be childless. Today, there is a growing number of couples who have families and who are both on active duty or in the Reserves and National Guard. Both wish to further their careers and to be reassigned to jobs at the same spot. While the military attempts to accommodate such desires, this is not always possible, especially as both promote to higher rank. The couple face the challenge of trying to keep the family intact when the spouses may be sent for long periods of time to different posts around the globe. One army sergeant explained the problem: I’ve found the biggest difficulty is trying to get the Army to work with us. We are in different career fields and so have different detailers [the

50

Following the Flag

individuals whose job it is to schedule change-of-station for personnel]. We ask to be reassigned to the same base, but it’s hard to get our problem across. It’s hard to get a detailer from one area to talk to a detailer from another area. It sounds like it would be easy, but it isn’t. As is the case with the military member and civilian spouse, child care is always a major problem . It is especially so if the parents are simultaneously placed on alert or sent to a combat area. No matter what their duty station is, the couple is required by the military to have a family care plan that outlines who will care for children in case both parents are deployed. When Army Major Ken McDonald was ordered to Saudi Arabia in January 1991 and his wife, Army Major Deborah McDonald, had already been there for four months, their two-year-old daughter was put on a plane to Wyoming—to grandmother’s house.42 The family care document has to be updated each time there is a permanent change of station and usually outlines legal, medical, financial, educational, and logistical responsibilities. (Failure to provide plans that make service personnel unable to deploy or fulfill duty assignments may result in separation from the military.) For short-term deployments or other short-term “recalls,” parents may designate local care givers or neighbors if no relatives live in the area.43 An air force colonel recalled an incident on Okinawa when one of his officers had to “simply drop the kid on a neighbor.” I had two female officers in my command, and about midnight we had a recall. This one Captain was married to another Captain who was a pilot on a tanker and was not at the base. I guess I remembered the next day that someone had told me she had a new baby, but it didn’t register that night. At any rate, we recalled her, and she didn’t know what to do with the baby. So she just went next door on the base, woke up a neighbor and asked that the woman keep the child. The woman did. It was just unfortunate that both of the parents were busy on duty that night. They made sure they had adequate plans set up in case it happened again—but it never did while I was there. LOOKING FOR WORK For the spouse who must relocate, there appear to be certain types of jobs requiring a college degree that are more easily obtained than others. Among these are nursing and teaching. Help-wanted sections of newspapers across the country constantly have advertisements seeking nurses to fill part-time and full-time positions in clinics, hospitals, and doctors’ offices. Also, those with university credentials often are in demand for yearly contracts or at least substitute teaching. One retired officers’ wife recalled that she had never been unable to teach.

Another Resume

51

No matter where he was sent, in the States or overseas, I could always teach, at least as a substitute. Sometimes I taught in the DOD (Department of Defense) schools. Since I had an advanced degree, I was able also to teach in a junior or community college and to pick up a class or two at a four-year college or university. When I taught part time, I could bring in some additional income and still host or attend functions that were a necessary part of being a military officer’s wife. The same was true for Nancy Montville, who followed her sergeant major husband to both stateside and overseas assignments. “I had a B.A. degree,” she said, “so I could work in the school system. Sometimes I did counseling or substitute teaching, or I could be a teacher’s aide.”44 (Montville also was able to be employed in Civil Service jobs and is now a GS13.). Sharon Parkis also was able to continue with a teaching career, full-time while her husband was enlisted and then part-time when he became an officer and she accompanied him to Colorado, Nebraska, Australia, Germany, and Washington D.C. However, she points out the downside to all of this mobility. As a teacher moves from one school district to another, they are usually unable to build retirement. “Most states have their own retirement programs, and most don’t pay into social security. So, the mobile teacher is sort of left out in the cold.”45 Some states are helping military spouses pursue careers in the field of education. Virginia, Georgia, Florida, Texas, California, and Colorado (all states with high concentrations of military personnel) launched a Spouses to Teachers program in 2004. Initially, the program focused on helping certified teachers find jobs; however, the program was expanded to include “scholarships, grants and funding sources for those who wish to acquire certification.” It is available to spouses of active duty, selected reserve, National Guard, and Individual Ready Reserve who have been recalled to active duty.46 This may be one way to not only help the mobile military spouse but to address the national teacher shortage. In addition, according to a January 2005 article in the Air Force Times, some corporations are offering job opportunities to military spouses. Home Depot, which averages a new store opening every forty-eight hours, is working with the DoD to hire more service-related personnel. While the company does not guarantee a job, if a service member is relocated, the company will try to transfer the person’s spouse to a store near the new base—if a job is available. Home Depot believes this “spouse transfer provision will help reduce attrition in the military because servicemen will be less worried about their spouse’s ability to find work.”47 One Home Depot success story is that of Dana Chango, wife of an army staff sergeant stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. She manages the Clarksville, Tennessee Home Depot after being transferred from one in California. “I didn’t know what I would do if I couldn’t work,”

52

Following the Flag

Chango said. “It was just by luck that there were always Home Depots around.”48 According to another article in the Air Force Times, Home Depot had hired 150 military spouses since March of 2004. Adecco N.A., Eurpac Service Inc., Sears, and the commissary agency have all signed agreements pledging to help increase employment opportunities for army spouses. Adecco has a Career Accelerator military spouse employment program (which works with Navy and Marine Corps bases, as well as Guard and reserve components) and has placed 45 percent of the 5,000 military spouses who have registered in their program. This Army Spouse Employment Partnership with the various corporations “is a centerpiece in the army’s effort to improve retention among our fine soldiers by providing opportunities for spouses to better meet their employment goals,” stated Reginald Brown, assistant secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.49 Employment help has also been made available from Atlanta-based BellSouth Corporation that has set up a Web page for spousal employment as has Hospital Corporation of America, based in Nashville, Tennessee. This latter corporation is helping employees transfer to facilities without a break in service or loss of benefits or tenure.50 Wendy Mellletti, an air force wife at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, has benefitted from a DoD pilot program that provides direct placement services through a contract with the IMPACT Group in St. Louis. This program, named IMPACT JEMS (Jobs/Employment for Military Spouses) is linked to 187 employers with both part-time and full-time work opportunities. IMPACT JEMS was able to help Molletti, who is working on a master’s degree in education, locate a job as a substitute teacher. “Right now, this is what I need,” Molletti indicated. “It’s extra income.” Molletti also explained that the job let her use the skills she learned in undergraduate school so that she “won’t lose them.”51 Other companies and government agencies which are part of the Army’s Military Spouse Corporate Employment Partnership include Dell, Lockheed Martin, Sprint, Computer Sciences Corporation, CVS, Eurpac Service Inc, Merck, BellSouth Corporation, Defense Commissary Agency, and the Army and Air Force Exchange Service. Roger Herman, chief executive officer of The Herman Group in Greensboro, North Carolina, indicated that the outlook for employment by military spouses would be very good as it was anticipated that there would be “a severe shortage of skilled workers and a high rate of employee turnover across the country and across industry lines [in 2005].”52 KEEPING THE KIDS Who is watching the kids while parents work is a significant issue. Since most military families are far away from their extended families, having

Another Resume

53

a relative “babysit” is not usually an option. For an agreed upon fee, the spouse in a neighboring military family may be willing to provide care. This can be a problem, however, for shortly after an individual lands a job, the military family providing care may get orders to relocate. Most military bases have some form of day care, but the hours of operation may be such that they do not accommodate all work schedules. This could be true if the military member was deployed, and the spouse worked a shift that went well into the night or if overtime work was needed. The regular hours of operation for most of the day-care facilities are from 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. At some installations, other options are available. As one individual at a military Community and Family Readiness center explained, bases may have Family Child Care Homes for those personnel required to do shift work. These are designated homes that are inspected frequently. The army subsidizes these child care homes and also similar homes for special needs children. Still, some parents prefer the base child care center as they feel there is more control than in a home over who comes and goes and is therefore safer for their children.53 Katherine Hardison, a registered nurse and the wife of a technical sergeant at McConnell Air Force Base in Kansas, faced a dilemma. Scheduled to work the third shift at the local hospital and with her husband TDY (temporary duty) for an extended period, she had no one to care for the couple’s two children. Although she called her mother to help, the woman lived in another state and couldn’t make the trip. “I don’t know what I would have done. . . ,” Hardison explained. “I may have tried to take the children to work with me . . . I really did not want to do that. I can’t leave work, and it would have been hard to get them to school in the morning.”54 She called the base and was provided with the information she needed for someone who would stay with the children at night. During Operation Desert Storm, Air Force Captain Erin M. faced a similar child-care crisis when she was told that her squadron was scheduled to be deployed from its South Dakota base. The mother of a three-month-old baby and her husband just newly employed by the airline, Erin called her parents for help. Her mother was working and unable to leave her job but quickly provided other help. “Dad is now retired and can come up,” Erin was told. “After all, he can change a diaper.” Fortunately, a squadron other than Erin’s was deployed for, like Hardison, she could not depend on base facilities for extended child care. If both parents are deployed, as is often the case in time of war for dualcareer military members, relatives may have to fill the gap. RayLyn Whitmore, daughter of career U.S. Army personnel Jason and Heather Whitmore, lived with her grandparents in Louisiana while her parents were stationed for a year in Iraq and a previous year in South Korea. “We’re just trying to get to know each other again,” Jason said, as Heather added that the time away from their daughter had been “heartbreaking.”55

54

Following the Flag

In a conversation with an individual from a military Family Readiness Center, it was pointed out that if both parents are deployed or if the family is headed by a single parent, a designated caregiver can take over. For example, grandparents, if designated, would even be permitted to move into the children’s home on base. They would fulfill all of the functions of the absent parents and could purchase needed food at the commissary, use the Post Exchange (PX), and take the children to a base clinic or hospital for needed medical care. This arrangement would allow the children to remain in familiar surroundings instead of being uprooted and moved to another residence in the area or out of state. Assuming that a couple is not deployed and is able to opt for base childcare, a growing problem is availability of space as the childcare facility may have reached its capacity. According to an article in the Air Force Times, the combined services have approximately 176,000 spaces available in military child-care centers, after-school programs, and family child-care homes. It is estimated that an additional 38,000 spaces will be needed, and the DoD is considering launching new programs whereby families may qualify for subsidies for child care off base. Criteria for subsidies would be if the family lives far from the military installation or if they face long waiting lists for on-base care.56 Since civilian child care is often more costly than that on military installations, the subsidy would be of considerable help to the military family. It certainly would be of help to those families that have to utilize full-time, live-in care as costs may become overwhelming. Like civilian women with careers in business, finance, the medical field, construction, etc., military female personnel travel often, and live-in help may be required. For eight years, Air Force Colonel Erin M. and her husband, Jon, have hired an European au pare to care for their child. Erin calculated their yearly cost at around $12,000 and explained why this expense was necessary. I’m away from home for weeks at a time, and so is he. We have the monthly salary for the au pare, her plane fare to and from Europe, the cost of required college courses for the young woman, health insurance. It adds up really fast. Then, if we travel on vacation, we usually take the au pare with us, so we pay for her plane ticket, hotel room, meals, etc. We have employed someone full time since our child was four years old and she’s now fourteen. Since my husband also makes good money with the airline, we can afford to do this. But I wonder about those who are enlisted and make considerably less money or may only have one income. This colonel certainly made a good point. For families lower in rank, the cost of child care such as this would be prohibitive. Also, it would be true for many families if the wife were employed in close to a minimum-wage job.

Another Resume

55

The military is trying to cope with the problem of extended child care, and now offers extended-duty programs to spouses left behind, to troops who are working long hours as they prepare to deploy and to others simply working additional hours at home stations. According to Beverly Houston, family child care program specialist for the air force, military families “use an average of 13,000 to 18,000 hours of extended-duty child care each month.” In addition, the army and air force offers “respite care” for those parents who need a break and for those with rotating schedules and “rest and recuperation” care for troops returning from deployment.57 For those families living in privatized housing projects (Chapter two), “significant discussions” have begun on options for day-care centers in these areas, according to Philip Grone, deputy undersecretary of defense of installations and environment.58 The main questions to be considered would be who would operate the centers—the developer of the project, the government, a third party—and, more importantly, who would pay for these facilities and the necessary staff. Of course, in today’s high-tech society, working from home may eliminate some child care problems. WORKING FROM HOME For those spouses wishing to add to their families’ income, there are many opportunities available that do not require that they obtain additional education or leave home. Military spouses have had to be very inventive, and home-based jobs include everything from simply “baby-sitting” to consulting via computer. One army wife, Nancy R., who had three school-age children did not wish them to become latch-key kids, coming home from school to an empty house and waiting until she or her husband returned from work. She was known as a “good cook” and decided to put this skill to use. I loved to bake and learned by trial and error to make fancy cakes for all kinds of occasions. I made Christmas cakes in the shape of trees with fancy frosting ornaments. I made Halloween pumpkin cakes, birthday cakes, cakes for anniversaries. Sometimes I was so busy that I had to turn away orders. This was a business that I took with me when we moved, and believe it or not, I made quite a bit of money without having to leave home to do it. Among other possibilities that could be of interest to the military spouse are those listed by Priscilla Huff in her book, 101 Best Home-Based Businesses for Women, such as customer services, arts and crafts, entertainment, computer and mail order, home-based distributorships and franchises.59 For the spouse who is willing to be inventive or to take time to investigate the

56

Following the Flag

job market, there are many different types of work which can become very profitable in a home-based setting. A “telework project” (which includes the departments of Labor, Defense, state and Homeland Security, the National Guard Bureau, and the General services Administration) has the goal of letting spouses take their jobs with them when military personnel are reassigned. This pilot program is expected to connect about “50 million military and foreign-service spouses with private-sector jobs.”60 In addition, along with the Army Spouse Employment Parntership, the U.S. Community and Family Support Center, and the Department of Labor, the army announced in Fall 2005 a new Web site. for spouse employment which contains more than 26,000 job vacancies. The spouses are able to access career tools, build resumes, get labor market information, and find information on colleges and technical schools.61 Accessing this Web site should be of immense help to the spouse looking for work. Freelancing may be an option as the Internet has opened new avenues for jobs that permit spouses to work from home. Jobs such as Web site design, writing and editing, medical and legal transcription, etc. are listed on Monster.com and Freelanceworkexchange.com.62 Also, signing up with an employment agency as a temporary employee may be a good plan as this can bring employment for a few days to a few months. It also allows the “temp” to learn what full-time jobs might become available. Jim Lever decided to work part-time before his son was born and after his daughter entered school. “I got a job as a security guard for a few months. The company said that I’d been in the Army and should know how to use a gun. I did, so I got the job.” Volunteering may sometimes be helpful in learning a new job that can lead to future employment. Sandy Gallagher followed her army staff sergeant to South Korea on her own or noncommand sponsored. A former payroll clerk and secretary, she discovered that her job prospects in those areas were less than promising. Putting her love of animals to work, she decided to become a Red Cross volunteer at Camp Walker’s veterinary clinic.63 Gallagher plans to continue in that field of work when her husband retires in 2006. Running a home-business can be a problem, however, especially when the family is living overseas. In Europe, officials at U.S. Army Europe headquarters indicated that running a business from government quarters is extremely limited. Long-standing Status of Forces Agreements between the United States and host nations prohibit the “exploitation for economic benefit of accommodations [such as family housing] made available and leased to the U.S. forces” by a foreign government. Apparently, home-based businesses that provide services, such as tutoring, child care, and tax preparation are permissible with approval from an area-support group or installation commander and need to comply with both United States and host-nation laws regarding the reporting of income.64

Another Resume

57

Wives in Germany, for example, were unhappy as they felt the rules were not being strictly enforced and complained that individuals making crafts could sell these from their homes. They also were unhappy about the prohibition on selling home-based commercial items such as Avon or Mary Kay cosmetics. “People want these things. They either aren’t available on the economy, or they’re too expensive,” said one wife who asked not to be identified.65 The Status of Forces Agreement in effect for American military in Australia prohibited spouses from working in clerical jobs as these were reserved for Australian citizens. However, spouses could work packing or unpacking military household goods and in local sports clubs. In addition, spouses could be certified for teaching in the public schools or possibly obtain a position in a private school. Still, in such sites as the remote air force station in Woomera, jobs for wives were extremely scarce. Of course, no one would say that starting, finding, or keeping a job or career is easy for military spouses. As Eleanor, the wife of a retired Marine said, “You just had to get out, beat the bushes and see what offer might fall out.” However, registering with local and state employment agencies, checking into employment programs provided by the military, and, maybe most importantly, networking with other working spouses will help spouses keep or resurrect their careers.

CHAPTER 4

Being Alone The hardest role in the military is the spouse who’s left behind. —General Jim Jones, 20031 Today, along with career personnel, men and women in the Reserves and Guard have become active duty military with many families having difficulty coping with unexpected call-ups and deployments. Although the Guard and Reserves can be recalled at any time (as some were during the Korean and Vietnam wars), until the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq this seldom was the case, especially in any great numbers. However, as retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel Jay Farrar, and analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, emphasized, “Nobody promised anyone anything. When you put on the uniform, you are at the beck and call of the Army.” He goes on to say that families “. . . should prepare themselves for more time away from home [for the spouse] as the nation opens new fronts in the war on terrorism. . . . “That is a tough reality.”2 Families of military personnel must prepare themselves to end up alone. Since 9/11, career personnel, National Guard, and Reserves are in the news daily as they deploy to the Middle East. In 2004, a partnership of the Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University Survey Project, interviewed spouses of active duty members at ten of the largest army bases in the United States to see how prepared a spouse had been for the husband or wife to deploy. Most responded that they were “very” or “somewhat” prepared. Only a small number indicated that they were “not at all” prepared.3 However, the spouses of activated Guard or Reserve units may have a more difficult time coping with deployment than active duty spouses. While some are spouses of former active duty military and have

Being Alone

59

experienced the military lifestyle, many are not. To them, military life may be a bewildering array of acronyms that have little meaning. Spouses should be aware that, at one time or another, career service members will be away on TDY (temporary duty) for additional training or to attend service schools. Unlike a TDY, which is usually for a few days or a few weeks, there is always the chance for an unaccompanied tour. This means that the military man or woman will be reassigned to a remote, unaccompanied site such as Diego Garcia, an island in the Indian Ocean, or the DMZ in South Korea for a year, adding to feelings of desertion for those military spouses left behind. Most have heard the adage that “absence makes the heart grow fonder.” As Meredith Leyva stated in Married to the Military, absence may make the heart more resentful.4 For whatever reason, the military member is going to be away from the family for a portion of his or her career, and family tension is heightened by the knowledge and worry that this is going to happen. It’s a proven rule. When a spouse leaves, something will go wrong. The car and washer will not function; the checkbook will not balance; the kids will get sick or need hospitalization; there will be deaths of close friends or family. For the National Guard or Reservist family, who had to leave a job with a good salary for lesser money while on active duty, there may be the additional worry of making financial ends meet. Vern Hagen, [Washington] state ombudsman for the Employer Support for Guard and Reserve, indicated that “a majority of reservists and guardsmen called into active duty take a pay cut. . . . A few employers will cover the gap but most don’t.”5 For both career and reactivated families, financial stress of extended deployment can be severe. The Kaiser Family Foundation and the Boston Globe reported in 2004 that three in ten families report they have had trouble paying bills. “For more than one in five, their current financial situation is such that they have to get food stamps or Women, Infants and Children program (WIC) aid from the government.”6 Even some officers’ families indicated they received food stamps or WIC. Naturally, financial difficulties aren’t the only emergencies that can happen with the military spouse away. Consider Brenda and the issues she faced alone. Like most wives, Brenda had heard the dire predictions of trouble occurring when a spouse left. Before his leaving for a military exercise in Germany, she and her husband had tried to cover every contingency. Cars had been serviced; power of attorney (POA) was signed; financial matters under control. However, during the separation, the area around Fort Benning, Georgia, was hit with a major ice storm. During the middle of the night Brenda awoke to find water pouring down the walls of her living room—the room containing all of the couple’s new furniture. For Brenda, everything seemed to be crashing around her, as it truly was, for the ceiling finally caved in.7 Although Brenda coped with this problem, she would rather not have done it alone.

60

Following the Flag

“I worry about being alone,” stated Pamela Hall, an air force wife facing her [National Guard] husband’s first deployment. “I worry about the heater quitting or the car breaking down. Every time he’s gone, my car breaks. I’ve heard it gets easier, but I didn’t get married to be separated. I’ve told him I don’t want a marriage where we’re used to being apart and we look forward to it.”8 Stephanie Perry didn’t wish to have her husband deployed three weeks after their daughter was born. Lieutenant Ted Perry had been reassigned to Germany and from there was deployed to Afghanistan. Fortunately for Stephanie, she had good support from other women who lived nearby. However, she indicated that she knew what her husband did when she married him and was very philosophical about the time alone. “You just buck up and take it day by day!”9 Army Major Sue A. can empathize with the wife left alone as her husband was deployed three different times, once for six months and two other times for shorter periods. However, she was not overly sympathetic as, like Stephanie Perry, she felt that individuals who marry into the military should expect that military requirements would come first. “Those who marry should know before the marriage what the spouse does—military or not.”10 Still, even if the bride and groom are aware of their new spouse’s job, it doesn’t make the separation easier. Spouses of service personnel who are left alone not only suffer from anxiety but also from depression, anger, and guilt. In addition, there can be changes in physical well-being, including headaches, menstrual irregularity, weight change, and sleep disturbances. As the person solely responsible for family decisions and care of children—really a single parent—severe fatigue often is experienced. Similar effects “are almost always exacerbated in children, from feelings of separation and anxiety to fear, defiance, and school difficulties.”11 Certainly, the military is aware of both the physical and emotional problems happening in the homes of deployed service members, and both formal and informal support groups try to ease these. Of course, nothing can replace the missing parent. The army military family survey mentioned earlier indicated that, although some children had problems adjusting to a one-parent household, most were able to make the adjustment. Some experienced fear about what could happen to the deployed parent, but, again, for approximately 63 percent it was either not a problem or not a serious problem. When asked if children had showed sadness, displayed more aggressive behavior or had trouble at school, again the figures were low, but still around the 11 to 16 percent figure.12 As part of the Defense Women’s Health Research Program, the DoD funded a study that compared the behavior of children of enlisted navy mothers to those of civilians. Researcher Michele Kelley, an associate professor of psychology at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, found that

Being Alone

61

most children of deployed mothers maintained emotional levels within “the normal range for children whose mothers were on shore . . . but 12 percent of the children showed very high levels of sadness, worry . . . high enough to indicate the children may need to be monitored and may need mental-health treatment.”13 Interestingly enough, other studies on children in military families, who had a parent deployed, found that children were not as affected for as long a period by a father’s deployment as they were by the mother’s. It was felt this was due to the fact that men tend to stay in the military for longer periods of time than women, may be older when they deploy, and have older children who are more able to cope with the father’s absence. The results in Kelley’s study were on very young children, averaging only two and a half years, and may have been limited by the small number of subjects.14 Still, the studies indicate that for many children, the absence of a parent has an effect on their feeling of stability in their lives. Even if the percentages for children’s problems are fairly low, knowing about the problems may make finding solutions easier. On the other side of the coin is the effect of deployment on the mothers. Behavioral scientist, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Barbara Rowe, presented research information at an August 2005 Force Health Conference on this issue. Included in Rowe’s study were women who had been deployed to the 1991 Gulf War and those in current conflicts. Rowe found that the mothers performed military duties well but were torn between families and professional responsibilities. For deployed mothers of young children, the stress of being away was higher than for mothers of older children. This was especially true if the child was under a year old. The mothers’s stress declined as her trust in the father’s ability to care for the children increased.15 Rowe found that upon getting orders, the mothers’ reactions appeared to be similar to those of children—anxiety, sadness, anger. Simultaneously, many expressed pride to be “part of a mission intended to combat enemies of American values” or “honored to be chosen to deploy.”16 Still, with the mother gone, children may feel unloved and abandoned, adding to the mother’s ambivalence about a military career. Lieutenant Colonel Darlene Anderson, a member of the Air National Guard (ANG), who commanded the 109th Aeromedical Evacuation Flight during the Gulf War, indicated she had been accused by one of her two sons of not caring about him since she left him when called up. Like others activated for service, Anderson felt that the military could help in situations such as hers. She emphasized that the military needed to increase counseling not only for Gulf War veterans but to spouses and children as well. “If you’re going to help me, you have to help my family,” said Anderson.17 Anderson makes a good point. Retention of military personnel, male or female, is important to the AVF. For example, in 2000 in the navy, there were

62

Following the Flag

more than 53,000 female or 14 percent of all active duty personnel, with women constituting more than 20 percent of all new recruits. Many of these women are mothers and, like all navy personnel, face deployments from home for various periods of time. Michele Kelley’s study of 154 active duty enlisted navy mothers found that as sea duty approached, some of the women experienced ambivalence about staying in the navy. The study indicated that this was a reasonable concern since the women “were anticipating a lengthy separation from their families that would clearly prevent mothers from fulfilling a primary care giver role.”18 The needs of the navy mother and the needs of the navy (as with all branches of the service) may just be unreconcilable. Children are usually aware that a parent is deploying, and talking with them about this situation may be a benefit. Whether or not a child should go to a deployment area to bid farewell is up for debate, although the media constantly shows children waving goodbye. One wife, Mary Poole, wrote to the Army Times indicating that her husband was being deployed to Iraq, his third deployment. She felt that since the children, ages 8 and 4, were old enough to understand about dad “going to work in Iraq,” it would benefit them to be with their father as long as possible. However, now she faced a problem. At earlier deployments, she and the couple’s two children had been able to go to the plane and tell him goodbye. The problem now is that “. . . my employer has refused to allow me the requested time off (without pay) . . . to take our children and myself to see my husband deploy. . . . Nobody can guarantee . . . that our soldier . . . is going to return home safely, if at all.”19 This incident may simply reflect the attitude of that particular employer and is probably the exception rather than the rule. It also may reflect the ignorance of the general public about what “the war on terror” really means to families with a military connection. For Guard and Reserve families, it is almost impossible for the spouse and family to accompany the activated military member even to a stateside area. The call to active duty usually is for a short duration (six to twelve months), and moving a family would simply be cost prohibitive for most since there would not be a moving allowance as there is for the career service person. The family must wave goodbye, stay home, and wait. Another problem that arises frequently is the spouse of a Guard or Reserve member (or even one on active duty) who may not be residing near anyone else connected with the military. Unlike career service members, Guard units are composed of personnel from various locations, meet sporadically, and cannot provide the sense of community that living on a military installation does. If the spouse does not know of other families faced with deployment from the area, she may feel isolated in a civilian world that cannot relate to her problems. This may be particularly the case if she has not experienced separation before. For Guard and Reserve families, activation and deployment may come as a shock.

Being Alone

63

Although she didn’t use the term “isolated,” a captain’s wife recalled feeling “different” during the Vietnam War when she was living in an Iowa town of approximately 6,000 population. “No one really knew what I was going through. One day, someone told me that they thought there was another military wife in the town whose husband was in Vietnam. I asked around, and sure enough, there was an army wife and the couple’s little son. I never met the woman, but I felt less different. It made his being away easier.” In her book, Home Fires Burning, Karen Houppert mentions her mother’s worry about being left alone in a civilian community while her father flew support for search-and-rescue missions in Vietnam. Her mother was teaching full-time and rearing three daughters and simply felt that she couldn’t cope any more with her situation. When she called the base hospital to see if she could get help, she was informed that it would be three months before she could see a counselor. She was directed to a local waiting wives’ club that turned out to be a big help. “It was emotional support for us because we were all going through the same thing and we could talk and commiserate.”20 Houppert indicated that the club provided a lifeline for her mother, a spouse who experienced a sense of being isolated. “We’ve learned a great number of lessons about family support,” stated Colonel James Scott, USAR, Director of individual family support policy for the assistant secretary of defense for Reserve Affairs. “We try to put policies in place to ensure that families are prepared for self-sufficiency during a deployment . . . also learned that those who need the help the most—our ‘high risk’ group—usually don’t seek it.”21 The high-risk group Scott mentions includes junior enlisted personnel who have never been deployed and who have young spouses and children. Aside from living far from the traditional support that active duty families offer each other, the Reserve or Guard spouse may not know where to find help. The National Guard Family Program distributes newsletters to ensure that Guard families stay informed. Through the Naval Reserves’ Family Readiness Program, volunteers aid spouses in the Naval Reserves while both the army and air force utilize both paid and volunteer staff for family readiness groups (FRGs).22 However, regardless of whether it is the family of career personnel, Guard or reservist, when the service member is sent to a remote, unaccompanied or combat location, waiting alone is the only option. The stress of being alone always takes a toll. IN TIMES OF WAR Unlike the short TDY or remote tour, deployment of a spouse to a war zone is even more stressful for those left behind as there is more danger involved. In earlier times, just as today, women feared that the men would not survive.

64

Following the Flag

Writing in 1875, Emily McCorkle expressed to her mother the anxiety she felt at the absence of her husband, a physician with troops fighting the Nez Perce Indians. Indeed, I have never been so unhappy in my life. . . . This uncertainty of everything in the future, and this not knowing or hearing anything is the hardest thing to bear. . . . I have heard nothing . . . for almost a month. . . . I am very anxious and worried about my dear husband. . . . I wish all this war was over and John home again.23 When Jennie Barnitz finally received a letter from her husband, Colonel Albert Barnitz, and knew he was safe, after being wounded in a battle with the Cheyenne, she was overjoyed. “What joy to see your dear handwriting once more. . . . The past four weeks seem to me like some terrible dream . . . yet I never gave up for one moment—it seemed to me you would not die— that when you thought of me you would live. . . .”24 Throughout her letters home and to her husband, General Benjamin Grierson, Alice Grierson worried about his absence on Indian scouting parties which often lasted weeks, sometimes months, or when she was waiting to join him at various locations.25 While movies portray women in flowered calico dresses watching the cavalry riding out to the tune “The Girl I Left Behind Me,” one army wife recalled, “To this day that tune makes the cold chills run through my body.”26 Like these wives of the nineteenth century, no matter the era when a spouse leaves for war, those left behind are filled with anxiety. “He was drafted,” a World War II wife explained, “so he had to go. We had only been married seven months, and I never had thought I’d be married to a soldier. I went to live with my parents, who were awfully good to me, but I only saw him for a short leave before he went overseas to England. I knew he would be in the fight eventually. I hoped nothing bad would happen to him, but I couldn’t help worrying.” Another wife recalled that when her career husband received expected orders for Vietnam, the assignment was difficult to accept. If transfers were to a place we didn’t want to go, we always knew that we would be sent somewhere else in a couple of years. So, we always consoled ourselves by saying, ‘Oh, we can do this tour standing on our head.’ But the Vietnam year was different; we knew it was a dangerous place for him to be. I tried not to think what might happen, but it was a hard 12 months for both of us and for our daughter. Naturally, spouses differ in their adjustment to being alone. Today, as was the case in earlier times, when troops are deployed and spouses can’t accompany them, some return to the comfort of parents. Maribeth Coultrip

Being Alone

65

stayed with her parents when her husband’s army unit was deployed to Bosnia. She wrote every day, keeping him informed about their two children, although she admits it was difficult to find something new to write about. Sometimes to fill the gap, she sent cards, and her husband tried to call every couple of days. Although her husband is now out of the army and both are in college, with the deployment time still fresh in her mind, Maribeth says, “I wouldn’t have cared if he had stayed in.”27 Like Maribeth, Lindsey Mestas returned home when her husband, a Chief Warrant Officer, was deployed from Fort Rucker, Alabama, for a second tour to Iraq. The Mestas’ own a home in Tennessee, and initially, Lindsey had planned to remain there with the couple’s two children, one four and the other twenty months old. “But I decided I wouldn’t be able to keep my sanity with two kids twenty-four seven [twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week[. So, I came home to my parents.”28 On the other hand, Maureen Swain opted to stay put. She continued living with her infant daughter in San Antonio at Kelly USA (formerly Kelly Air Force Base) when her air force husband was deployed twice to Kuwait and Iraq. We’d only been there two months when he left. I didn’t work but was a full-time student at San Antonio College and completed a 2-year degree there. It was difficult, but he was able to call often using a phone card, and I wrote a letter to him every day. Also, I never watched the news so I didn’t hear if something bad had happened over there. I wouldn’t have known if he was involved, and I knew I’d worry more if I thought he was.29 Jane Osborne also did not go home; she bought a home in which to wait. Her husband Charles had been an active duty service member and then a member of a National Guard unit. When Jane, a military brat, and Charles were married in 1999, she was knowledgeable about the military and was aware he might be called up at some time, but still felt it was probably a remote possibility that this would happen. However, after September 11 and the attack on the World Trade Center in New York, Charles was activated and served for six months at a command station in Colorado Springs. By 2004, Charles had left the Guard and become a member of the Reserves. In 2004, he was again activated and sent to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri and to Fort Hood, Texas for training and then to Iraq for a year with a unit based out of Louisiana. He was gone a total of fourteen months.30 Jane said it was a very difficult time for her and their five-year-old daughter, who also realized that her father was going away. “I cried a lot because it was a most dangerous time in Iraq, and I was very worried about him,” Joan said. “I had just lost my mother a month before he left, so it was doubly hard.” Still, during the time Charles was gone, Jane, who had his power of

66

Following the Flag

attorney, bought a home, moved into it, and built a cedar fence around the property. At the same time she continued taking classes toward a sociology degree at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. We were able to talk with each other almost every day either by using a telephone card or through instant messaging on the computer. I talked with him about buying the house. He could hear me through the computer, and although he didn’t have a microphone so I could hear him, we could see each other. That helped a lot. My dad had been in the Gulf War and we had a hard time hearing from him. It would have been an expensive phone call or letters, and actually we didn’t hear from him for a long period of time.31 Male spouses of deployed female military personnel also are not immune to problems. Brian Myatt of Clovis, California, faced a number of crises when his National Guard wife, Sergeant 1st Class Lisa Myatt, was deployed to the Middle East. He couldn’t locate his daughter’s hair ribbon for her cheerleading uniform ten minutes prior to the start of a game, a crisis for her. He was diagnosed with stress-related shingles, and on his way home from running errands a pizza delivery car hit his car. “There’s always some crisis going on, and all I can do is take them one at a time and deal with them as best I can,” said Brian, an airline mechanic who works the graveyard shift.32 Being left alone, is not just a problem for the civilian who is a military spouse. It can also affect the couple who are in the military. Both Stacey Evans Schoch and her husband were enlisted navy personnel. They had been colocated in San Diego, and during that time two children were born. Stacey indicated that she was aware of the navy quotation “A baby doesn’t come in your seabag,” but she and her husband had little trouble handling child care when they were at the same base.33 However, after the couple was relocated, and she was pregnant with a third child, her husband was deployed, and the deployment was extended from six months to eleven months, Stacey felt she couldn’t handle the situation. “I was a wimp,” she stated. “I didn’t want to be alone with three kids.” Also, with him gone, providing satisfactory day care while she was on duty had become an issue. “I wasn’t happy with the military day care, and it wasn’t always open when I needed it,” she explained.34 Stacey requested release from her naval service and was discharged. One of the hardest things to deal with, families indicate, is being told your spouse will be coming home and then find out the return is delayed. “Basically it broke my heart,” stated Marlene Albert, after learning that the deployment of her husband, Spc. Carlos Albert, would be extended from six months to a year. Some soldiers will return to children they never have seen, which is the case for the Spc. Albert whose first child was born while he was away.35 It is important that couples communicate as much as possible.

Being Alone

67

KEEPING IN TOUCH Communication between spouses during a deployment is very important, and today it appears to be quite easy. No longer do most spouses have to wait days or weeks for a letter to arrive as was the case during the Vietnam War and other earlier wars. The author recalls that, while she usually received at least one letter a week, several weeks went by without a line from her husband in Da Nang, Vietnam. I was really worried, as we both tried to get off at least a short note each day. I didn’t always get a letter every day, but one or two came each week. When none arrived for a couple of weeks, I talked with the mailman, anxiously hoping for something. About two weeks later, when I was at work, another employee carried in a handful of letters. The postman had been nice enough to deliver the mail to my office to keep me from further worry. During the Gulf War in the early 1990s, communication from overseas was much improved. Today, most spouses indicate that communication is excellent, although half of the spouses in a Kaiser Family Foundation study reported “having had difficulty sending or receiving communications with their husband or wife.”36 Still, as with Jane Osborne and her husband, many of those on regular assignments, unaccompanied tours, or in war zones talk often with their families. Phone cards, e-mail and cell phones, video cameras have certainly helped bring those deployed closer to home and those at home closer to their absent loved ones. Although communication devices are better, the marriage may still suffer, and, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation survey, half of the respondents reported that marital problems were “very common.”37 Intimacy between spouses is difficult to maintain over months of separation. The old saying, “Absence makes the heart grow fonder” has another ending—“for someone else!” Keeping up a long-distance romance is extremely difficult. In her book, Meredith Leyva writes that while X-rated e-mails are inappropriate, to try and keep a feeling of intimacy, couples might develop coded words, which only the two know and that relate to their intimate times.38 Some are concerned about infidelity (adultery), an area that is not often mentioned in books and articles for military spouses. However, the Military Families Survey asked 188 currently deployed or recently deployed and ninety-one not deployed personnel how common they thought infidelity was in their husband’s or wife’s army unit. Of those currently or recently deployed, nearly 69 percent indicated that infidelity was “very” to “somewhat” common.39 Talking with a member of Army Community Services (who asked not to be identified), the author was told that infidelity was fairly common when

68

Following the Flag

troops deployed—and not just for the male. “We have men who move into the soldier’s home when he leaves,” she said, looking somewhat bewildered. “Sometimes with the approval of the man who’s gone.” Her explanation for wives having extra-marital relationships was that society had changed. “It’s more acceptable now than it used to be. Also, women are more independent, more equal. They may know their husband has had an affair and think, ‘Why can’t I do the same.’” One wife who worked as a volunteer with Family Services stated that infidelity was “rampant among wives of men deployed in the Middle East.” She had no statistics to support this comment but mentioned numerous cases of wives who had come in seeking counseling or who had indicated that they were contemplating divorce. Although she was very concerned about her daily experiences, she, too, felt infidelity had become more acceptable in American society, not just the military. Apparently, it is not acceptable to everyone in the military. Marissa Bootes told of being at Fort Bragg in a group of wives who kept in close touch with each—one husband named it “the cult” when another wife came into the club with a man who was not her husband. As the two sat down near Marissa, she said, “. . . if you’re going to cheat on your husband while he’s gone, that’s your business. But get the hell away from me, ’cause guys talk, and I don’t want anybody saying I’m hanging out with you.”40 The woman got up and pulled the man away and on to the dance floor. Marissa and the other wives didn’t want their deployed husbands to hear a false rumor that they were out with other men. Retired Navy Chaplain Gene Gomulka offers a Survival Guide for Marriage in the Military Web site and answers questions from readers. Recently, a husband wrote that his wife was on active duty, deployed overseas, and, apparently, “cheating” on him. The spouse was hurt and wanted to know why this was occurring. Gomulka explained that “because of our strict DoD drug policy, military personnel more frequently will attempt to escape from loneliness, particularly during period of separation from family and friends, with alcohol or sex.”41 His only advice was for the couple to find help through counseling, although for many this does not solve the problem. Those military personnel who commit adultery need to be aware that it is treated as a serious crime. Under current rules, adultery can lead to a dishonorable discharge, with the guilty party losing all pensions and other benefits. It is forbidden for the same reason that fraternization is—to prevent the appearance of unfairness or favoritism. “If your commander orders you to take the next hill, you must trust that he is doing so for sound military reasons and not because he is sleeping with your wife and would like to see an end of you.”42 Whether infidelity is the reason or not, marriages are breaking up. In a 2001 book by Marsha Thole and Frank Ault on divorce and the military, the authors state that, while the Military Family Resource Center in Arlington,

Being Alone

69

Virginia, has numerous statistics on military members, it could not provide divorce information as the DoD indicated those number do not exist. Still Thole and Ault provide the statistic that 55 percent of all marriages in the United States end in divorce, with the military rate mirroring that figure.43 Although divorce statistics vary from source to source, recent studies show that divorce rates are high among couples where one spouse has been sent off to war. According to a “nonscientific survey” in February 2005, there appears to be a spike in the military divorce rate. Chaplain (Col.) Glen Bloomstrom, director of ministry initiatives for the army’s chief of chaplains, indicated that the survey showed that the top fear of soldiers and family members is “loss of a significant relationship—surpassing even death and major injury.”44 Lieutenant Colonel Michael L. Russell, a licensed clinical psychologist indicated that there had been a dramatic increase in divorces among army officers—up 78 percent over a few years prior—while statistics for enlisted personnel “were 28 percent more than the previous year [2003] and up 53 percent from 2000.”45 To put a number on these percentages, there were 7,152 divorces among army enlisted in 2004; for army officers, the total number of divorces was 3,325. Divorce rates are also up for the other services with Marine officers’ rates hovering around 1.8 percent and enlisted at 3.5 percent. Rates for the navy and air force are similar.46 For the National Guard, the divorce rate has doubled in the past four years, according to Department of Defense data.47 The military has become more active in setting up programs to try and salvage some of these war-ravaged relationships. Of course, whether the rise in divorces can be attributed directly to the deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq is debatable. However, according to Kathleen Moakaler, deputy director of government relations for the National Military Family Association (a military family advocacy group located in Virginia), repeated deployments to combat areas do take a toll on family life. When asked if divorce increases can be traced to Iraq and Afghanistan missions, army spokeswoman Major Elizabeth Robbins would not speculate. Robbins did point out that “other organizations that require high levels of responsibility coupled with possible traumatic events and danger also have high levels of divorce” and gave as an example civilian police offices.48 Recognizing the stress military life, particularly deployments, place on families, the armed services are stepping up efforts to help troops strengthen family relationships and, hopefully, avoid divorce courts. A number of outreach programs are available, including support groups for spouses of deployed troops to weekend retreats for military couples. Also available is chaplain and mental-health counseling and the Deployment Cycle Support Program, which gives briefings on how a soldier’s absence and return may affect family relationships.

70

Following the Flag

A marriage retreat was recently offered at Callaway Gardens, Georgia, to study “danger signs” in a relationship—sort of a boot camp for love. So far, only about 10 percent of soldiers have enrolled in this type of armysponsored marriage-enhancement program, but attendance appears to be rising. Other branches of the service, including the navy have started to offer enrichment retreats.49 All are aimed at helping families endure the hardships of military life. However, finding any one reason for the upswing in divorce is difficult. Colonel Michael Cannon, commander of the 1st Battlefield Coordination detachment at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, indicated that operational tempo can’t be blamed unless each couple is interviewed. He feels that deployments can worsen other problems within a marriage but may not be the primary source of the divorce. Joyce Raezer, director of government relations for the National Military Family Association, felt that finding any one specific reason for the breakups was very difficult. In talking to officers’ spouses, she discovered that it was “not just a divorce from the service member—it’s a divorce from the military.”50 The stress of military life may be taking its toll, but the military is doing its best to bring help to troubled couples. GETTING HELP Hopefully, the military member about to be deployed (and those recently activated) will have insured that the family will be cared for. All family members must be enrolled in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) in order to have access to military benefits. Based on duty status, included in these will be use of the commissary and exchange, education services, and Servicemembers Group Life Insurance (SGLI). On a limited basis legal assistance and Family Services Center programs may be available.51 Still, the nearest military installation could be several hundred miles from the family home, necessitating a lengthy drive. The Reserve or Guard spouse may be unable to take advantage of these benefits. With the AVF and the need to keep a well-disciplined and focused military force, the services are becoming more adept at providing help for “people issues” that affect all military families. Angie is a good example of why help is needed. New to army life, Angie arrived in Germany with her husband, three children and a new baby only to learn that her husband’s unit was being deployed. Like many such women, Angie was miserable. She began seeing other unhappy wives, complaining about life, and having a really good “pity party.” She needed to find help. Air Force Times contributors Kathie Hightower and Holly Scherer write that they speak to many spouses who have negative attitudes. They go “from ‘aint-it-awful’ sessions to stuffing themselves with junk food out of stress or boredom.”52 As with Angie, these wives need to seek help to cope with being alone for when they communicate with their husbands, the communication may be only a gripe session.

Being Alone

71

Help for the waiting spouses is available. However, they have to ask for it. “I think the biggest challenge is going to be encouraging spouses to use us,” said 1st Lieutenant Chris Giorgianni, assigned to coordinate “Operation Support Spouse” at Hill Air Force Base, Utah.53 The 34th Fighter Squadron was on the way to Saudi Arabia after bidding farewell to their families. Services that would be provided to the spouses included video teleconferencing with almost unlimited electronic mail, free morale calls, even free oil changes at the base gas station. Reiterating Giorgianni’s comment, the commander of the wing operations group told personnel and spouses, “The services are here, but you have to first off raise your hand and say you have a problem.”54 For example, Army Community Services at Fort Carson, Colorado, offers a wide variety of programs to aid families living on post or in the area. They are available whether the spouse is at the post or deployed. These include parenting programs; marriage enrichment programs; single parent programs; child safety programs; family violence awareness; conflict resolution; sexual assault prevention; financial, employment, and relocation readiness. Participating in some of these programs would help the lonely spouse fill empty hours until a husband or wife comes home. In 2004 a joint hearing before the Subcommittee on Children and Families was held to examine how states were responding to military families, especially those of the Guard and Reserves. Senator Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina indicated that she was very aware of the “great personal sacrifice and . . . significant disruption for family life and employment” that was occurring. She continued by praising the family support programs already in place and “. . . the groundswell of support for Reserve families within the State of North Carolina.”55 Dole also was aware of those families who didn’t live close to bases and ccouldn’t utilize the networks that base programs provided. She was encouraged by a growing number of “localized Family Assistance Programs” in North Carolina that had been designed specifically for Reserve and Guard families.56 Of course, spouses should not expect the military to provide activities for their empty hours. They should find ways themselves to keep busy was the advice given by many spouses. Deborah Davis put her skills in health to work and created a healthy-cooking TV show in Wurzburg, when her husband was deployed from Germany to Iraq. Amy McCormick, the mother of twins, started weight training and bodybuilding. Spouses at Fort Lewis, Washington originated a “Walk to Iraq and Back” program to fill time while their spouses were in Iraq. “The walking helps reduce our stress,” one wife emphasized.57 Marla Summers, wife of Reserve Petty Officer 1st Class Michael Summers, didn’t sit home and mope. She worked full time and began a master’s degree in library science. Marla also established a support system of both friends and family to lean on if she needed help. “I was scared and upset at times,

72

Following the Flag

but when I compared it to where he was and what he was going through, I couldn’t complain,” she said. “I still had friends and family nearby.”58 Richard Trent, who has his own consulting business, takes on more clients when his wife is deployed which fills “my schedule to the max.” Nancy McKenzie uses “organizing” as a way to have less idle time to think about her deployed husband. As she organizes things in her home, it is a way “to clear her mind” and her house.59 Getting someone to sit with the kids can be important during a deployment as the single parent needs some personal time. Going for a walk, surfing the mall, taking a ceramics class, playing golf, or taking in a movie, will help fill some of the empty hours while he or she is gone. Of course, adding too many outside activities to what may already be a full schedule of work, child care, and household tasks can increase stress. Waiting spouses need to pace themselves. A good place to find help when a spouse is deployed is from other military spouses. Key volunteers (Marine Corps), ombudsmen (Navy, Coast Guard), and support volunteers (all other branches) are military spouses who “have taken on the mission of supporting unit families. . . . They are trained in listening techniques; crisis, stress, and time management; and a variety of family readiness issues. . . .”60 Many bases have FRGs, made up of friends who provide good information and emotional support. While an army spokesperson said that FRGs were “absolutely” a success, a 2002 army survey indicated that only one-third of military spouses were even aware that the program existed with only 25 percent saying they had attended a meeting. Officers’ wives participated more and often assumed leadership positions. Reasons for nonparticipation included lack of time, inconvenient hours or locations, being uncomfortable with FRG leaders/members, and member spouses not encouraging them to attend.61 Many spouses felt the groups were not helpful or beneficial; however, many others find the spouses they meet in these groups to be friends the rest of their lives. COMING HOME While the service personnel have been gone, adjustments have been made in the family situation that may lead to friction upon the service member’s return. Spouses left behind will have assumed the task of keeping their families intact. This means financial decisions may have been made, contracts entered into, jobs taken, and rules established for the kids. When the absent spouse returns, a period of adjustment will probably be needed. Spouse Jim Lever recalled that when his wife occasionally would return home to Seoul from where she was stationed at Camp Casey, Korea, all the rules he had set up for their children “just flew out the window. After she left, it would take me several days to get things back the way they had been.”62

Being Alone

73

Children have to know who is in charge when one parent leaves. If “daddy” has been in charge before, the fact that he is gone doesn’t mean he’s not still in charge as a parent. If there is a stepmother or stepfather, service members must help the children realize he or she will be the person to mete out rewards and discipline while they are absent. The children should understand that the parents are keeping in touch and both will continue to share authority.63 For husbands who have been deployed, coming home may be somewhat of a shock for changes will have occurred. In America’s paternalistic society, even when mothers are employed, fathers still are considered the primary “breadwinners.” Therefore, they may be accustomed to making the major decisions in a household. Unless a spouse discusses each necessary decision with a deployed individual, a period of adjustment may be needed at homecoming. Like Jim Lever, the waiting spouse who is caring for the kids must set the rules; he or she must decide what to do about dozens of items necessary for daily living: medical needs, school issues, home repairs, vacations, curfews, etc. It is often difficult for the returning person who had charge to suddenly find out this is no longer the case. As an example, Kelly McQueen, a history teacher in Marietta, Georgia, indicated that she and her husband had to “grapple with some issues” regarding their children when lst Class William McQueen returned home after a year. “Before I would always discuss what our daughters were doing, where they were going,” Kelly said, “but while he was gone, I had to make decisions on my own. So when he got back, the girls were out, and he was like, ‘Hey, what’s going on?’”64 Spouses will need to talk out problems in order to get the family back on an even keel. Active duty personnel may return from deployment only to learn that they are being reassigned to another location. This also will produce additional upheaval for families already coping with the addition to family routine of the returning service member. For deployed reservists, there is an additional worry—the possibility that they will lose ground in civilian jobs, miss licensing deadlines, or fall behind in educational requirements. Problems always seem to arise when someone is yanked from civilian status into the military as was the case with Reserve Air Force Tech. Sergeant Brian Bertany. When he was demobilized after a year of active duty, Bertany discovered that his college degree, which would have qualified him to take a California state examination to become an architect, was no longer valid because the state had changed its requirements. Bertany was fortunate. With help from military legal services, the state “grandfathered” him in under previous eligibility rules. He passed the exam and is now employed by an architectural firm.65 For those in the Guard or Reserves called to active duty, federal law provides that the their civilian jobs be protected, assuming that the employees notify their employers of the activation, “serve under honorable conditions

74

Following the Flag

and . . . report back to work in a timely manner upon completion of military duty.”66 Although this law sounds uncomplicated, things do not always work out, as was the case with Joseph Perez. When Perez got his “dream job” as a civilian firefighter at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, he was “on top of the world.” Within a year of getting the job, the Nevada Army National Guard sergeant was deployed to Iraq and wounded in June 2003. After several surgeries and a lengthy recovery, he still could not put weight on his left knee. Also, he found that his job had been eliminated. “This has torn me up,” he said. “It has torn my family up. I have no insurance coverage now for my wife and three kids.”67 Under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), even if Perez is unable to work as a firefighter, his former employer is required to place him in a job with comparable salary, status, and seniority. This rule applies to any service member—Guard and Reserve— with injury, wounds, or illnesses received during active duty, not just those received in combat.68 Of course, in some instances, additional training might be needed to fulfill requirements of a new position. As the military relied more and more on the reserve components, who, apparently, had not contemplated the hardships arising from active duty, complaints surfaced. During the Gulf War of 1990–1991, those reservists injured in combat were particularly critical of the lack of help given them by the military. Some complained of not getting enough information on medical and financial benefits. Others who were wounded questioned being kept on active duty status while in military treatment facilities. “I’ve been gone from my family since the day after Christmas,” said army specialist Stacey Akra. She had been wounded in the Iraqi Scud attack on her Saudi Arabia barracks in February 1991 and emphasized in July, “I want to go home now!”69 Twenty-four-year-old army private Chris Ortega was left permanently disabled from injuries received in Saudi Arabia and succinctly presented his criticism of military aid for reserve troops. “We served a job over there and once they were done, they put us in a corner. They are not taking care of us the way they’re taking care of Regular Army folks.”70 A 2002 article in U.S. Army on support for families indicates that many army spouses—two-thirds of those surveyed—were dissatisfied with support that army leaders were giving them. There was a comparable drop among the spouses of officers, with only about 25 percent of spouses feeling that those who lead their spouses’ units are concerned about the welfare of the military family.71 Many of the wives were against their husband’s reenlisting when their service commitment was complete, and separation of family members was a big issue. There is little doubt that deployments and separations—the reality of military life—are major and sometimes insurmountable problems encountered by families. Possibly, as Nancy Montville thought, the age of spouses may

Being Alone

75

make a difference. “I wasn’t a 17-year-old bride married to a 19-year-old soldier. I was twenty-five and he was close to thirty.”72 Their maturity may have helped them deal with problems, including separation, encountered in their military marriage. Many times the separations come before the families have been together long enough to solidify relationships. Hollywood has long used the frantic courtships and sudden marriage of men and women during World War I and II as vehicles for romance stories. Usually, the story ends with the return of the serviceman to a warm, welcoming family and a happy ending. Sadly, then as now, this was seldom reality as was so aptly portrayed in the 1946 film, The Best Years of Our Lives. What is different now is that, contrasted with WWII warriors who left home for as long as four years or more with little to no communication between family members, separations are shorter and communications are better. Still, even with short deployments of twelve months or less and better means of communication, many times soldiers return home to meet their infant child for the first time. Like their mothers and grandmothers before them, military wives and now husbands still struggle to find adequate housing and pay the family’s bills. Coming from a combat area to a “peacetime” home requires a great deal of adjustment for the service member and the rest of the family. Today, the military, no longer able to tap unlimited manpower by the draft, has initiated and continues to provide programs that make these transition periods easier for families. The success of these efforts remains to be seen. Military divorce statistics, if they can be used as a measurement of success, have steadily risen to 53 percent from 2003 to 2004,73 not something to cheer about. If domestic violence is considered a measurement, again the numbers are not good. Media reports continue to indicate that domestic violence seems to be increasing with troubling homicide and suicide statistics. (Chapter 5) Despite the apparent lack of success with these issues, one hopes that the military organization continues to build support groups, encourages and finances education programs and counseling sessions for family members. These cannot help but ease some of the tension arising from current and continuing family separations. Still, soldiers will be deployed, and deployments will be extended. Chrystie Omo, writing from Fort Stewart, Georgia, gives some sound advice to those waiting at home. “I believe that it is a personal responsibility issue if you feel alone or out of the loop. If you keep busy . . . you will have a better attitude and outlook on deployments. . . . We have to pick ourselves up, have faith and go on. That is what were to do as military spouses.”74

CHAPTER 5

Trouble at Home If I had a dollar for every time a military spouse told me, “I want you to make him stop hitting, but I don’t want you to get him in trouble,” I could give up my military retired pay and live in luxury in the Caribbean. —Rod Powers, U.S. Military

Violence in the family is an unrelenting problem. It shows up in all racial and ethnic groups, all social classes, and all income brackets in both the civilian and military community. However, since reporting methods vary and the demographics of the military are different (a much younger population than the general society and heavily male in composition), it is difficult to compare rates. From service to service and unit to unit, statistics on the incidence of military domestic violence, as with those on divorce, vary. An October 2005 article in the Air Force Times indicated that Defense Department data shows that while the number of abuse reports had fallen, the severity of domestic violence had risen by 8 percentage points since 1998 to 13 percent in 2004. Incidents classified as severe included physical injury requiring inpatient treatment, temporary or permanent disfigurement, sexual contact, and/or emotional injury that required long-term mental health care. The downward trend was reported for the army and navy, with the Marine Corps figures remaining about the same; the air force trend was slightly up.1 If there is a downward trend in abuse reports, the reasons are hard to pinpoint. They may be due to more public awareness of its unacceptability and available help to prevent the incidents, although this does not seem to be the case.

Trouble at Home

77

Rod Powers, who writes for the newsletter U.S. Military, does not see a downward trend. He indicates that, if numbers are down, it may be due to the fact that many victims refuse to report an incident because they feel it will be a threat to a spouse’s career.2 A recent DoD study found that service personnel reported for domestic violence were 23 percent more likely “to be separated from the service than non-abusers and somewhat more likely to have other than honorable discharges. The majority who remain in the military are more likely to be promoted more slowly than non abusers.”3 Of course, those involved in domestic violence may have other problems that lead to separation from the military or not being promoted. Certainly, promotion chances play a big role in whether or not an officer’s spouse will report abuse. One major’s wife, who was both verbally and physically abused, indicated that she did not report the incidences of violence because she didn’t wish to jeopardize her husband’s career and, ultimately, the family’s finances. Apparently, his frequent slaps and verbal abuse of her in public were not physically or emotionally harmful enough that she would hurt his promotion opportunity and the family’s money. In another instance, because of their financial situation, an air force colonel’s wife stayed with her abusive husband even after he retired from the service, until their three children had completed college and either married or were employed. Only then did she divorce him. Enlisted wives also may be hesitant to report violence. At one base, a domestic violence incident came to light when neighbors could hear screams and the sound of objects being thrown against walls. However, when an air force officer was sent to the home to investigate, the sergeant living there indicated that nothing was wrong, and the wife agreed. Later, the wife said that she was afraid the husband would be “kicked out of the service, and we would have no money.” At the time of the incident, the couple were stationed overseas, and the wife also indicated that she didn’t know how she would be able to get back to the United States if she tried to leave her spouse. Another army wife stayed married to an abusive husband for ten years. She described the abuse as his controlling her “through constant belittlement, forbidding her to drive or have a job, and ultimately, through rape and other violence.”4 Abuse can also come from the female half of a marriage. The wife of a Navy lieutenant stationed in Virginia was both verbally and physically abusive, although he never officially reported any of the abusive incidents. Neighbors living near the couple in base housing could hear her screaming curses, and several times the man required medical aid due to objects that had hit him. His tolerance of her actions made for good gossip among the other families, which was harmful not only to him but also to their children. Eventually, the couple divorced, and it is not known whether or not she sought help for her violent rages.

78

Following the Flag

Financial help for abused spouses is available, but as the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence learned, many spouses (and many commanders) may not be aware of the Transitional Compensation (TC) Program for abused dependents. In an effort to reduce victim’s hesitancy at reporting incidents, Congress established TC in the FY94 DoD Authorization Act. Temporary payments are authorized for families if service personnel have been discharged for domestic violence, either administratively or by courtmartial. The rate dependents may receive is $911 for a spouse and $229 for each dependent child “for 12 months or until the service member’s expiration term of service date, whichever is longer, but may not exceed a maximum of 36 months.”5 Some might ask if there are only a few incidents where couples are unable to personally solve their domestic problems without the use of violence. Not according to Rod Powers, who claims that domestic violence “happens so much in the military that the Department of Defense has made it an item of specific concern.”6 According to Jon Elliston and Catherine Lutz, writing in Southern Exposure, a 1993 army-funded study that indicated “severe aggression” against spouses “ran more than three times higher among Army families than among civilian ones.”7 Although Powers does not provide support for his statement about violence “happening so much,” apparently Congress was concerned enough to establish the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence under The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2000. The Task Force “was charged with the specific responsibility of formulating a long-term strategic plan to assist the department in addressing domestic violence matters.”8 Unfortunately, it appears that a central database does not exist to track information on domestic violence incidents among service personnel and show the true scope of the problem. Further, it does not provide information on disciplinary action taken by commanders nor effectively communicate new policies that would help victims.9 Still, the authorization of the Domestic Violence Task Force indicates that, like the rest of American society, the military is aware of this severe problem for which there seems to be no easy explanation or solution.

EXPLAINING THE PROBLEM For many years, sociologists and psychologists have studied the problem of violence in the family. According to sociologist Thomas J. Sullivan, Social Problems (1997), one reason is the wide acceptance in the United States, especially among males, of the use of violence to settle disputes. Traditional norms support male domination in marriage, and those with nonegalitarian views toward sex-role relationships are more likely to approve of spouse abuse and more likely to have abused a spouse.10

Trouble at Home

79

Poverty is another reason proposed for marital violence, which is said to be disproportionately a problem of the economically disadvantaged. Those families with low educational and occupational attainment are said to be especially at risk of spouse abuse. Sexual inequality where power over decision making is in the hands of the husband and where wives have less economic resources is another explanation. Substance abuse by the abuser often is a big factor. Social isolation, where the spouse has few contacts outside the marriage, also may lead to violence.11 Due to the isolation, she may feel the violence is justified and fail to seek help.While these reasons are given for domestic violence in civilian society, they appear to be an adequate explanation for violence in military life. The military is still a heavily maledominated society. Military families, particularly those in the lower enlisted ranks, experience poverty similar to that of civilians. Many of the young wives have only a high school education, leaving them with few chances for economic resources outside those of their husbands. Substance abuse, usually in the form of alcoholism, is a problem in the military. Just visit the social clubs on a military installation on any Friday evening and join the merrymakers at Happy Hour. Living apart from close family, the abused spouse may feel isolated and unable to get help. For those who write on military issues, one of the most common reasons given to explain this phenomena is feelings of lack of control over victims by military personnel. In her book, Surviving Deployment, Karen Pavlicin supports this concept as she feels that there may be increased abuse after a long deployment in families where a military member has been a forceful, dominant figure. “Once home this authoritarian parent may use any means necessary, from threats to abusive physical force, to obtain compliance and reestablish authority. If this person was used to giving orders, its hard to switch to a mutual-decision family arrangement.”12 Christine Hansen, of the Miles Foundation, a nonprofit organization, indicates that military personnel are more controlled from above than most civilian workers, which may have an effect on whether they become abusers. Many come home looking to reassert control, often with violence. The anxieties about control, and consequently the violence, flare up most before and after military deployments as soldiers lose and then try to reinstate control.13 Hansen ties this theory into the increase in calls the foundation received both before and after men returned from deployments in Afghanistan. However, if it is valid, the theory would apply to any deployment, whether in war time or not, and to the control experienced by military personnel as they perform their normal routines. After all, personnel in all branches of the service are trained in violence—some say an incubator of violence. Overt expression of violence is part of its normative system. For example, military

80

Following the Flag

sayings such as are heard in the army stating “(1) There are no rules. (2) Follow rule one,” show a set of values different from the overall society. The air force saying that the only duty of personnel is “to fly and fight” also indicates a violent act. Another theory of violence, proposed as early as 1967 by sociologists Marvin Wolfgang and Marco Ferracuti, lends support to Morris and Hansen. It combines structural and social psychological factors and is known as the “subculture of violence” theory. According to these two men, “. . . overt use of force or violence, either in interpersonal relationships or in group interaction, is generally viewed as a reflection of basic values that stand apart from the dominant culture.” The two expand on this by adding that this overt expression of violence “. . . is part of a subcultural normative system . . . reflected in the psychological traits of the subculture participants.”14 Some, like Duke University law professor, Madeline Morris, argue that military values support domestic violence as women are not highly valued in what is still today a heavily masculine subculture. In the Duke Law Journal (1996), she wrote that “the norms currently prevalent within military organizations include a configuration of norms regarding masculinity, sexuality and women . . . elements of hypermasculinity, adversarial sexual beliefs, promiscuity, rape myth acceptance, hostility toward women, and possibly also acceptance of violence against women.”15 It could easily be argued that this theory fits not only the military but civilian society as well. Of course, no one should be surprised that the domestic violence in the military is so similar to that of the civilian world, for after all, the military is made up of people who once were civilians. As in the civilian world, family violence often results in death. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND DEATH If the average person were to be asked to describe a serious domestic violence incident, most would tell of a wife, husband, or children who had been beaten and hospitalized. They may not be aware of the number of deaths attributed to this problem whether in the civilian or military world. However, in 2002, the murder of spouses by military personnel returning from the war zones made headlines in the national media and brought death in the home to the attention of the general public. “It’s mind-boggling,” said Henry Berry, manager of family advocacy programs at Fort Bragg, discussing the killing of four army wives—three by husbands from Special Operations and one from the 18th Airborne Corps.16 Although three had recently returned from Afghanistan, the fourth had not been deployed. Sergeant lst Class Rigoberto Nieves, who had been home only two days, shot his wife, Teresa, and himself. Master Sergeant William Wright, back from Afghanistan for about a month had moved out of his house and was living in the barracks. Returning to his home, he strangled his wife, Jennifer,

Trouble at Home

81

and reported her missing. Two days later he led police to her body and was charged with murder. Sergeant 1st class Brandon Floyd shot his wife, Andrea, and then killed himself. A local newspaper reported that while in Afghanistan Floyd had been a member of Delta Force, a secretive antiterrorism unit. Sergeant Cedric Ramon Griffin, who was not in a special operations unit and had not been deployed to Afghanistan, stabbed his estranged wife, Marilyn, approximately fifty times and set fire to her home. This has raised the questions about the stress the three deployed men in special operations and Delta Force may have been under while coordinating air attacks on forces of the Taliban government or working on the ground with Northern Alliance troops in Afghanistan. It was also proposed that isolation in the field might have been a factor as special operations soldiers work in small groups instead of with a large ground force.17 Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome has also been mentioned as a cause for the violence. Symptoms such as nightmares, depression, and sleepwalking are difficult to explain to a civilian spouse. Army Captain Kristiaan Hughes had thought his bad dreams were gone. However, one night he had an “aggressive dream” and began walking in his sleep, “yelling, barking orders and pointing to things that weren’t there.”18 Although he did not physically harm his wife, she was so frightened that she locked herself and their child in a spare bedroom. (An Air Force Times article is critical of the military’s actions regarding returning war veterans, indicating that in both the air force and the army four out of five service members who screen positive for combat-related stress are not being referred for treatment.)19 Another possible reason given was the use of the antimalarial drug mefloquinine, known more familiarily as Lariam. However, Dr. David Sullivan, at John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, sees no “solid evidence” for a connection between Lariam and the killings. Sullivan questioned why the drug would affect only soldiers as civilian travelers have taken it to prevent malaria for over ten years. Still, the manufacturer, Hoffman-La Roche, acknowledges Lariam has side effects—an extensive number of them, including nausea, diarrhea, sleeplessness, abnormal dreams and, more rarely, panic attacks, depression, mood changes, and paranoid reactions. The company’s literature also states that “rare cases of suicide have been reported, though no relationship to drug administration has been confirmed.” Two of the soldiers committed suicide after killing their wives. However, Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence cochair, Debby Tucker, did not place Lariam at the top of her list for the cause of the killings or the suicides. She felt that officials needed to see if there had been instances of prior violence in the home and whether the soldiers had been aggressive toward others.20 Wilma Watson, the mother of Jennifer Wright, also was trying to find an explanation for her daughter’s murder. She indicated that Master Sergeant Wright had “changed” after his deployment and was “getting these attacks of rage.” Watson said that Jennifer had been afraid of her husband but would

82

Following the Flag

not go home to her family as she “loved him.” Andrea Floyd’s mother also was looking for answers and felt that Sergeant Floyd’s training had been such “that if you can’t control it, you kill it.”21 What may not be apparent to other friends or relatives such as Mrs. Watson or Mrs. Floyd, is that family troubles were present before the soldier was deployed but were unknown to those outside the marriage. The violence might be a symptom of the deployment, but the root cause may have been something wrong in the relationship all along—even something that the couple might not have wished to face earlier. In that case, probably neither would have tried to seek help for the problem. Many times infidelity or the suspicion of infidelity leads to violence. Shortly after returning from Iraq, a soldier in Fort Collins, Colorado, killed his wife and then himself. Pfc. Stephen S. Sherwood shot his wife, Sara, five times in the head and torso before killing himself. Sherwood had gone through a mental and physical screening required of all soldiers returning from combat areas just a few days earlier at Fort Carson, Colorado. Neighbors indicated that Sara Sherwood told them she had been involved with another man while her husband was deployed and planned to discuss that relationship with her husband. Sherwood had discussed his financial and marital problems with army mental health evaluators but was not considered a risk. “He was not flagged for any kind of mental health issues,” 1st Lieutenant Justin Journeay stated, “There were no indicators.”22 Colonel Heidi Terrio, a doctor who helps screen soldiers at Fort Carson for war-related problems, indicated that Sherwood hadn’t known of the marital infidelity at the time of the screening. “It sounds like he received some news about his wife that he didn’t expect.”23 While the returning soldiers are interviewed by a chaplain and a social worker to determine if they need treatment or counseling, the colonel emphasized that screeners need to be tipped off to possible trouble. Elliston and Lutz touch on what they say is a double standard of sexuality in the military. Both soldiers and their wives indicated infidelity was to be expected of deployed men, but infidelity of wives, real or imagined, got punished by violence.24 If this way of thinking permeates the military culture, possibly Sherwood’s wife telling of her infidelity may have been his excuse for the murder. Sometimes a reason for the violence is not forthcoming. For example, Senior Airman John Valen allegedly stabbed his wife, Jody Lynn, over hundred times. Then he set her body and their home near Mountain Home Air Force Base on fire. So far, Valen has provided no explanation for this violent act.25 Of course, not all who wish to rid themselves of their spouses have been deployed. Also, not all of the murdering spouses are male. Wendi Mae Davidson, a Texas veterinarian was indicted on a charge of killing her husband with a drug used to euthanize animals. Staff Sergeant Michael

Trouble at Home

83

Severance was found tied to cinder blocks at the bottom of a stock tank. He had been poisoned with both pentobarbital and phenobarbital.26 In addition, apparently some do not wish to do the killing themselves; they try and hire it out. At Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, Captain Barry Brown and Staff Sergeant Ramona Greiner were accused of a plot to kill Brown’s wife, Irene. According to an air force memo, Greiner approached a civilian friend and asked if he would be willing to kill Irene for $25,000. She then arranged for Brown to meet the civilian, who allegedly also asked the man to kill his wife by going to her workplace and shooting anyone else who was there. Although it was not specifically stated that Brown and Greiner were romantically involved, a search of Greiner’s car revealed two notes from Brown, which were described as “affectionate.” According to a second article in the Air Force Times, Brown did state that he had “thought about doing it myself. I thought about two or three different ways.”27 Of course, death in a domestic violence incident does not always involve one spouse killing another, although abuse was the instigator. The Times in Shreveport, Louisiana, wrote of the unfortunate death of Air Force Master Sergeant Dwight Branstetter being shot outside his home as he pointed a shotgun at law enforcement officers. Branstetter’s wife had fled to a neighbor’s home and then made a domestic violence call to police. Neighbors described the sergeant as committed to the military and an amiable, quiet man, and there had never been a domestic violence call from the home previously. Still, as Bossier Sheriff Deen said, “Domestic violence incidents are very volatile,” going from peaceful resolution to extreme violence in just minutes.28 Sometimes when there is a domestic violence incident, suicide may seem the only solution for a perpetrator. This may have been the thinking of Chief Warrant Officer William Howell who was a fifteen-year Army Special Forces veteran, married and the father of three. Three weeks after returning from Iraq, Howell suddenly began hitting his wife, Laura, and threatened to kill her. Then he shot himself. “You look back every day and think what could I have done different,” Laura said. “I can’t think of anything.”29 Laura blamed his suicide on the fact that he had been taking the drug Lariam while deployed. Sergeant 1st Class Andre McDaniel, a father of two, also shot himself six weeks after his return from Iraq. His wife, Linda, said he had not been himself, had been withdrawn after coming home. She did mention that he had called once during his Iraq tour and said his unit was being shelled. “He said goodbye at that particular time,” she stated, “because he was scared he wouldn’t be coming home.”30 However, the army indicated that there appeared to be no connection between the men’s overseas service and their suicides, although they (and another soldier who committed suicide about the same time) were all in the same unit. It was only a coincidence, according to a military spokesman.

84

Following the Flag

On the other hand, Steve Robinson, a former Army Ranger and veterans’ advocate suspected there might have been among the men “a macho refusal to acknowledge stress and seek help.”31 Laura Howell would agree with that assessment as she also felt her husband would have seen asking for help as a weakness. In addition, to the adults affected by domestic violence, there are the children who die in these situations. An Air Force Times article indicated that the rate of child abuse resulting in murder is more than twice as high among military families living in North Carolina than among civilians there. According to a study done by the North Carolina Child Advocacy Institute with funding from the Justice Department, 2.2 of every 100,000 children in North Carolina died from child abuse. However, among military families at Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base, Camp Lejeune, and Marine Corps Air Station New River, the rates were twice as high—around 5 per 100,000. Army Lieutenant Colonel Joe Richard, a Pentagon spokesman, indicated that the military’s Family Advocacy Program database showed a lower average of children under age 18 killed in abuse-related incidents—a rate of 1.82 deaths per 100,000.32 However, the difference in numbers may be because the two samples did not cover the same age range. Also, comparison of child-abuse deaths from other states having a large number of military installations was not made. There may be other communities where a disproportionate number of childabuse homicides could be found. Investigations into suspected child fatalities should be improved and information shared between military and civilian law enforcement agencies. In addition, if, as some believe, deployment is a big factor in domestic violence, the risk of abuse-related deaths for both adults and children could escalate as there are still over 140,000 troops in the war zone, with hundreds of thousands already having returned home earlier. THE ISOLATED SPOUSE While recent emphasis has been on domestic violence by returning soldiers, not all violence occurs because of deployments. It happens on every military installation, stateside or overseas, with military spouses who are abused sharing the same feelings as abused civilian spouses and possibly being in similar situations. They may have little education and be unable to support themselves and any children if they leave an abusive situation. They may fear for their safety and the safety of their children if they leave an abuser. They may be in a situation where alcohol or drugs are involved. If they are in a foreign country, they are apart from family or close friends and feel a sense of isolation and lack of support. For a military wife, it can be a real problem if she is in an isolated overseas area with little support. A Navy spouse allegedly abused in Bahrain said

Trouble at Home

85

that her husband, an officer, assaulted her when she was pregnant and also assaulted the couple’s three-year-old son. “There was no safe house . . . no place to escape,” she stated.33 She was advised to find someone on base who would house her and the boy. A chaplain provided some support, urging the command to take her safety seriously. Another commander gave her information on what was happening behind the scenes, although his help was done anonymously as he apparently felt an overt show of support might damage his position. He explained that her complaint was known throughout the base. “There is no confidentiality. In a foreign situation, everybody knows everything,” the wife said, indicating that other officers’ wives who learned of her complaint criticized her for reporting the abuse and of “disgracing the uniform.” The issue of confidentiality was raised by the Task Force on Domestic Violence. In its initial report to the secretary of defense in February 2001, the members indicated that from the very first meeting concern was expressed “. . . about the lack of confidentiality for victims of domestic violence in the DoD and its impact on the willingness of victims to seek assistance.”34 It also called attention to the fact that some chaplains, who often hear wives’ complaints, are not clear about confidentiality and their options to refer the abuse problem to military of civilian resources in order to get help for those abused. The abused navy wife (mentioned above) also felt the military was reluctant to prosecute her spouse and tried to pressure her into flying back to the United States. “No victim, no crime,” was the way she put it. “The military wants to wash its hands of you.”35 Certainly the military does not wish to air its dirty laundry in public. As in any organization, to do so may weaken the entity. However, if a complaint is made that a husband or wife is being abusive, some action is required. On base, military police will investigate the complaint and immediately notify Family Advocacy Program officials and the personnel’s commander. If the abuse occurs off-base, the local police may or may not report the incident to base officials. If the abuser is a civilian, the incident is given to civilian law enforcement. However, base personnel cooperate with the local authorities, and DoD officials are now working to develop memoranda of understanding between the two entities to establish needed reporting procedures. Civilian communities surveyed by the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence were generally receptive to “DoD liaison personnel participating in an active, coordinated response to domestic violence.”36 Many times, however, spouses living off base may be hesitant to report offenses. “I didn’t call anyone,” said Maria D. who lived in a duplex in San Diego. “First of all, he didn’t really beat me, just pushed me around, knocked me down ever so often. Since we lived in a suburb away from the base, I didn’t want to call the cops. It would have been too embarrassing to have my neighbors who weren’t in the military know that we were having troubles.”

86

Following the Flag

Maria also didn’t want their children to see the police come to the house and, possibly, arrest her husband, although this may not have been his punishment. Casey Gwinn, a member of the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence pointed out that punishment for domestic violence in the military varies both within the United States and overseas. In some places a service man will be convicted for the offense; in others he basically gets off. For example, offenders in San Diego are “prosecuted, convicted and booted out of the military. In Cumberland County, N.C . . . convicted offenders are offered the option of a 16-week diversion treatment.” On the other hand, district judge Peter C. MacDonald indicated that, although he frequently sees service members in his court, he felt the response to domestic violence at Fort Campbell, Kentucky was very good. “. . . as far as being cognizant and trying to do the right thing, they’ve done very well.”37 SOLVING THE PROBLEM Speaking about the four wives killed at Fort Bragg, Henry Berry of family services stressed, “We’re going to look at these cases . . . to prevent them from happening in the future.”38 This comment sounds good, but prevention is difficult. For several years the military has been concerned and has taken steps to get those involved in domestic violence into counseling. Doing so is not an option; counseling is mandatory for the abuser. However, the victim is not required to find help, and this may be a big part of the problem. Psychologists and sociologists indicate that abusive attacks by a husband—verbal assaults, ridicule, financial control, threats of harm to children—attack a wife’s sense of self-worth. The victim internalizes insinuations and accusations of her attacker, gradually coming to believe them. In physical abuse, the added element is terror as the spouse feels at risk of being killed, or having children injured, if she attempts to leave the abusive situation.39 In 1993, Dutton and Painter (“Emotional attachments in abusive relationships: A test of traumatic bonding theory”) developed the “traumatic bonding” theory that indicates that in some relationships there is a power imbalance combined with good–bad treatment . The abuser intermittently is nice and supportive of the spouse, providing her with feelings of love and safety. Then, usually for no apparent reason, the abuse begins. However, Dutton and Painter felt this good–bad treatment increased the emotional attachment of the abused individual.40 Most times, the victim does not show anger toward her abuser, possibly out of fear of more abuse, and frequently says, “He really loves me.” As in the civilian world, military wives may file a complaint against their abuser and then recant. One major recalled that a wife of one of his enlisted men reported that she had been beaten and raped by her husband, a staff

Trouble at Home

87

sergeant. “I had the medical people check her out, but there was no physical evidence of a beating. Still, I had her and the kids taken to a safe place and gave the sergeant an order to stay away from her. A few hours later, she changed her mind, said there’d been no rape. Next day, I saw them on the base walking hand in hand.” It was less than a month before another domestic violence incident was reported by the same woman. Unfortunately an MPO, which is a written order prohibiting the military member from contact with the alleged victim, is not always fully understood by the abuser. Many times a service member will say, “Oh, I thought it was okay if I telephoned her.” That is not the case. No contact means just that— no contact at all. Some bases may have an “abused dependent safeguard” system where the victim and other family members can be placed in billeting under an assumed name.41 If, when domestic violence occurs, the victim were required to get help, the incidents might decline. Counseling to strengthen their sense of selfworth, to show that they are not always to blame for the problem, to help them gain some sense of independence would be of benefit to the family as a whole. Meanwhile, the military has been looking into this problem at overseas locations. In 2001, the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence visited ten communities in Germany, Italy, Japan, and South Korea and provided several recommendations to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It specifically noted that providing a safe house for victims should be a priority. Because their safety may depend on it, funds should be provided for moving spouses away from service members, especially overseas where victims may feel trapped and cannot leave because of lack of funds. While the military pays for dependents to accompany the service member to and from overseas locations, this is done in connection with the member’s reassignment. If family members wish to leave before the service member’s assignment is up, they must do so at their own expense. For many military personnel, the cost of doing so would be prohibitive and certainly wouldn’t be a priority of the service. However, Christine Hansen, executive director of the Miles Foundation, felt getting dependents home and to safety was vitally important. She noted that families, or service members for that matter, rarely were returned to the United States because of domestic violence.42 Because violence intervention treatment may not be available overseas, recommendations were made that the military not send service members or command-sponsored family members overseas if they are enrolled in a stateside command-directed or court-ordered domestic violence intervention program. In addition, it was suggested that the Pentagon “establish a standard policy for enforcing warrants and orders on military bases.” This would insure that MPOs would keep the abuser away from the abused when on base.43 Lawmakers indicated that they would continue monitoring these recommendations to see if they were implemented.

88

Following the Flag

In 2003, President Bush signed the Defense Authorization Act for 2004 that requires a “full review of every death in the military known or suspected to be caused by domestic violence or child abuse.” Additionally, travel expenses can be funded for family members of domestic violence who request relocation. However, to be eligible the commanding officer of the service member has to determine that the member committed dependent abuse, that the safety of the dependent is at risk, that counseling for the dependent has been provided and that relocation is advisable.44 This can be a problem as there are times when a person in charge does not take a complaint seriously, leaving the victim with little recourse. There is also another problem. The military does not agree with the Defense Task Force’s definition of domestic violence. In addition, it does not acknowledge that there is typically a “primary aggressor” in the situation. If called to a scene, military police will likely arrest both partners in the “fight,” but statistics show that the fight is not equal. It is the woman who usually ends up worse off; the couple is not engaging in “mutual combat.”45 The Task Force members felt that the military still sees domestic violence as a “relationship problem” and, rather than arrest abusers for breaking the law, sends them to “couples counseling.” For the military the problem of abuse is viewed as a communications issue, with batterers often ordered into anger-management classes, considered by civilian experts to be largely ineffective. There is also “an assumption about mutuality in violence,” says Deborah Tucker, cochair of the task force and a civilian domestic violence expert, “making this a ‘he said/she said’ problem.”46 Elliston and Lutz also feel the military does not take appropriate action when domestic violence occurs. When domestic violence is confirmed by military authorities, case review committees staffed by officers often recommend such meager ‘punishments’ as anger management or stress reduction courses, or treatment for alcohol abuse. Even severe felony assaults often result in non-judicial sanctions such as demotion or extra work assignments.47 They feel the reluctance to prosecute offenders is due to the military wishing to bury controversial aspects of this problem, as it has the potential to harm future recruitment. In addition, Elliston and Lutz point out the cost involved in training a soldier and the loss incurred if he or she is discharged or imprisoned. According to them, “. . . Protection of women from domestic violence . . . falls even farther down the list of missions to be accomplished than it does in the civilian sector.”48 A lack of training also was seen by the task force to be another problem. The DoD does not mandate domestic violence training nor do most commanding officers, although most of the Staff NCO Academies do. For example, the Marine Corps provides training for its senior NCOs (E-8 and

Trouble at Home

89

E-9) as well as E-5 through E-7. The Corps instituted a Mentors in Violence Prevention (MVP) program designed to provide background information on gender violence. The goal of the MVP is for “male peers to realize that abusive behavior toward women is criminal and totally unacceptable.”49 Like civilian society, the military is attempting to solve the problem of domestic violence and the devastation it leaves in its aftermath. However, emphasizing the young age of military, the violent nature of their jobs, and the stress involved in combat situations as the reason for this violence is too easy. Many young civilian men do not have jobs involving a culture of violence nor are they usually in stressful and dangerous situations. Yet domestic violence permeates the American society, and so far, all of the help programs in the civilian world have been unable to stop it.

CHAPTER 6

Going in Harm’s Way Ma’am, we regret to inform you . . . Sometimes it’s just called the “knock.” —Air Force Chaplain Norris Burkes1 When the “knock” on the door comes, no one is prepared. “You feel like you’re the angel of death,” stated Marine Lieutenant Michael Jackson, recounting the feelings he had as he went to deliver news of a dead husband. “You’re about to change somebody’s life forever. . . . ”2 In the minds of every service member and spouse is the knowledge that being in the military, even when there is no war, is a dangerous job. As in any large organizations, fatal accidents can occur. In times of war, there is more fear that a loved one will not survive. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation survey, 56 percent of today’s army spouses “. . . of extendedduty soldiers are living day-to-day with the fear that their husband or wife will be injured or killed overseas.”3 Because of the fear, symptoms such as depression, insomnia, shortness of breath, and crying jags often occur—the same symptoms that individuals experience after the death of any loved one. Chaplains indicate that “it’s a common reaction among spouses during wartime deployment, and it has a name—anticipatory grief.”4 It is the anticipation that the family will hear the knock on the door. This has been true throughout history, but knowing does not make the reality easier to bear. For both Frances Courtney Grummond and Katherine Gibson, their fears became realities in 1866. On December 21, Frances, then several months pregnant, watched as her husband, Lieutenant George Grummond, set off with Captain William J. Fetterman and troopers in pursuit of Indians who

Going in Harm’s Way

91

had attacked a wood train bound for Fort Phil Kearney, Nebraska. All were killed. Grummond watched men dig graves four days before Christmas and “knew that my husband’s coffin was being made, and the sound of hammers and the grating of saws was torture.”5 (This incident would go down in history as the Fetterman Massacre.) On a hot summer night in 1876, Katherine Gibson, wife of Captain Francis Gibson, lingered in the coolness of the evening on her porch with a group of other wives. Suddenly, Horn Toad, an Indian scout, ran toward the group and gasped, “Custer killed. Whole command killed.” At first, the women, whose husbands were with General George Custer’s 7th Cavalry did not want to believe the news.6 Denial did not help for, sadly, it was true. The diary of Elizabeth Custer recounted hearing the “knell of disaster.” . . . the battle of the Little Big Horn . . . wrecked the lives of twenty-six women at Fort Lincoln, and orphaned children of officers and soldiers joined the cry to that of their bereaved mothers. From that time the life went out of the hearts of the ‘women who weep,’ and God asked them to walk on alone and in the shadow.7 Even though stricken by grief, as were the other wives, Mrs. Custer went to the home of each one to try and offer some little consolation. In the 1960s, Joan Hunt recalled living with her young son outside Fort Bragg in the Dreamland Trailer Court, waiting for her husband who was serving his third tour in Vietnam with Army Special Forces. Every day a staff car would come through Dreamland, and the women would watch out their windows to see if it stopped at the trailer of a friend. If it did, they hurried over to comfort her, because her husband wasn’t coming home again. They were all the support they had. The loneliness, the sense of isolation from the wider world, could seem unbearable.8 Hunt felt at that time that the military gave little support to families who had soldiers in the war. “You had your ID card, you could shop the commissary and go to the hospital, but other than that, while your husband was deployed, the military had no more to do with you.”9 In the case of a death, it was up to the other military wives to offer support and comfort to the bereaved. Attempting to comfort those who have lost a loved one is never easy. When the individual is younger, as is the case of most military personnel, family members seek to find a reason for the tragedy. Yet for those who go to war and for those who send soldiers off to do battle, the specter of death apparently is unimaginable. Film footage from both World War I and World War II shows ranks of men marching through cheering crowds. There is a sense of carnival about these scenes—flags waving, flowers tossed

92

Following the Flag

in the men’s path. Unfortunately, the carnival atmosphere is fleeting, and, eventually, the news of a soldier’s death will have to reach home. During most of America’s foreign wars, death was far away and impersonal. Unless the men were family members or close friends, they were just statistics. In World War II, for example, a Western Union boy delivered a telegram. Names of the dead might be printed in local newspapers and, occasionally, a photo would accompany them. To some of those left behind, the death was unreal. No funerals were held; the bodies were buried near where they died; countless rows of white markers appeared on graves in places like Guadacanal, Normandy, or the Punch Bowl in Hawaii. The small flags with a blue star, denoting someone serving the country, were replaced in windows with a small flag and the gold star of loss. In the novel, Achilles Absent, the central character fails to accept the death of her son on a distant Pacific island. For her, there is no physical evidence of his death—only the dreaded telegram. She cannot mourn because for her, he is not dead; he merely went away one day and never came back. For many mothers and wives, this was the case. Their son or husband had simply donned a soldier’s uniform and vanished. By the Vietnam War, however, television brought the losses of war home. More importantly, those killed were almost immediately returned to their loved ones for stateside internment. No longer did a military person simply vanish into the morass of battles overseas; family members could arrange for burial rites and begin the process of mourning. This does not make the death any easier, however. “I’m not ready yet. I’m not ready yet,” Lauren Fidell (not her real name) wailed collapsing when she saw the commander of her husband’s navy SEAL group and a Casualty Notification Officer. Her husband had been severely wounded south of Kabul in Afghanistan, and she was told that he was unconscious and dying. When she insisted in talking to him, she was eventually put through to the hospital where she told him about their two boys, that he would be okay, and that if he had to go, it would be okay. “I didn’t mean it,” she admitted five months after his death.10 “Um, no, I think you should come back later. No, this isn’t a good time,” a wife said to the Casualty Assistance Officer and chaplain. She put her hands over her ears to keep from hearing the words “we regret to inform you. . . . ” The officers watched for signs of fainting as the chaplain held her hand and prayed. The other officer explained how the air force would pay to have her husband’s body escorted home by a friend.11 Although the toll of dead in the military is heavily male, females also find themselves going in harm’s way. Marine corporal Ramona Valdez was only three days from her twenty-first birthday when a car bomb hit her convoy in Iraq. Valdez had joined the Marine Corps when she was seventeen—with her mother cosigning the papers—and at eighteen had fallen in love and married a fellow Marine, Corporal Armando Guzman. After the enlistment

Going in Harm’s Way

93

was completed, she had planned to return to her family in Pennsylvania.12 There is nothing the military can do to stop Fidell’s or Guzman’s pain; it can merely help their families with the immediate problems connected with any death. CASUALTY ASSISTANCE Even though casualties have been far fewer in the Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq than was the case in Vietnam, the military works hard to insure that loved ones are promptly notified and support provided. It is important to remember that being a “casualty” does not always mean someone has died; it can mean that a service member is injured, gets sick or is hospitalized. All of the services now have their own casualty assistance programs; however, by September 1, 2006, Congress expects a defense-wide policy to be in place that will provide “the same kind of benefits, help and guidance for all services, from initial notification through financial counseling.”13 Once a casualty occurs, this starts a series of activities beginning with notification of the next of kin by a Casualty Assistance Officer (CAO), although each service has acronyms for assistance personnel that vary slightly. The primary next of kin (PNOK) is the person most closely related to the casualty; for those married this is the “unremarried surviving spouse.” Other next of kin (in order) are natural and adopted children in order of seniority, parents in order of seniority, remarried surviving spouse, blood or adoptive relative who has legal custody of the casualty, brothers or sisters of legal age in order of seniority, etc.14 The contact will be personal, not over the telephone. The CAO is usually accompanied by a chaplain and a fellow service member, generally an officer. Unless the situation is extremely urgent, a call on the next of kin will not be between midnight and 6 a.m. In injury or illness of a service member, the CAO monitors the situation and keeps the next of kin updated. In death cases, the CAO coordinates all family-desired arrangements. This can include funeral support, travel, benefits such as arrears of pay, death gratuity and Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance (SGLI), household goods shipments, if needed, and personal effects collection.15 For the spouse and family of a deceased member, overwhelmed by grief, this is welcome aid. Of course, the government is very much aware that there is no cure for grief. “We can never . . . give someone back their loved one,” stated David Chu, the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness. “There is nothing we can do about the hurt, to make it go away. But we can make your circumstances reasonable, in terms of finances.”16 However, in earlier times there was little attempt to make a widow’s circumstances reasonable. Prior to 1853, a renewable half-pay for five years was given to dependents of those who died serving in the militia, as volunteers or in the navy and Marines. For the army, the only benefit was a

94

Following the Flag

nonrenewable five-year half-pay stipend and only for dependents of officers who had died as a result of combat. In 1853 Congress finally gave the benefit to enlisted men’s dependents.17 In the 1830s and 1840s, widows and their families had to find aid from whatever source was available. Some post councils could provide a small amount of temporary relief to widows and indigent orphans; money for this relief was often found by asking for contributions from officers. Because of her husband’s former service in the Revolutionary War, one women at West Point received income from the military for feeding twelve cadets in her home. In another instance, the widow of First Sergeant Biddle at Fort Hamilton was granted one ration of food, although this was not enough to feed her four children. To do so, she took any job that became available.18 Today, to help with finances, there has been a dramatic boost in the “death gratuity” provided to families of those killed in battle. Begun in 1908, the death gratuity was only a token sum to help grieving families. Through both World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, the amount remained relatively constant and was only $6,000, which was taxable, at the beginning of the war in Iraq. For Melissa Givens, who was eight months pregnant when she learned of the death of her husband, Pvt. Jesse Givens in May 2003, $6,000 would not have gone very far as she cared for the new baby and their five-year old son.19 Fortunately for Melissa, she would receive additional financial help from new congressional legislation which would significantly raise death benefits retroactive to 2001. However, Melissa was not thinking about money or long-term goals when the news of Jesse’s death was delivered. “All I wanted was my husband back.”20 In 2005, with the passage of an emergency appropriations bill, the current gratuity ($12,420) paid within days of an active duty death was raised to $100,000 with the ceiling on Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) for those in the war zone raised from $250,000 to $400,000. This basically means that for each service member killed in the line of duty, the government will pay up to $500,000 to survivors with the payments retroactive to October 7, 2001. These payments also include soldiers who died supporting war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq.21 For those in a war zone, the first $150,000 of SGLI coverage is free; those already enrolled in SGLI but not in a war zone will pay a higher monthly premium. (It is interesting to note that the average amount paid to families of victims in the terrorist attacks of 9/11is $1.8 million.22 ) The Veterans’ Administration (VA) helps support military widows with lifetime medical benefits, a monthly widow’s pension of $967, plus $241 for each dependent child up to age 18, combined with payment from Social Security. The VA will also provide up to $35,460 in educational assistance and, since 2003, has offered grief counseling at 206 medical centers

Going in Harm’s Way

95

throughout the nation.23 A national nonprofit organization, Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), also provides grief counseling for survivors. Although the government has upgraded casualty assistance over the years, Congress is attempting to improve even more the support provided to families of those who die or are injured. Beginning no later than July 1, 2006, as part of the Defense Authorization Act, service members will be required to designate a specific person to be responsible for their funeral arrangements if they die in the military. This action came about due to problems arising between divorced parents, “with the military deferring to the older parents, and among spouses and parents, with the military deferring to the spouse.”24 This should eliminate some of the family disputes which have risen following deaths of some service members in Iraq. Lawmakers also wish to have military aircraft instead of commercial aircraft transport dead service personnel to the U.S. This recommendation is the result of news coverage of a Marine killed in Iraq being sent down a conveyor belt of a commercial jet with the luggage of passengers. If military transport is not always possible, lawmakers wish to have a military honor guard meet commercial aircraft and “. . . remove coffins from cargo holds only if they are covered with an American flag and military honors are rendered.”25 While changes are being made that may be of benefit or comfort to family members, the military realizes that they do not compensate for the loss of a loved one. The death means that the spouse and children must go on alone. Depending on the branch of the service, the need for quarters, and the unit commander, the military asks survivors to move out of base housing within six months.26 Wives on the frontier were often expected to leave forts within a few weeks of a husband’s death, although this was not a hard and fast rule. One wife who was pregnant in 2003, at the time of her husband’s death in Iraq, stayed in base quarters three months longer than the military requirement to vacate. Still having quarters after losing a loved one solves only a small problems. Coping with the realization that the person is not coming home is the tough part for the family.

COPING WITH THE LOSS Once the military spouse is deceased, those survivors who are civilian wives and children are out-processed and no longer remain part of the military. Unless a spouse and children can return to the support of close family members, they may feel alienated. They become what some say are “secondary casualties.” No longer do they have the highly structured environment of the military way of life.

96

Following the Flag

This leaves a void in the family’s life and according to several war widows, “grief and trauma loom large.” TAPS aids widows by counseling “four tasks” of mourning. These are: accept the reality of the loss; work through the grief; adjust to the environment in which the deceased is missing; form a new identity. While these tasks make sense, they are difficult to live by on a daily basis. As one widow explained, “I had made Don my world. . . . When he was gone, my world was gone.”27 For some widows, accepting the loss and moving ahead is almost impossible, and this has been true throughout military history. The widow of Captain Benjamin H. Arthur remained in a Cincinnati hotel, where each morning she brushed her husband’s uniform and made sure his hat and equipment were ready and waiting for his use.28 One military spouse, who was born while her father was in Vietnam, mentioned that her mother had never fully recovered from her husband’s death, never remarried. As far as I can remember, she never had any kind of interest in another man. She never dated. She always did things alone or occasionally with other women. She had a large photo of my dad in her bedroom, and I can remember as a little kid hearing her talk to that picture. I would ask her about my father, but she always looked sad—still does when I mention him—so I just finally stopped asking any questions. Deborah May, the widow of Marine Staff Sergeant Donald May, still has her late husband’s voice on her answering machine. She recalled that her mother-in-law memorialized Don’s father, a former marine. This was the case even though the couple had been divorced. “His uniforms are hanging in her closet,” May stated. “Now I’m her.”29 Certainly the steps the military has taken to help grieving spouses is a big help, but the its difficult to know what to do after the funeral services are over and one is alone. Making no major decisions for possibly a year is sound advice as immediate grief symptoms may cloud the decision process. Those young widows (widowers) with children to rear may find that putting an emphasis on parenting tasks will help take the mind off of what some say is overwhelming feelings of loneliness. Hobbies, volunteer work, or employment can occupy minds otherwise filled with memories of happier times. Of course, no amount of grief counseling, work, or friends and family support will be totally effective in coping with the loss. Grief is a personal and private process that all human beings experience once or several times in their life, and they must deal with it in their own way. Some collapse into depression; some attempt to put on a stoic demeanor. For Sarah Wallace, the widow of Army Pfc. Jeffrey Wallace, being stoic may have been somewhat of a problem. The couple had been friends for several years and finally were married during a two-week leave from his

Going in Harm’s Way

97

base at Fort Stewart, Georgia. “By the time he returned to base, Sarah was pregnant. Their daughter, Ava Grace, was born four months after his death.”30 Sarah and Jeffrey hardly had time to get to know each other. “He did a great job balancing a pretty intense Marine Corps career with also being a great husband and father,” stated Dawn Rowe, speaking of her husband Captain Alan Rowe, who was killed in Iraq in 2004. “He worked extremely hard to balance it.” The couple had married in 1993, and she and their two children accompanied him to various assignments. Rowe had served in the Persian Gulf War, had completed a four-month tour in Iraq and was deployed there a second time. “I never worried like some wives,” Dawn said, “in part because of faith and because he was so well trained. It just wouldn’t be an issue. . . . He died doing what he loved.”31 Like Rowe, Leah Freeman, widow of staff Sergeant Brian Freeman, also stated, “It’s easier for me knowing that Brian died doing what he loved. She recalled at a memorial service for the fallen soldier that her husband also loved the camaraderie of the army. Leah indicated that there was a fellowship among the men he knew that had proven itself since his death. “I get calls from Brian’s soldiers and friends every day. They’ve become my family, too.”32 It is this family, the other individuals in the armed forces who can relate to Leah’s situation, that helps support all of those in the United States military. Jennifer Auchman, widow of Air Force Master Sergeant Steven Auchman killed in Iraq in 2005, stated at a TAPS gathering in Virginia that she felt “kind of frozen” as she tried to cope with her husband’s death. I’m only 61/2 months out [from learning about his death]. This is going to take a while to sink in. I’ve gotten some more tools to cope with what’s happening and what’s going to happen. It [TAPS] has helped because I met people farther along than I am.33 Originally, Auchman had taken her two teenage sons to a grief group in Olympia, Washington, hoping this would help them be able to deal better with their father’s death. Unfortunately, she found that the boys had difficulty relating to other kids in the group whose parents’ deaths were not connected with the military.34 Many times those not directly involved with the loss are uncomfortable dealing with grieving families. Their attitude often tends to be, “Get over it.” However, Heidi Kinner, wife of a marine, understands the risks and worries (and dealing with death) that are a part of marriage to military personnel. “You learn to cope with it [the risk], but it’s always there,” Kinner said, explaining what is expected of military wives and what they have to do. You hope the knock on the door isn’t . . . telling you that your husband has been killed. You just get on with it and make sure everything is

98

Following the Flag

done. The military wives, that’s their service to the country—keeping families together, taking care of the children, managing finances and keeping daily lives running. Kinner is right. That’s what military spouses have always done—from Revolutionary War times to the present. That is expected of them, and that is what they will continue to do. Some refer to this attitude that results from being a military spouse as “the sisterhood.”

EPILOGUE Although Marriage and the Military has dwelled on the problems spouses face as a part of the military subculture and which at times may seem unbearable, they are very much like the problems faced in civilian life. Most of the spouses (male or female) that the author interviewed were, if not overjoyed, at least content with their lifestyle. “Oh, we gripe a lot,” one master sergeant’s wife said, “but overall I think we like what our husband’s are doing. We like the military way of life.” Another enlisted wife agreed. “I hate it when he’s gone and tell him I wish he would get out of the Army. But when it comes right down to it, I’m okay with the way we live.” Many of the wives mentioned the camaraderie that exists between military spouses. Since they are away from close family most of their lives, they come to depend on the friendships and support of the women they meet. Many still belong to the military clubs, especially for those who are with spouses at overseas locations. Several spouses stated that knowing their husbands or wives had stability in their jobs gave them a sense of security. All of the spouses were aware of the retirements benefits that will come from a career in the armed forces—a pension, medical care, continued use of base facilities, space available travel on military transports, etc. Meredith Leyva emphasizes the wonderful opportunities for children and spouses offered by a military lifestyle, which to her outweigh the hardships. “This includes the chance to experience other cultures first hand. Many military children learn to speak different languages, and living overseas can give them a broader worldview. . . . Children with a better understanding of the world make better American citizens.”1

100

Epilogue

Another woman stated that as a military wife, alone a good deal of the time, that she had “grown up” and realized that she could cope with all sorts of problems. “There’s so much going on all the time,” she said. “Each day seems to be an adventure.” Certainly, following the flag is an adventure for any family. Learning to adapt to the many changes that occur in any military career will help it adapt to the challenges of civilian life. In addition, as Meredith Leyva states, there is a sense that military families are doing something monumentally important for the world which “. . . makes us realize what’s important in life and what isn’t important in life.”2

GLOSSARY AFSC Air Force Specialty Code: Service members military job Alert: Time during which personnel stand by in readiness for action Allotment: Portion of military pay automatically sent to another person/institution ANG: Air National Guard AVF: All Volunteer Force AWOL: Absent without leave BAH: Basic allowance for housing or housing expenses BAS: Basic allowance for subsistance CAO: Casualty Assistance Officer CO: Commanding Officer COLA: Cost-of-living allowance to help with expenses at overseas stations Commissary: On-base grocery store Concurrent travel: Service personnel and family travel together to new duty post CONUS: Continental United States COW: Commanding Officer’s wife DDESS: Department of Defense Elementary and Secondary Schools DEERS: Defense Eligibility Enrollment Reporting System for those eligible to use military healthcare facilities or Tricare Dependent: Person who receives all or some financial support from service member

102

Glossary

DITY move: (do-it-yourself move) DLA: Dislocation allowance: Money to help pay moving expenses DoDDS: Department of Defense Dependents’ Schools DoDEA: Department of Defense Education Activity Exchange (PX/AAFES/NAVRESSO/MCX): On-base department store FRG: Family Readiness Group FSSA: Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance GI Bill: Program which helped to pay college tuition Household goods: Personal property shipped to new duty station IRR Individual Ready Reserve: Reservists not in the selected reserve but liable for mobilization Joint Chiefs of Staff: Military advisory group to the president Leave: Vacation time, accrued at the rate of 2 1/2 calendar days for each month of active duty LES: Leave and earnings statement: Monthly statement of service member’s earnings, deductions, leave balance, etc MARS: Military Affiliate Radio stations MIA: Missing in Action Military treatment facility: Military hospital or clinic MP: Military police MPO: Military Protective Order MVP: Mentors in Violence Prevention MWR: Department that manages leisure activities to ensure morale, well-being and recreation NAEP: National Assessment of Educational Progress NCO: Noncommissioned officer NMFA: National Military Family Association Noncurrent travel: Service member and family do not travel together O Club: Officers’ Club (The enlisted have their own club, although many bases are integrating both clubs into one.) OCS: Officer’s Candidate School Ombudsman: A family support group leader (usually a wife) for a command PCS: Permanent change of station

Glossary

103

PNOK: Primary next of kin POA: Power of attorney POW: Prisoners of war PSRC: Presidental Selected Reserve Call-Up PX: Post Exchange Quarters: On-base government housing R&R: Rest and rehabilitation Rank: The title and level at which service personnel have been promoted in the military hierarchy. (The military is not a classless society; it is closer to a caste system.) Ready Reserve: Liable for duty in wartime or national emergency. Includes selected reserve and individual ready reserve ROTC: Reserve Officers’ Training Corps SAO Survival assistance officer: Army and Air Force term for personnel assigned to aid families in case of a service member’s death SBP: Survivor Benefit Plan Selected reserve: Part of ready reserve which provides trained units for the “total force’ concept SGLI: Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance: Up to $250,000 of coverage that can be purchased by active duty personnel SOC: Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges SP Security police. Air Force term for military police Sponsor: The active duty service member. (Can also mean someone designated to help newcomers become familiar with new duty station.) TAPS: Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors TC: Transitional Compensation program TDY/TAD Temporary duty/Temporary Assigned Duty: Time spent away from regular duty station TLA/TLE Temporary Lodging Allowance/Expense: Helps pay moving expenses when making a move TLF: Temporary Lodging Facility Tricare: Medical healthcare program for military families UCMJ Uniform Code of Military Justice: Federal laws that define actions considered to be crimes in the military

104

Glossary

Unaccompanied tour: Service member not allowed to have family accompany him/her to new assignment USERRA: Uniformed Services Employment and Rights Act VA: Veterans’ Administration VEAP Veterans Educational Assistance Program: To help service personnel pay for college tuition VHA Variable housing allowance: Helps offset cost of housing in high-cost areas for personnel not living in quarters WIC: Women, Infants & Children. Provides nutrition education and supplemental foods for qualifying women, infants and children under five years of age

NOTES CHAPTER ONE: THE ENDURING FAMILY 1. Page Smith, A New Age Now Begins, Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976, p. 1811; Linda Grant DePauw, Founding Mothers: Women of America in the Revolutionary Era. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1975, p. 182. 2. George F. Scheer and Hugh F. Rankin, Rebels and Redcoats. New York: The World Publishing Company, 1957, pp. 99 and 103. 3. John R. Elting, Col. USA Ret., American Army Life. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1982, p. 49. 4. Scheer and Rankin, Rebels and Redcoats, p. 310. 5. Ibid., p. 233. 6. James Ripley Jacobs, The Beginning of the U.S. Army, 1783–1812. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1947, p. 14. 7. Edward M. Coffman, The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784–1898. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 42. 8. Ibid., pp. 42–43. 9. Elting, American Army Life, p. 87. 10. Ibid., pp. 117–118. 11. Ibid. 12. John Y. Simon, ed., The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, Vol. 8, April 1–July 6, 1863. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1979, p. 332. 13. Elting, American Army Life, p. 118. 14. Ray Brandes, Frontier Military Posts of Arizona. Globe, AZ: Dale Stuart King Publisher, 1960, pp. xiii, 19. 15. Ibid., p. 20. 16. Shirley Anne Leckie, ed., The Colonel’s Lady on the Western Frontier: The Correspondence of Alice Kirk Grierson. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1989, pp. 12–193.

106

Notes

17. Robert C. and Eleanor R. Carriker, eds., An Army Wife on the Frontier: The Memoirs of Alice Blackwood Baldwin 1867–1877. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Library, 1975, p. 31. 18. Martha Summerhayes, Vanished Arizona: Recollections of the Army Life of a New England Woman (Introduction by Dan L. Thrapp). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1979, pp. 12–13. 19. Martha Fleishman and Carol Joy Justice, Bugs to Blizzards or An Army Wife at Fort D.A. Russell. Cheyenne, WY: Wigwam Publishing Company, 1974, p. 72. 20. W. S. Nye, Carbine and Lance: The Story of Old Fort Sill. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1937, pp. 360–361. 21. Roger T. Grange, Jr., Fort Robinson: Outpost on the Plains. Reprint from Nebraska History, 39(3), September 1958, p. 217. 22. Betty Sowers Alt and Bonnie Domrose Stone, Campfollowing: A History of the Military Wife. New York: Praeger, pp. 65–66. 23. Summerhayes, p. 10; A Navy Lieutenant Commander recalled that he and his family were “quite anxious” when they were living in Hawaii in what were quarters for a higher rank. “When a Captain’s family was assigned, we thought we might have to move to new quarters, as his rank entitled him to our house. But he didn’t push the issue, and we were permitted to retain our place.” 24. Ibid., p. 237. 25. Shirley Anne Leckie, ed., The Colonel’s Lady on the Western Frontier: The Correspondence of Alice Kirk Grierson. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1989, p. 165. 26. Oliver Knight, Life and Manners in the Frontier Army. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1975, p. 6.; Colonel R. Ernest DuPuy, “Pass in Review,” The Army Combat Forces Journal, October 1954, 31. 27. Merrill J. Mattes, Indians, Infants and Infantry: Andrew and Elizabeth Burt on the Frontier. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1960, pp. 106–108. 28. Anne Bruner Eales, Army Wives on the American Frontier: Living by the Bugles. Boulder, CO: Johnson Books, 1996, p. 99. 29. Ibid., pp. 98–99. 30. Elizabeth Bacon Custer, Following the Guidon. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966, p. 227. 31. Coffman, The Old Army, p. 315. 32. Grange, Fort Robinson, pp. 217–218. 33. Sandra Myers, ed., Cavalry Wife: The Diary of Eveline M. Alexander. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 1977, p. 34. 34. Mrs. Orsemus Boyd, Cavalry Life in Tent and Field. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1982, p. 199. 35. Frances M. A. Roe, Army Letters from an Officer’s Wife. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1981, pp. 25–27. (Originally published, New York: D. Appleton, 1909.) 36. Patricia Y. Stallard, Glittering Misery. San Rafael, CA: Presidio Press, 1978, p. 29. 37. Elizabeth Bacon Custer, Boots and Saddles. New York: Harper & Bros., 1885, p. 103. 38. Elting, American Army Life, p. 164.

Notes

107

39. Ibid., p. 233. 40. I. B. Holley, Jr., General John M. Palmer: Citizen Soldiers and the Army of a Democracy. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982, pp. 99–100; Alt and Stone, Campfollowing, p. 66. 41. Alt and Stone, Campfollowing, p. 68. 42. Ibid., pp. 64–74; DuPuy, The Army Combat Forces Journal, p. 37. 43. DuPuy, The Army Combat Forces Journal, p. 32. 44. Ibid., p. 27. 45. Robert K. Griffith, Men Wanted for the U.S. Army. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982, p. 203. 46. “Army Housing A ‘National Disgrace,’” The Literary Digest, 95, November 5, 1927, 10. 47. Ibid., p. 11. 48. Griffith, Men Wanted for the U.S. Army. 49. James M. Morris, America’s Armed Forces: A History. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1991, p. 139. 50. George Forty, US Army Handbook 1939–1945. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., by arrangement with Sutton Publishing, Ltd., 1995, pp. 1–2. 51. Ibid., pp. 1–5; Morris, America’s Armed Forces, p. 298. 52. “The Missus Gets $50—Regardless,” Yank, 1(6), July 22, 1942, 3. 53. “Gypsy Wives—Army Style,” The New York Times Magazine, December 27, 1942, 19. 54. Elting, American Army Life, p. 256. 55. Margie Wood, “Nightly Kiss Secret to 70-Year Marriage,” The Pueblo Chieftain, December 31, 2005, 1–2A. 56. Interview with Lucille Giordano Ritzus, November 24, 2005. 57. Florence Ptacek, “We’re in the Army Now,” The Parents’ Magazine, 95, April 1943, 21 and 71. 58. Ibid., pp. 70–71. 59. Nancy L. Goldman and David R. Segal, eds., The Social Psychology of Military Service, Vol. VI. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1976, p. 124. 60. Sar A. Levitan and Karen Cleary Alderman, Warriors at Work: The Volunteer Armed Forces, Vol. 58. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1977, p. 55. 61. Interview with Julia Litvack Vean, December 2005. 62. Alt and Stone, Campfollowing, p. 112. 63. Elting, American Army Life, p. 24. 64. Interview with Kiku and Cecil R. Sowers, December 2005. 65. Alt and Stone, Campfollowing, pp. 118–122. 66. William Bowman, Roger Little, and G. Thomas Sicilia, The All-Volunteer Force After a Decade. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Grassey’s, 1986, p. 34. 67. Interview with Sharon Parkis, January 23, 2006. 68. Gordon Lubold, “Study: Most Recruits Are from Middle Class,” Army Times, December 5, 2005, 22. 69. Ibid. 70. Caspar W. Weinberger, “The All-Volunteer Force in the 1980s: DoD Perspective”; Lawrence J. Korb, “Military Manpower Training and Achievements in the 1980s,” in The All-Volunteer Force After a Decade, William Bowman, Roger

108

Notes

Little, and G. Thomas Sicilia, eds. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s, 1986, pp. 1–6. 71. Robert Burns, “Study: Army Stretched to the Breaking Point,” Pueblo Chieftain, January 25, 2006, 3A (from an Associated Press article). 72. Sar A. Levitan and Karen Cleary Alderman, Warriors at Work. 73. Charles C. Moskos, John Allen Williams, David R. Segal, eds., The Postmodern Military: Armed Forces After the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 3. 74. Marilyn Pribus, “Help at Home,” Military Officer, August 2003, 58. 75. “Military Reserves Federal Call Up Authority,” U.S. Military Newsletter, http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/guardandreserve/a/reservecallup.htm (accessed October 19, 2005). 76. Vince Crawley and Jon Kamman, “Recruitment, Retention Hit Goals; Will It Last?” Air Force Times, November 17, 2003, 26. 77. “The Needs of Military Families: How Are States and the Pentagon Responding, Especially for Guard and Reservists?” Joint hearing before the Subcommittee on Children and Families of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions United States Senate, Y 4.L 11/4:S.HRG. 108–820, July 21, 2004, p. 2. 78. Vince Crowley, “Pushed Too Far? Declining Reserve Morale Spurs Retention Worries,” Air Force Times, September 13, 2004, 10. 79. “Army Reserve, Mobilization, Activation, Deployment,” http://www.goarmy. com/reserve/nps/mobilization activation.jsp (accessed October 19, 2005). 80. Col. J. Bruce Laubach, USAF-Ret, Military Officer, June 2004, 14. 81. Interview with Major Sue A., December 2005. CHAPTER TWO: ON THE ROAD AGAIN 1. Dee Brown, The Gentle Tamers: Women of the Old Wild West. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1986, p. 66. 2. Edward M. Coffman, The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784–1898. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1986, p. 292. 3. “History of Housing,” http://www.nsa.naples.navy.mil/housing/welcome/ history.htm (accessed October 24, 2005). 4. Ibid. 5. Robert K. Griffith, Jr., Men Wanted for the U. S. Army. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982, p. 75. 6. “Capehart Wherry Era Military Housing,” Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), Updated August 22, 2005, http://www.achp.gov/armycapehartwherry.html (accessed October 24, 2005). 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid. 9. Paul Taibi, “Outsourcing & Privatization of Defense Infrastructure,” BENS Special Report, March 1997, http://www.bens.org/pubs 0397.html, 23 (accessed October 24, 2005); “Housing Revitalization Oversight,” Statement by Paul W. Johnson, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army Installations and Housing, before the Subcommittee on Military Installations & Facilities, March 7, 1996, http://www.acq.osd.mil/housing/ct97 johnson.htm (accessed October 24, 2005). 10. Interview with Jim Lever, December 2005.

Notes

109

11. Karen Jowers, “Lawmakers Limit Family Housing Funds,” The Army Times, December 5, 2005, 34. 12. Laura M. Colarusso, “Most Family Housing to Be Fixed By 2012,” Air Force Times, March 20, 2006, 10. 13. 2006 Basic Allowance for Housing, with dependents, Air Force Times, January 2, 2006, 38–41. 14. Interview with Maureen Swain, November 23, 2005. 15. Ibid., p. 125. 16. Interview with Lt. Ted Perry, January 13, 2006. 17. Rick Maze and Vincent Crawley, “Your Own Home,” Air Force Times, September 19, 2005, 14–16. 18. Ibid., 18, 19. Latayne C. Scott, “Long-Distance Landlord,” Military Officer, November 2005, 60–61. 20. Karen Jowers, “Incentives Sweeten Deals as Privatized Housing Hits the Market,” Air Force Times, September 5, 2005, 18. 21. Karen Jowers, “Child Care Could Come to Private Housing Projects,” Air Force Times, March 14, 2005, 21. 22. “GMH Makes Playground Handicapped Accessible,” The Patriot, 1(3), August 2005, 1. 23. Ibid. 24. Karen Jowers, “In Privatized Housing, the Meter’s Running,” Air Force Times, November 15, 2004, 22; “Utility Mock Billing to Begin,” The Patriot, 1(1), May 2005, 1. 25. Shirley Anne Leckie, ed., The Colonel’s Lady on the Western Frontier: The Correspondence of Alice Kirk Grierson. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1989, p. 24. 26. William Manchester, American Caesar, Douglas MacArthur 1880–1964. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1978, pp. 42–43. 27. Florence W. Kaslow and Richard I. Ridenour, The Military Family. New York: The Guilford Press, 1984, p. 60. 28. Ibid., p. 63. 29. Mary Edwards Wertsch, Military Brats: Legacies of Childhood Inside the Fortress. New York: Harmony Books, 1991, p. 255. 30. Mady Wechsler Segal, “The Military and the Family as Greedy Institutions,” in The Military: More Than Just a Job? Charles C. Moskos and Frank R. Wood, eds. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s, 1988, p. 84. 31. Ibid., p. 256. 32. Interview with Gina Higgs, July 2004. 33. Karen Jowers, “Initiative Aims to Ease Moves to New Schools,” The Air Force Times, October 17, 2005, 27. 34. Karen Jowers, “Who Should Run Base Schools?” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005, 14. 35. Ibid., pp. 14–15. 36. Karen Jowers, “Robins School Goes Civilian; Scores Fall,” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005. 37. “DoD Mustn’t Fail Schools,” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005, 52. 38. Ibid., p. 14.

110

Notes

39. Karen Jowers, “Scholarship Praised,” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005, 15–16. 40. Ellen R. Delisio, “Department of Defense Schools: Their Secret Weapons for Success,” Education World, http://www.education-world.com/a issues/issues349. shtml (accessed October 24, 2005). 41. Ibid. 42. Karen Jowers, “Scholarship Praised,” p. 15. 43. Delisio, Ibid.; Beatrice L. Bridglall and Edmund W. Gordon, “Raising Minority Academic Achievement: The Department of Defense Model,” ERIC Digest, October 2003, http://www.ericdigests.org/2004–2/minority.html (accessed October 24, 2005). 44. Christopher J. Klicka, “Home Schoolers Gain Equal Access to Department of Defense Schools,” Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) Special Report, http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/00000258.asp (accessed October 24, 2005). 45. Ibid. 46. “DoDEA Special Education,” http://www.dodea.edu/instruction/curriculum/ special ed/ (accessed October 24, 2005). 47. Interview with Frankeeta D. Brown and Howard Clarke, December 2005. 48. Zeb B. Bradford, Jr., and Frederic J. Brown, The United States Army in Transition. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1973, p. 241. CHAPTER THREE: ANOTHER RESUME 1. Nancy Shea, The Army Wife, New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1966, pp. 7–8. 2. Ibid., p. 141. 3. Ibid., pp. 86–87. 4. “Spouse Issues: Blue Ribbon Panel Report,” March 1988, 8. This 21-page pamphlet (under the auspices of Larry D. Welch, General USAF, Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force and E. C. Aldridge, Jr., Secretary of the Air Force) was provided to Air Force personnel and listed the panel’s charter, its members, and other consultants. 5. Laurie Weinstein and Helen Mederer, “Blue Navy Blues: Submarine Officers and the Two-Person Career,” in Wives & Warriors: Women and the Military in the United States and Canada, Laurie Weinstein and Christie C. White, eds. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, 1997, p. 9. 6. Blue Ribbon Panel, p. 11. 7. Weinstein and Mederer, Wives & Warriors, p. 9. 8. Department of the Air Force, Memorandum for ALMAJCOM-SOA/CC, March 11, 1988. 9. Ibid. 10. Mady Wechsler Segal, “The Military and the Family as Greedy Institutions,” in The Military: More Than Just a Job? Charles C. Moskos and Frank R. Wood, eds. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s, 1988, p. 82. 11. Interview with Jim Lever, December 2005. 12. Michele McCormick, “The 90s Military Spouse,” Married to the Military: A Supplement to Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times, May 17, 1993, 4. 13. Kathie Hightower and Holly Scherer, “Be a Pro at Networking Jobs,” Air Force Times, August 16, 2004, 31.

Notes

111

14. “Working Around the Military: Challenges of Military Spouse Employment,” Rand National Defense Research Institute, 2004, http://www.rand.org/publications/ RB/RB9056 (accessed March 15, 2005). 15. Ibid. 16. Karen Jowers, “Study: Military Spouses Fare Poorly in Job Market,” Air Force Times, September 4, 2000, 27. 17. “Working Around the Military: Challenges of Military Spouse Employment,” Rand National Defense Research Institute, http://www.rand.org/publications/ RB/RB9056/ (accessed March 15, 2005). 18. Meredith Leyva, Married to the Military: A Survival Guide for Military Wives, Girlfriends, and Women in Uniform. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003, p. 58. 19. Lydia Sloan Cline, Today’s Military Wife, 5th ed. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2003, p. 97. 20. Karen Jowers, “Spouses Seek Unemployment Compensation,” Air Force Times, September 1, 2003, 31. 21. Ibid. 22. Karen Jowers, “Unemployment Pay Eyed for Partners on the Move,” Air Force Times, January 31, 2005, 22. 23. Ibid. 24. Interview with an Air Force spouse, Washington, D.C., 2004. 25. National Military Family Association (NMFA), http://www.nmfa.org/site/ PageServer?pagename=spouseeducation (accessed November 4, 2005). 26. Tranette Ledford, “Aid Options Can Help Spouses Earn Degree, Avoid Debt,” Air Force Times Supplement, December 10, 2001, R12. 27. “Spouse Education: What Is Available?” National Military Family Association, Inc., http://www.nmfa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=spouseeducation (accessed November 4, 2005). 28. Margaret C. Harrell, Invisible Women: Junior Enlisted Army Wives. Santa Monica, CA: Rand, 2000, p. 51. 29. Ibid., pp. 21–27. 30. Ibid., p. 78. 31. Vince Crawley, “Despite Replacement Program, Food Stamps Remain Popular,” Air Force Times, November 1, 2004, 20. 32. “When Duty Calls, Some Military Families Find Financial Hardship,” The Olympian, September 14, 2003, http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/ 200330914/frontpage/99897.shtml (accessed January 5, 2005). 33. Ibid. 34. Karen M. Pavlicin, Surviving Deployment: A guide for military families. Saint Paul, MN: Elva Resa Publishing, 2003, p. 105. 35. All material in this chapter from an interview with Jim Lever, December 15, 2005. 36. Interview with Howard Clarke and his wife, E-3 Frankeeta D. Brown, December 20, 2005. 37. Ibid. 38. Interview with Jon M., 15-year pilot for a U.S. civilian airline, December 2005. 39. Interview with recently separated Army officer, September 2004. 40. Interview with a civilian husband, August 2004.

112

Notes

41. Victoria Sherrow, Women and the Military: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC- CLIO, p. 187. 42. Julie Rasicot, “To Grandma’s House We Go,” Married to the Military: A Supplement to Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times, May 18, 1998, 14. 43. Ibid., pp. 14–15. 44. Interview with Nancy Montville, December 2005. 45. Interview with Sharon Parkis, January 2006. 46. Karen Jowers, “Program Helps Military Spouses Find Teaching Jobs,” Air Force Times, August 16, 2004, 22.; Tranette Ledford, “Married to the Military— and a Career, Too,” Military Times, February 14, 2005, 8. 47. Harry R. Weber, “Home Depot Offers Work to Military Spouses,” The Pueblo Chieftain, September 21, 2004, 7B (from an Associated Press article). 48. Ibid. 49. Karen Jowers, “Keeping Spouses on Career Track,” Air Force Times, November 8, 2004, 24. (A January 2005 article cites an Adecco spokesman who states that the company has placed more than 5,900 spouses since 2002.); Lydia Sloan Cline, Today’s Military Wife, 5th ed. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2003, p. 99. 50. Ibid. 51. Karen Jowers, “Spouses seeking jobs find brighter outlook,” Air Force Times, January 31, 2005. 52. Ibid. 53. Interview with Judith Wooley, December 15, 2005. 54. Karen Jowers, “Child Care Goes Extra Mile for Troops’ Families: Options Ease Burden When Military Spouse Is Deployed,” Air Force Times, June 28, 2004, 18. 55. Nick Bonham, “Army Family Savors Military Appreciation Day,” The Pueblo Chieftain, August 29, 2005, 5A. 56. Karen Jowers, “Taking Care of Kids,” Air Force Times, April 18, 2005, 30. 57. Ibid. 58. Karen Jowers, “Child Care Could Come to Private Housing Projects,” Air Force Times, March 14, 2005. 59. Tranette Ledford, “Mom-Based Business Work for Military Spouses,” Air Force Times, July 9, 2001, R5. 60. Karen Jowers, “Telework Project Gives It Another Go: Program Would Link Employers with Spouses Working at Home,” Air Force Times, January 31, 2005, 23. 61. “Spouses Get a Helping Hand,” Military Officer, November 2005, 21. 62. Tranette Ledford, “Married to the Military” p. 8. 63. Ibid. 64. Karen Jowers, “Spouses Question Home-Business Curbs,” Air Force Times, September 1, 1997, 17. 65. Ibid.

CHAPTER FOUR: BEING ALONE 1. “A Marine’s Toughest Mission,” Parade Magazine, January 19, 2003, 6. 2. John Diedrich, “Alone a little longer,” The Gazette, September 1, 2003, A1–2.

Notes

113

3. Military Families Survey, The Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/ Harvard University, March 2004, p. 24. 4. Meredith Leyva, Married to the Military: A Survival Guide for Military Wives, Girlfriends, and Women in Uniform. New York: A Fireside Book published by Simon & Schuster, 2003, p. 156. 5. Christian Hill, “When Duty Calls, Some Military Families Find Financial Hardship,” The [Washington] Olympian, September 14, 2003, http://www.theolympian. com/home/news/20030914/frontpage/99897.shtml (accessed January 5, 2005). 6. Drew E. Altman and Robert J. Blendon, “Perpetual War Hits Military Families Hard,” Boston Globe Op-Ed, June 13, 2004, http://www.kff.org/newsroom/ bostonglobe061304oped.cfm (accessed January 12, 2006). 7. Brenda Pace and Carol McGlothlin, Medals Above My Heart. Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 2004, pp. 73–74. 8. “Young Couple Face the First Deployment, Air Force Times, October 27, 1997, 14. 9. Interview with Stephanie Perry, January 13, 2006. 10. Interview with Major Sue A., December 2005. 11. Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Children and Families of the Committee in Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, July 21, 2004, 16; Suzanne Wood and Jacquelyn Scarville, “Waiting Wives: Separation and Reunion Among Army Wives,” Armed Forces and Society, Winter 95, 21(2), http://web12.epnet.com/citation.asp?tb= 1& ua=bt+military++psychology+shn+1+db+aphj (accessed March 22, 2005). 12. Military Families Survey, p. 34. 13. Deborah Funk, “While Mom’s Away, Children Worry,” Air Force Times, November 29, 1999. 14. Ibid. 15. Deborah Funk, “Home, Field Duties Tug Deployed Moms,” Air Force Times, October 3, 2005, 20. 16. Ibid. 17. Soraya S. Nelson, “Gulf Reservists Air Complaints,” Air Force Times, July 29, 1991, 17. 18. Michele L. Kelley, et al., “Navy Mothers Experiencing and Not Experiencing Deployment: Reasons for Staying In or Leaving the Military,” in Military Psychology, 13(1), January 2001, http://web12.epnet.com/citation.asp?tb=1& ua= bo+B%5FSU+1+db+aphjnh+do+B% (accessed March 22, 2005). 19. “Time Off for Goodbyes,” Army Times, December 5, 2005, 61. 20. Karen Houppert, Home Fires Burning. New York: Ballantine Books, 2005, pp. 157–158. 21. Marilyn Pribus, “Help at Home,” Military Officer, August 2003, 57. 22. Ibid., pp. 58–59. 23. Emily Fitzgerald McCorkle, An Army Doctor’s Wife on the Frontier, Abe Lauf, ed. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1962, pp. 301–302. 24. Robert M. Utley, ed., Life in Custer’s Cavalry. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1977, p. 238. 25. Shirley Anne Leckie, ed., The Colonel’s Lady on the Western Frontier: The Correspondence of Alice Kirk Grierson. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1989, pp. 30–39.

114

Notes

26. Edward M. Coffman, The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784–1898. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 298. 27. Interview with Maribeth Coultrip, December 2005. 28. Interview with Lindsey Mestas, January 2006. 29. Interview with Maureen Swain, November 2005. 30. Interview with Jane Osborne, January 3, 2006. 31. Ibid. 32. Latayne C. Scott, “Home Alone,” Military Officer, August 2005, pp. 54–55. 33. Interview with Stacey Schoch, October 2005. 34. Ibid. 35. John Diedrich, “Alone a little longer,” The Gazette, September 1, 2003, 1A. 36. Altman and Blendon, “Perpetual War Hits Military Families Hard,” June 13, 2004. 37. Ibid. 38. Leyva, Married to the Military, p. 159. 39. Military Families Survey, p. 18. 40. Kristin Henderson, “The Siege,” The Washington Post, October 10, 2004, http://www.truthout.org/docs 04/101104V.shtml(accessed January 12, 2006). 41. Captain Gene Thomas Gomulka, “Marriage in the Military: Remaining ‘Semper Fi’ in Marriage,” Military.com, http://www.military.com/NewContent/o,13190, Gomulka 040505,00.html (accessed January 7, 2006). 42. Mona Charen, “Making the Military More Like Us, Jewish World Review, July 24, 2998, http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/charen072498.html (accessed January 7, 2006). 43. Marsha L. Thole and Frank W. Ault, Divorce and the Military II: A Comprehensive Guide for Service Members, Souses, and Attorneys. Redlands, CA: The American Retirees Association, 2001, p. vii. 44. Karen Jowers and Gina Cavallaro, “War & Wedlock: Stress of Duty and Deployments Turning Marriage into a Mine Field” Air Force Times, June 27, 2005, 24. 45. Don Vaughan, “Aftershock,” Military Officer, November 2005, 48. 46. “Soldiers’ Divorce Rates Up,” Revolution Health News, December 23, 2005, http://www.mydna.com/newsd/news 20051223 soldier divorce rates.html (accessed January 7, 2006); Lisa Burgess, “Divorce Rate among Active-Duty Army Officers, Enlisted Has Risen Dramatically,” Stars and Stripes, June 9, 2005, http://www.military.com/NewContent/013190.SS 060905 Divorce,00html (accessed January 7, 2006). 47. Helena Oliviero, “A Happier Home Front,” The Atlanta JournalConstitution, May 29, 2005, http://www.ajc.com/living/content/living/0505/ 29militarymarriage.html (accessed January 7, 2006). 48. Burgess, “Divorce Rate among Active-Duty Army Officers, Enlisted Has Risen Dramatically,” June 9, 2005. 49. Oliviero, “A Happier Home Front,” May 29, 2005. 50. Karen Jowers and Gina Cavallaro, “War & Wedlock”, p. 25. 51. 2005 Handbook for the Guard & Reserve, August 2005, 18, p. 46. 52. Kathie Hightower and Holly Scherer, “Keep Busy While Spouse Is Deployed,” Air Force Times, March 21, 2005, 37.

Notes

115

53. Julie Bird, “Back to the Desert,” Air Force Times, October 27, 1997, 12. 54. Ibid. 55. Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Children and Families of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, July 21, 2004, 10. 56. Ibid. 57. Hightower and Scherer, “Keep Busy While Spouse Is Deployed”. 58. Suzanne McAuliffe, “When Duty Calls,” USAA Magazine, 37(2), 2005, pp. 12–13. 59. Karen M. Pavlicin, Surviving Deployment: A Guide for military families. Saint Paul, MN: Elva Resa Publishing, 2003, p. 107. 60. Ibid., p. 210. 61. Karen Houppert, Home Fires Burning, pp. 155–156. 62. Interview with Jim Lever, December 2005. 63. Leyva, Married to the Military, p. 162. 64. Oliviero, “A Happier Home Front,” May 29, 2005. 65. Rick Maze, “Reservists Can Lose Ground in Civilian Jobs,” Air Force Times, August 22, 2005. 66. “Army Reserve Soldiers Are Ready When Needed,” http://www.goarmy.com/ reserve/nps/mobiliazaiton activation.jsp (accessed October 19, 2005). 67. Karen Jowers, “Office Helps Troops Get Civilian Jobs Back,” Air Force Times, August 29, 2005, 16. 68. Ibid. 69. Seraya S. Nelson, “Gulf Reservists Air Complaints,” Air Force Times, July 1991, 17. 70. Ibid. 71. Dennis K. Orthner, Ph.D., “Army Leadership Support for Families and Adjustment of Army Non-military spouses,” U. S. Army, June 2002, 1. 72. Interview with Nancy Montville, December 2005. 73. Erin Emery, “In Search of a New Life, Family,” The Denver Post, January 9, 2006, 12A. 74. Chrystie Palomo, “All Wives Not So Angry,” Air Force Times, July 7, 2003, 60.

CHAPTER FIVE: TROUBLE AT HOME 1. Karen Jowers, “Domestic Violence Severity Is Up, Pentagon Data Shows,” Air Force Times, October 31, 2005, 30. 2. Rod Powers, “Military Domestic Problems, Part IV—Family Violence,” US Military, http://usmilitary.about.com/od/divdomviolence/1/aadomviol1.htm (accessed November 5, 2005). 3. Linda D. Kozaryn, “When Violence Happens,” American Forces Information Service (afis), October 11, 2000, http:www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2000/ n10112000 200010111.html (accessed January 27, 2006). 4. Jon Elliston and Catherine Lutz, “Hidden Casualties: An Epidemic of Domestic Violence When Troops Return from War,” Southern Exposure, Spring 2003,

116

Notes

http://www.southernstudies.org/reports/Hidden%20Casualties-new.htm (accessed January 7, 2006). 5. Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, Arlington, Virginia, February 28, 2001, pp. 1–119. (In this chapter, unless otherwise noted, all references to this Task Force will be from this specific report.) 6. Ibid. 7. Jon Elliston and Catherine Lutz, “Hidden Casualties,” Spring 2003. 8. Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, pp. 47–48. 9. Karen Jowers, “GAO: Domestic Violence Tracking Inadequate,” Air Force Times, June 12, 2006, 33. 10. Thomas J. Sullivan, Social Problems, 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997, p. 104. 11. Ibid. 12. Karen M. Pavlicin, Surviving Deployment: A Guide for Military Families. Saint Paul, MN: Elva Resa Publishing, 2003, pp. 195–196. 13. Jon Elliston and Catherine Lutz, “Hidden Casualties,” Spring 2003. 14. Robert H. Lauer, Social Problems and the Quality of Life, 6th ed. Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark, 1995, p. 178. 15. Jon Elliston and Catherine Lutz, “Hidden Casualties,” Spring 2003. 16. Peter Smolowitz, “Killings Weigh on Army Post,” Charlotte (North Carolina) Observer, July 27, 2002. 17. Dave Moniz, “Army Searches for Link in Base Killings,” USA Today, July 29, 2002, 3A. 18. Deborah Funk, “Troops with PTSD Find an Uneven Reception,” Air Force Times, August 8, 2005, 24. 19. Gayle S. Putrich, “Most Vets At Risk for PTSD Aren’t Referred for FollowUp,” Air Force Times, May 29, 2006, 20. 20. Deborah Funk, “Experts: Malaria Drug Didn’t Drive Husbands to Kill, Air Force Times, September 16, 2002, 14. 21. Ibid. 22. “Soldier Not Considered Risk,” The Pueblo Chieftain, August 7, 2005, http://www.chieftain.com/metro/1123321149/20 (accessed August 7, 2005). 23. Tom Roeder, “GI in Murder-Suicide Wasn’t Deemed a Risk,” The Gazette, August 9, 2005, A1, A5. 24. Elliston and Lutz, “Hidden Casualties,” Spring 2003. 25. “Witnesses Say Airman Admitted Killing Wife,” Air Force Times, April 18, 2005, 5. 26. “Police Say Spouse Murdered Dyess Airman,” Air Force Times, June 6, 2005, 5 27. Rod Hafemeister and Nicole Gaudiano, “Another Murder-for-Hire Case?” Air Force Times, April 18, 2005, 8–9; Rod Hafemeister, “I Thought About Doing It Myself,” Air Force Times, June 6, 2005. 28. Francis McCabe, “Deputy Shoots Airman After Tense Standoff,” Air Force Times, August 8, 2005, 12 (from The Times, Shreveport, LA). 29. Jon Sarche, “3 Suicides in Fort Carson Unit Raise Concerns Over Stress,” The Pueblo Chieftain, October 12, 2005, 3A (from an Associated Press article). 30. Ibid.

Notes

117

31. Ibid. 32. Karen Jowers, “Rate of Child-Abuse Deaths Higher for N.C. Military Families,” Air Force Times, October 4, 2004, 23. 33. Karen Jowers, “Task Force: Do More to Stop Domestic Violence,” Air Force Times, June 10, 2002, 26. 34. Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, p. 6. 35. Ibid. 36. Linda D. Kozaryn, “When Violence Happens,” Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, October 11, 2000, p. 23. 37. Linda D. Kozaryn, “Researchers Study Crime and Punishment,” American Forces Information Service (afis), September 21, 2000, http://www.defenselink.mil/ news/Sep2000/n09212000 20009214.html (accessed January 27, 2006). 38. “Rash of Wife Killings Stuns Ft. Bragg,” New York Times, July 27, 2002, http://www.truthout.org/docs-02/07-29D.Kill.bragghtm (accessed July 17, 2006). 39. Katherine Stuart Van Wormer and Clemens Bartollas, Women and the Criminal Justice System. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2000, p. 123. 40. Ibid., p. 124. 41. Rod Powers, Military Domestic Problems, Part IV. 42. Jowers, “Task Force: Do More to Stop Domestic Violence”. 43. Ibid. 44. Karen Jowers, “Deaths Get Mandatory Domestic-Violence Review,” Air Force Times, December 15, 2003, 22. 45. Karen Houppert, Home Fires Burning. New York: Ballantine Books, 2005, p. 135. 46. Ibid., p. 136. 47. Jon Elliston and Catherine Lutz, “Hidden Casualties,” Spring 2003. 48. Ibid. 49. Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, p. 35. CHAPTER SIX: GOING IN HARM’S WAY 1. Norris Burkes, “Ma’am, we regret to inform you . . . ,” The Denver Post, November 11, 2003, 7B. 2. Elliot Blair Smith, “Deaths in Combat Ricochet Here at Home,” USA Today, December 1, 2004, http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-12-01-cover-iraqdeaths x.htm (accessed January 7, 2006). 3. Drew E. Altman and Robert J. Blendon, “Perpetual War Hits Military Families Hard,” The Boston Globe, June 13, 2004, http://www.kff.org/ newsroom/bostonglobe061304oped.cfm (accessed January 12, 2006). 4. Kristin Henderson, “The Seige,” The Washington Post, October 10, 2004, http://www.truthout.org/docs 04/101104V.shtml (accessed January 12, 2006). 5. Dee Brown, The Gentle Tamers: Women of the Old West. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1958, pp. 51–58. 6. Katherine Gibson Fougera, With Custer’s Cavalry. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1986, pp. 263–264. 7. Elizabeth B. Custer, “Boots and Saddles” or, Life in Dakota with General Custer. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1961, p. 222.

118

Notes

8. Kristin Henderson, “The Seige,” October 10, 2004. 9. Ibid. 10. Karen Houppert, Home Fires Burning. New York: Ballantine Books, 2005, pp. 4–5. 11. Norris Burkes, “Ma’am, we regret to inform you . . . ,” November 11, 2003. 12. “Portraits of Valor: Profiles of U. S. service members killed in Iraq,” The Denver Post, September 2, 2005, 28A. 13. Rick Maze, “Congress Orders Better Casualty Assistance,” Air Force Times, January 23, 2006, 9. 14. Karen M. Pavlicin, Surviving Deployment: A Guide for Military Families. St. Paul, MN: Elva Resa Publishing, 2003, p. 143. 15. Ibid. 16. Robert Burns, “Pentagon Would Raise Pay for War Dead,” Associated Press, January 31, 2005, http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id= 20050131170609990030 (accessed February 1, 1005). 17. Edward M. Coffman, The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784–1898. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, pp. 135–136. 18. Ibid., p. 136. 19. Jim Sheeler, “Funds for Fallen Heroes,” The Rocky Mountain News, August 13, 2005, 20–21A. 20. Ibid. 21. Vince Crawley, “Increased Death Benefits Plan Put in Place,” Air Force Times, July 18, 2005, 21; “Death Benefits Rise,” Military Officer, June 2005, 25. 22. “9/11 Victim Compensation Fund Pays Over $2.6 Billion to Date,” Department of Justice, April 1, 2004 (accessed January 6, 2006). 23. Elliot Blair Smith, “Deaths in Combat Ricochet Here at Home,” December 1, 2004. 24. Rick Maze, “Congress Orders Better Casualty Assistance,” January 23, 2006. 25. Ibid. 26. Elliot Blair Smith, “Deaths in Combat Ricochet Here at Home,” December 1, 2004; Telephone conversation with Housing Officer at Fort Carson, Colorado, September 2005. 27. Ibid. 28. Coffman, The Old Army, p. 135. 29. Elliott Blair Smith, “Deaths in Combat Ricochet Here at Home,” December 1, 2004. 30. Doug Smith and P. J. Huffstutter, “A Deadly Surge,” The Los Angeles Times, October 26, 2005, http://www.truthout.org/docs 2005/102605N.shtml (accessed January 7, 2006). 31. “Marine Corps Death in the Iraq War, September 3, 2004, http://www. scuttlebuttsmallchow.com/mardeath87b.html (accessed January 7, 2006). 32. Peter Roper, “Fallen Carson Soldiers Remembered,” The Pueblo Chieftain, December 2, 2005, 2A. 33. Karen Jowers, “Group Encourages Survivors to Mourn at Their Own Pace,” Air Force Times, July 4, 2005, 27. 34. Ibid.

Notes

119

EPILOGUE 1. Samantha L. Quigley, “Married to the Military: Spouse Sees Life as an Adventure,” American Forces Information Service (afis), http://www.defenselink.mil/ news/Jan2006/20060124 3995.html. (accessed January 27, 2006). 2. Ibid.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adde, Nick. “Mr. & Ms: When You’re Both Married to the Military,” Married to the Military (A supplement to Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times), May 17, 1993. Alt, Betty Sowers and Bonnie Domrose Stone. Campfollowing: A History of the Military Wife. New York: Praeger, 1991. Altman, Drew E. and Robert J. Blendon. “Perpetual War Hits Military Families Hard,” Boston Globe Op-Ed, June 13, 2004, http://www.kff.org/newsroom/ bostonglobe061304oped.cfm (accessed January 12, 2006). “Army Housing A ‘National Disgrace,’” The Literary Digest, 95, November 5, 1927. “Army Reserve, Mobilization. Activation. Deployment,” http://www.goarmy.com/ reserve/nps/mobilization activation.jsp (accessed October 19, 2005). “Army Reserve Soldiers Are Ready When Needed,” http://www.goarmy.com/ reserve/nps/mobilization activation.isp (accessed October 19, 2005). Bey, D. R. and J. Lange. “Wailing Wives, Women Under Stress,” American Journal of Psychiatry, 1974. Bird, Julie. “Back to the Desert,” Air Force Times, October 27, 1997. Blinkin, Martin. America’s Volunteer Military: Progress and Prospects. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1984. Blinkin, Martin and Shirley J. Bach. Women and the Military. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1977. Bonham, Nick. “Army Family Savors Military Appreciation Day,” The Pueblo Chieftain, August 29, 2005. ———. “Deployed Grandma Spending Fourth in Iraq,” The Pueblo Chieftain, July 2, 2004. Bowers, Matthew. “Virginia Beach is the Area’s Divorce Capital—But Why?” The Virginian-Pilot, October 30, 1995, A1, http://scholaar.lib.vt.edu/VAnews/VA-Pilot/issues/1995/vp951030/10300032.htm (accessed January 5, 2005).

122

Bibliography

Bowman, Gene. “It’s Unbelievable . . . The Military Spouses Q & A,” http:// www.operationsoldiersupport.org/militaryspouse.htm (accessed March 22, 1005). Bowman, William, Roger Little, and G. Thomas Sicilia. The All-Volunteer Force After a Decade. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s, 1986. Boyd, Orsemus. Cavalry Life in Tent and Field. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1982. Bradford, Zeb B., Jr. and Frederic J. Brown. The United States Army in Transition. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1973. Brandes, Ray. Frontier Military Posts of Arizona. Globe, AZ: Dale Stuart King Publisher, 1960. Bridglall, Beatrice L. and Edmund W. Gordon. “Raising Minority Academic Achievement: The Department of Defense Model,” ERIC Digest, October 2003, http://www.ericdigests.org/2004–2/minority.html (accessed October 24, 2005). Brown, Dee. The Gentle Tamers: Women of the Old West. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1986. Burgess, Lisa. “Divorce Rate among Active-Duty Army Officers, Enlisted Has Risen Dramatically,” Stars and Stripes, June 9, 2005, http://www.military.com/ NewContent/0,13190,SS 060905 Divorce,00.html (accessed January 7, 2006). Burk, Norris. “‘Ma’am, We Regret to Inform You . . . ,’” The Denver Post, November 11, 2003. Burns, Robert. “Army to Send Experts to Probe Spousal Killings,” The Pueblo Chieftain, August 24, 2002 (from an Associated Press article). ———. “Pentagon Would Raise Pay for War Dead,” Associated Press, http://aolsvc. news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050131170609990030 (accessed February 1, 2005). ———. “Study: Army Stretched to the Breaking Point,” Pueblo Chieftain, January 25, 2006 (from an Associated Press article). Call, Vaughn R. A. and Jay D. Teachman. “Military Service and Stability in the Family Life Course,” Military Psychology, 3, 1991. “Capehart Wherry Era Military Housing,” Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), http://www.achp:gov/army-capehartwherry.html (accessed October 24, 2005). Carriker, Robert C. and Eleanor R., eds. An Army Wife on the Frontier: The Memoirs of Alice Blackwood Baldwin, 1867–1877. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Library, 1975. Chaddock, Gail Russell. “Honoring American Women of War,” The Christian Science Monitor, October 20, 1997, http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/ durableRedirect.pl?/durable/1997/10/20/feat/feat.1.html (accessed March 15, 2005). Charen, Mona. “Making the Military More Like Us,” Jewish World Review, July 24, 1998, http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/charen072498.html (accessed January 7, 2006). Cline, Lydia Sloan. Today’s Military Wife, 5th ed. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2003.

Bibliography

123

Coffman, Edward M. The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784–1898. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Colarusso, Laura M. “Most Family Housing to Be Fixed By 2012,” Air Force Times, March 20, 2006, 10. Crawley, Vince. “Pushed Too Far?” Air Force Times, September 13, 2004. ———. “Despite Replacement Program, Food Stamps Remain Popular,” Air Force Times, November 1, 2004. ———. “Increased Death Benefits Plan Put in Place,” Air Force Times, July 18, 2005. Crawley, Vince and Karen Jowers. “Allowance May Move Families Off Food Stamps,” Air Force Times, May 21, 1001. Crawley, Vince and Jon Kamman. “Recruitment, Retention Hit Goals; Will It Last?” Air Force Times, November 17, 2003. Custer, Elizabeth Bacon. “Boots and Saddles” or, Life in Dakota with General Custer. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1961. ———. Following the Guidon. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966. “Death Benefits Rise,” Military Officer, June 2005. “Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence,” Arlington, VA, February 28, 2001. Deidrich, John. “Alone a Little Longer,” The Gazette, September 1, 2003. Delisio, Ellen R. “Department of Defense Schools: Their Secret Weapons for Success,” Education World, http://www.education-world.com/a issues/ issues349.html (accessed October 24, 2005). Department of the Air Force, Memorandum for ALMAJCOM-SOA/CC, March 11, 1988. DePauw, Linda Grant. Founding Mothers: Women of America in the Revolutionary Era. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1975. Desmond, Alice Curtis. Martha Washington, Our First Lady. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1976. “DoDEA Special Education,” http://www.dodea.edu/instruction/curriculum/special ed/ (accessed October 24, 2005). “DoD Mustn’t Fail Schools,” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005. Dupuy, Col. R. Ernest. “Pass in Review,” The Army Combat Forces Journal, October 1954. ———. The National Guard: A Compact History. New York: Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1971. Eales, Anne Bruner. Army Wives on the American Frontier: Living by the Bugles. Boulder, CO: Johnson Books, 1996. Elliston, Jon and Catherine Lutz. “Hidden Casualties: An Epidemic of Domestic Violence When Troops Return from War,” Southern Exposure, Spring 2003, http://www.southernstudies.org/reports/Hidden%20Casualties-new.htm (accessed January 7, 2006). Elting, John R., Col. USA Ret. American Army Life. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1982. Emery, Erin. “In Search of a New Life, family,” The Denver Post, January 9, 2006. “Family Assistance,” 2004 Handbook for the Guard & Reserve, Military Times. Farley, Janet I. Jobs and the Military Spouse: Married, Mobile, and Motivated for Employment. Manassas, VA: Impact Publications, 2003.

124

Bibliography

Fleishman, Martha and Carol Joy Justice. Bugs to Blizzards or An Army Wife at Fort D. A. Russell. Cheyenne, WY: Wigwam Publishing Company, 1974. Forty, George. US Army Handbook 1939–1945. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., by arrangement with Sutton Publishing, Ltd., 1995. Fougera, Katherine Gibson. With Custer’s Cavalry. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1940. Funk, Deborah. “It’s Embarassing: With Ailing Child, Military Family Is Forced to Accept Public Assistance,” Air Force Times, September 14, 1998. ———. “While Mom’s Away, Children Worry,” Air Force Times, November 29, 1999. ———. “Experte: Malaria Drug Didn’t Drive Husbands to Kill,” Air Force Times, September 16, 2002. ———. “Troops with PTSD Find an Uneven Reception,” Air Force Times, August 8, 2005, 24. “GMH Makes Playground Handicapped Accessible,” The Patriot, 1(3), August 2005. Goldman, Nancy L. and David R. Segal, eds. The Social Psychology of Military Service. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1976. Gomulka, Gene Thomas. “Marriage in the Military: Remaining ‘Semper Fi’ in Marriage,” Military.com, http://www.military.com/NewContent/ 0,13190,Gomulka 040505,00.html (accessed January 7, 2006). Grange, Roger T., Jr. Fort Robinson: Outpost on the Plains, 1978. (Reprint from Nebraska History, 39(3), September 1958.) Griffith, Robert K. Men Wanted for the U. S. Army. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982. Guadiano, Nicole. “Double Murder Mystery,” Army Times, July 19, 2004, 8. ———. “Abuse Cases on the Rise at Robins,” Air Force Times, August 16, 2004. “Gypsy Wives—Army Style,” The New York Times Magazine, December 27, 1942. Hafemeister, Rod. “Air Force Offers $300 a Month for Extra Yearlong Tour in Korea,” Air Force Times, June 14, 2004. ———. “I Thought About Doing It Myself,” Air Force Times, June 6, 2005. Hafemeister, Rod and Nicole Gaudiano. “Another Murder-for-Hire Case?” Air Force Times, April 18, 2005. ———. “Deputy Shoots Airman After Tense Standoff,” Air Force Times, August 8, 2005. Hall, Holly. “Anchors Aweigh: Help for Navy Families,” Psychology Today, 21, April 1987. Hall, Thomas F., Rear Adm. USN-Ret. “Keeping Pace with Change,” Military Officer, 1(8), August 2003. Handbook for the Guard and Reserves, 2005, Military Times, August 2005. Harrell, Margaret C. Invisible Women: Junior Enlisted Army Wives. Santa Monica, CA: Rand, 2000. Henderson, David G. Job Search: Marketing Your Military Experience, 3rd ed. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1999. Henderson, Kristin. “The Siege,” The Washington Post, October 10, 2004 (accessed January 12, 2006).

Bibliography

125

Hightower, Kathie and Holly Scherer. “Men Are Military Spouses, Too,” Air Force Times, November 24, 2003. ———. “No Spouse Is an Island,” Air Force Times, December 2003. ———. “Be a Pro at Networking Jobs,” Air Force Times, August 16, 2004. ———. “Keep Busy While Spouse Is Deployed,” Air Force Times, March 21, 2005. Hill, Christian. “When Duty Calls, Some Military Families Find Financial Hardship,” The [Washington] Olympian, September 14, 2003, http://www. theolympian.com/home/news/20030914/frontpage/99897.shtml (accessed January 1, 2005). “History of Housing,” http://www.nsa.naples.navy.mil/housing/welcome/history. htm. (accessed October 24, 2005). Holley, I. B., Jr. General John M. Palmer: Citizen Soldiers and the Army of a Democracy. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982. Holm, Jeanne, Maj. Gen. USAF Ret. Women in the Military: An Unfinished Revolution. Novato, CA: Presidio Press, 1982. Houppert, Karen. Home Fires Burning. New York: Ballantine Books, 2005. “House Oks Key SBP Fix,” Military Officer, July 2004. “Housing Revitalization Oversight,” Statement by Paul W. Johnson, deputy assistant secretary of the Army Installations and Housing, before the Subcommittee on Military Installations & Facilities, March 7, 1996, http:// www.acq.osd.mil/housing/ct97 Johnson.htm (accessed October 24, 2005). “Iraq No Honeymoon for Couples,” The Plain Dealer, February 25, 2004, http://www.cleveland.com/iraq/index.ssf?iraq/more/107771872984890.html (accessed January 5, 2005). Jacobs, James Ripley. The Beginning of the U.S. Army, 1783–1812. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1947. Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Children and Families of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, July 21, 2004. Jowers, Karen. “Spouses Question Home-Business Curbs,” Air Force Times, September 1, 1997. ———. “Study: Military Spouses Fair Poorly in Job Market,” Air Force Times, September 4, 2000. ———. “Task Force: Do More to Stop Domestic Violence,” Air Force Times, June 10, 2002. ———. “Families, Army Help Children After Slayings,” Air Force Times, September 2, 2002. ———. “Spouses Seek Unemployment Compensation,” Air Force Times, September 1, 2003. ———. “Deaths Get Mandatory Domestic-Violence Review,” Air Force Times, December 15, 2003. ———. “Child Care Goes Extra Mile for Troops’ Families: Options Ease Burden When Military Spouse Is Deployed,” Air Force Times, June 28, 2004. ———. “Program Helps Military Spouses Find Teaching Jobs,” Air Force Times, August 16, 2004. ———. “Rates of Child-Abuse Deaths Higher for N.C. Military Families,” Air Force Times, October 4, 2004.

126

Bibliography

———. “Keeping Spouses on Career Track,” Air Force Times, November 8, 2004. ———. “In Privatized Housing, the Meter’s Running,” The Air Force Times, November 15, 2004. ———. “Spouses Seeking Jobs Find Brighter Outlook,” Air Force Times, January 31, 2005. ———. “Telework Project Gives It Another Go: Program Would Link Employers with Spouses Working at Home,” Air Force Times, January 31, 2005. ———. “Unemployment Pay Eyed for Partners on the Move,” Air Force Times, January 31, 2005. ———. “Child Care Could Come to Private Housing Projects,” Air Force Times, March 14, 2005. ———. “Robins School Goes Civilian; Scores Fall,” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005. ———. “Scholarship Praised,” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005. ———. “Who Should Run Base Schools?” Air Force Times, April 4, 2005. ———. “Taking Care of Kids,” Air Force Times, April 18, 2005. ———. “Group Encourages Survivors to Mourn at Their Own Pace,” Air Force Times, July 4, 2005. ———. “Office Helps Troops Get Civilian Jobs Back,” Air Force Times, August 29, 2005. ———. “Incentives Sweeten Deals as Privatized Housing Hits the Market,” Air Force Times, September 5, 2005. ———. “Initiative Aims to Ease Moves to New Schools,” Air Force Times, October 17, 2005. ———. “Domestic Violence Severity Is Up, Pentagon Data Shows,” Air Force Times, October 31, 2005. ———. “Lawmakers Limit Family Housing Funds,” Army Times, December 5, 2005, 34. ———. “GAO: Domestic Violence Tracking Inadequate,” Air Force Times, June 12, 2006. Jowers, Karen and Gina Cavallaro. “War & Wedlock: Stress of Duty and Deployments Turning Marriage into a Minefield,” Air Force Times, June 27, 2005. Kaslow, Florence W. and Richard I. Ridenour. The Military Family. New York: The Guilford Press, 1984. Kelley, Michelle L., Ellen Hock, Jennifer F. Bonney, Melinda S. Jarvis, Kathleen M. Smith, Monica A. Gaffney. “Effects of Military-Induced Separation on the Parenting Stress and Family Functioning of Deploying Mothers,” Military Psychology, 6, 1994. ———. “Military Induced Separation in Relation to Maternal Adjustment and Children’s Behaviors,” Military Psychology, 6, 1994. ———. “Navy Mothers Experiencing and Not Experiencing Deployment: Reasons for Staying in or Leaving the Military,” Military Psychology, 13(1), January 2001, http://web12.epnet.com/citation.asp?tb=1& uabo+B%5FSU+ shn+1 db aphjnh+do+B% (accessed March 22, 2005). Kitfield, James. “Guard and Reserve in a Time of War,” Air Force Magazine, July 2004. Klicka, Christopher J. “Home Schoolers Gain Equal Access to Department of Defense Schools,” Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) Special

Bibliography

127

Report, http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000002/00000258.asp (accessed October 24, 2005). Korb, Lawrence J. “Military Manpower Training and Achievements in the 1980s,” in The Volunteer Force After a Decade, William Bowman, Roger Little, and G. Thomas Sicilia, eds. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s, 1986. Kozaryn, Linda D. “DoD Task Force Looks at Domestic Violence,” American Forces Information Service (AFIS), June 21, 2000, http://www.defenselink.mil/ news/Jun2000/n06212000 20006212.html (accessed January 27, 2006). ———. “Researchers Study Crime and Punishment,” American Forces Information Service (AFIS), September 21, 2000, http://www.defenselink.mil/news/ Sep2000/n09212000 20009214.html (accessed January 27, 2006). ———. “Advocates Help Troubled Families,” American Forces Information Service (AFIS), October 11, 2000, http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2000/ n10112000 200010113.html (accessed January 27, 2006). ———. “When Violence Happens,” American Forces Information Service (AFIS), October 11, 2000, http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2000/ n10112000 200010111.html (accessed January 27, 2006). Knight, Oliver. Life and Manners in the Frontier Army. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1975. Lacy, Col. (Ret.) Warren S. “Holidays During Wartime,” Military Officer, December 2004. Lakhani, Hyder. “Career Decisions of Dual Military Career Couples: A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the U. S. Army,” Journal of Economic Psychology, January 1992. ———. “The Socioeconomic Benefits of Active Military Service to Reservists,” Armed Forces and Society, 24, Summer 1998, http://web12.epnet.com/ citation.asp?tb=1& ua=bt+military++psychology+shn+1+db+aphj (accessed March 22, 2005). Laubach, J. Bruce, Col. USAF-Ret. Military Officer, June 2004. Lauer, Robert H. Social Problems and the Quality of Life, 6th ed. Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark, 1995. Leckie, Shirley Anne, ed. The Colonel’s Lady on the Western Frontier: The Correspondence of Alice Kirk Grierson. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1989. Ledford, Tranette. “Mom-Based Businesses Work for Military Spouses,” Air Force Times, July 9, 2001. ———. “Aid Options Can Help Spouses Earn Degree, Avoid Debt,” Air Force Times Supplement, December 10, 2001. ———. “Married to the Military—and a Career, Too,” Military Times, February 14, 2005. Levitan, Sar A. and Karen Cleary Alderman. Warriors at Work: The Volunteer Armed Force. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1977. Leyva, Meredith. Married to the Military. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003. Long, Patricia. “Growing Up Military: Separations, Moves, New Beginnings—That’s the Norm for Military Brats,” Psychology Today, 1999. Lubold, Gordon. “Study: Most Recruits Are from Middle Class,” Army Times, December 5, 2005.

128

Bibliography

Manchester, William. American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880–1964. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1978. “A Marine’s Toughest Mission,” Parade Magazine, January 19, 2003. “Marine Corps Deaths in the Iraq War,” September 3, 2004, http://www. scuttlebuttsmallchow.com/mardeath87b.html (accessed January 7, 2006). Mattes, Merrill J. Indians, Infants and Infantry: Andrew and Elizabeth Burt on the Frontier. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1960. Maze, Rick. “Death Benefits Will Be Increased, Tax-Free,” Air Force Times, November 17, 2003. ———. “Congress Oks Larger Death, Disability Benefits,” Air Force Times, May 16, 2005. ———. “Making Sure Reserves Get What They Deserve,” Air Force Times, July 11, 2005. ———. “Reservists Can Lose Ground in Civilian Jobs,” Air Force Times, August 22, 2005. ———. “Congress Orders Better Casulaty Assistance,” Air Force Times, January 23, 2006. Maze, Rick and Vincent Crawley. “Your Own Home,” Air Force Times, September 19, 2005. McAuliffe, Suzanne. “When Duty Calls, USA Magazine, 37(2), 2005. McCabe, Francis. “Deputy Shoots Airman After Tense Standoff,” Air Force Times, August 8, 2005 (from The Times, Shreveport, LA). McCollum, Audrey, Nadia Jensen, and Stuart Copans. Smart Moves: Your Guide through the Emotional Maze of Relocation. Lyme, NH: Smith and Krans Publications, 1997. McCorkle, Emily Fitzgerald. An Army Doctor’s Wife on the Frontier, Abe Lauf, ed. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1962. McCormick, Michele. “The 90s Military Spouse,” Married to the Military: A Supplement in Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times, May 17, 1993. Miles, Donna. “Programs Aim to Reduce Military Divorce Rates,” American Forces Press Service, http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/men2000.nsf0/ D0679131E49689A78525701C0066E42 (accessed January 7, 2006). Milgram, Norman A. and Karine Bar. “Stress on Wives Due to Husbands’ Hazardous Duty or Absence,” Military Psychology, 1995. Military Families Survey. The Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, March 2004. “Military Readiness: Women Are Not a Problem,” Rand Research Brief, http://www.rand.org/publications/RB/RB7515/index.html (accessed March 15, 2005). “Military Reserves Federal Call Up Authority,” U.S. Military Newsletter, http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/guardandreserve/a/reservecallup.htm. (accessed October 19, 2005). “The Missus Gets $50—Regardless,” Yank, 1(6), July 22, 1942. Moniz, Dave. “Army Searches for Link in Base Killings,” USA Today, July 29, 2002, 3A. Morris, James M. America’s Armed Forces: A History. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1991.

Bibliography

129

Moskos, Charles C., John Allen Williams, and David R. Segal. The Postmodern Military: Armed Forces After the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Moskos Charles C. and Frank R. Wood, eds. The Military: More Than Just a Job? Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s International Defense Publishers, Inc., 1988. Myers, Sandra, ed. Cavalry Wife: The Diary of Eveline M. Alexander. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 1977. National Military Family Association (NMFA), http://www.nmfa.org/site/ PageServer?pagename=spouseducation. (accessed November 4, 2005). Nelson, Soraya S. “Gulf Reservists Air Complaints,” Air Force Times, July 29, 1991. “New Law Allows Higher Limits in VA Home Loan Program,” Afterburner, 47(1), February 2005. “9/11 Victim Compensation Fund Pays Over $2.6 Billion to Date,” Department of Justice, April 1, 2004, http://www.ussdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/April/04 civ 207.htm. (accessed January 6, 2006). Nye, W. S. Carbine and Lance: The story of Old Fort Sill. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1937. Oliviero, Helena. “A Happier Home Front,” The Atlanta JournalConstitution, May 29, 2005, http://www.ajc.com/living/content/living/0505/ 29militarymarriage.html (accessed January 7, 2006). Orthner, Dennis K. “Army Leadership Support for Families and Adjustment of Army Non-military spouses,” U.S. Army, June 2002. Pace, Brenda and Carol McGlothlin. Medals Above My Heart. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004. Packota, Valerie J. “Military Wives and Emotional Abuse: A Literature Review,” http://www.womanabuseprevention.com/html/military wives.html (accessed April 30, 2002). Palomo, Chrystie. “All Wives Not So Angry,” Air Force Times, July 7, 2003. Pavlicin, Karen M. Surviving Deployment. St. Paul, MN: Elva Resa Publishing, 2003. “Police Say Spouse Murdered Dyess Airman,” Air Force Times, June 6, 2005. Poole, Mary. “Time Off for Goodbyes,” Army Times, December 5, 2005. “Portraits of Valor: Profiles of U.S. Service Members Killed in Iraq,” The Denver Post, September 2, 2005. Powers, Rod. “Military Domestic Problems, Part IV—Family Violence,” U.S. Military, http://usmilitary.about.com/od/divdomviolence/1aadomviol1.htm (accessed November 5, 2005). Pribus, Marilyn. “Help at Home,” Military Officer, August 2003. Ptacek, Florence. “We’re in the Army Now,” The Parents’ Magazine, April 1943. Putrich, Gayle S. “Most Vets At Risk for PTSD Aren’t Referred for Follow-Up,” Air Force Times, May 29, 2006. Quigley, Samantha L. “Married to the Military: Spouse Sees Life as an Adventure,” American Forces Information Service (AFIS), January 24, 2006, http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2006/20060124 3995.html. (accessed January 27, 2006). “Rash of Wife Killings Stuns Ft. Bragg,” New York Times, July 27, 2002, http:// www.truthout.org/docs-02/07-29D.Kill.bragghtm (accessed July 17, 2006).

130

Bibliography

Rasicot, Julie. “To Grandma’s House We Go,” Married to the Military: A Supplement in Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times, May 18, 1998. Roe, Francis M. A. Army Letters from an Officer’s Wife. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1981. Roeder, Tom. “GI in Murder-Suicide Wasn’t Deemed a Risk,” The Gazette, August 9, 2005. Roper, Peter. “Fallen Carson Soldiers Remembered,” The Pueblo Chieftain, December 2, 2005. Sarche, Jon. “3 Suicides in Fort Carson Unit Raise Concerns Over Stress,” The Pueblo Chieftain, October 12, 2005. Scheer, George F. and Hugh F. Rankin. Rebels and Redcoats. New York: The World Publishing Company, 1957. Scott, Latayne C. “Home Alone,” Military Officer, August 2005. ———. “Long-Distance Landlord,” Military Officer, November 2005. Segal, Mady Wechsler. “The Military and the Family as Greedy Institutions,” in The Military: More Than Just a Job? Charles C. Moskos and Frank R. Wood, eds. Washington, D.C.: Pergamon-Brassey’s, 1988. Shea, Nancy. The Army Wife. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1966. Sheeler, Jim. “Funds for Fallen Heroes: Increased Benefits for Survivors Can’t Erase Heartaches—But Can Ease Anxieties,” Rocky Mountain News, August 13, 2005. Sherrow, Victoria. Women and the Military: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc., 1996. Simon, John Y., ed. The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, Vol. 8, April 1–July 6, 1863. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1979. Smith, Doug and P. J. Huffstutter. “A Deadly Surge,” The Los Angeles Times, October 26, 2005, http://www.truthout.org/docs 2005/102605n.shtml (accessed January 7, 2006). Smith, Elliot Blair. “Deaths in Combat Ricochet Here at Home,” USA Today, December 12, 2004, http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004–12–01-coveriraq-deaths x.htm (accessed January 7, 2006). Smith, Leslie. “When Tragic News Travels Too Fast,” Air Force Times, December 1, 1997. Smith, Page. A New Age Now Begins, Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976. Smolowitz, Peter. “Killings Weigh on Army Post,” The Charlotte (North Carolina) Observer, July 27, 2002 (from an Associated Press article). “Soldiers’ Divorce Rates Up,” Revolution Health News, December 23, 2005, http://www.mydna.com/news/news 20051223 soldier divorce rates.html (accessed January 7, 2006). “Soldier Not Considered Risk,” The Pueblo Chieftain, August 7, 2005, http://www. chieftain.com/metro/1123431149/20 (accessed August 7, 2005). “Spouse Education: What Is Available?” National Military Family Association, http://www.nmfa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=spouseeducation (accessed November 4, 2005). “Spouse Issues: Blue Ribbon Panel Report,” March 1988. “Spouses Get a Helping Hand,” Military Officer, November 2005. Stallard, Patricia Y. Glittering Misery. San Rafael, CA: Presidio Press, 1978.

Bibliography

131

Stefan, Kara. “Escaping the Two-Income Trap,” Military Times, August 9, 2004. Stone, Bonnie Domrose and Betty Sowers Alt. Uncle Sam’s Brides: The World of Military Wives. New York: Walker and Company, 1990. Stumkpf, Susan S. “Department of Defense Family Housing Preference Survey: Attitudes and Preferences of Military Personnel and Spouses Concerning Housing and Basic Allowance For Quarters.” Navy Personnel Research & Development Center, 1975. Sullivan, Thomas J. SocialProblems, 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997. Summerhayes, Martha. Vanished Arizona: Recollections of the Army Life of a New England Woman. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1979. Swomley, John M., Jr. The Military Establishment. Boston: Beacon Press, 1964. Taibi, Paul. “Outsourcing & Privatization of Defense Infrastructure,” BENS Special Report, March 1997, http://www.bens.org/pubs 0397.html (accessed October 24, 2005). Thole, Marsha L. and Frank W. Ault. Divorce and the Military II: A Comprehensive Guide for Service Members, Spouses, and Attorneys. Redlands, CA: The American Retirees Association, 2001. Thompson, Estes. “4 Army Wives Killed in 6 Weeks,” Rocky Mountain News, July 27, 2002, 9A (from an Associated Press article). Trowbridge, Gordon. “Rags or Riches,” Air Force Times, August 12, 2002. “2006 Basic Allowance for Housing, with Dependents,” Air Force Times, January 2, 2006. Utley, Robert M., ed. Life in Custer’s Cavalry. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1977. “Utility Mock Billing to Begin,” The Patriot, 1(1), May 2005. Van Wormer, Katherine Stuart, and Clemens Bartollas. Women and the Criminal Justice System. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2000. Vaughan, Don. “Aftershock,” Military Officer, November 2005. Weber, Harry R. “Home Depot Offers Work to Military Spouses,” The Pueblo Chieftain, September 21, 2004 (from an Associated Press article). “Witnesses Say Airman Admitted Killing Wife,” Air Force Times, April 18, 2005. Weinberger, Caspar W. “The All-Volunteer Force in the 1980s: DoD Perspective,” Weinstein, Laurie and Christie C. White, eds. Wives & Warriors: Women and the Military in the United States and Canada. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, 1997. Wertsch, Mary Edwards. Military Brats: Legacies of Childhood Inside the Fortress. New York: Harmony Books, 1991. Wood, Margie. “Nightly Kiss Secret to 70-Year Marriage,” The Pueblo Chieftain, December 31, 2005. Wood, Suzanne and Jacquelyn Scarville. “The Waiting Wives: Separation and Reunion among Army Wives,” Armed Forces & Society, 21, Winter 1995, http:// web12.epnet.com/citation.asp?tb=1& ua=bt+military++psychology+shn+ 1+db+aphj (accessed March 22, 2005). “Working Around the Military: Challenges of Military Spouse Employment,” Rand National Defense Research Institute, http://www.rand.org/publications/ RB/RB9056/ (accessed March 15, 2005). “Young Couple Face the First Deployment,” Air Force Times, October 27, 1997.

INDEX Afghanistan, 60–69, 92, 94–95 Air Force Academy, 25 All Volunteer Force (AVF), 15–17, 22, 61–62 critics of, 16 end of conscription, 15 Heritage Foundation study, 16 humanitarian missions, 17 lower class enlistments, 16 National Priorities Project, 16 peacekeeping, 17 retention, 22–23, 61–62, 70 American Association of University Women. See Employed spouses Anderson, Lieutenant Colonel Darlene Army Community Services, 71 Army Emergency Relief. See Employed spouses Army Relief Fund, 46 Army Spouse Employment Partnership. See Employed spouses Baldwin, Alice, 4 Barnitz, Colonel Albert, 65 Barnitz, Jennie, 64 Basic Allowance for Housing. See Housing

Biddle, Colonel Clement, 2 Blue Ribbon Panel. See Employed spouses Brown, E-5 Frankeeta, 34 Burt, Major Andrew, 6 Burt, Elizabeth, 6–7 Campfollowers stipend, 2 Camp Lejeune, 84 Camp Smith, 23 Cavalry units 7th Cavalry, 91 9th Cavalry, 8 Center for Strategic and International Studies, 58 Chaney, Laura, 13 Child care, 52–55 capacity of on-base child-care facilities, 54 during deployment, 53–54 extended-duty, 55 family child-care homes, 53 Cholera, 7. See also Disease Civil War, 3–4 Clarke, Frankeeta, 47–48 Clarke, Howard, 34, 47–48 Continental Army, 2 Coultrip, Maribeth, 64–65

134

Index

Custer, Elizabeth, 8, 91 Custer, General George, 91 Death of military personnel casualty assistance, 92–95 Casualty Assistance Officer, 92 coping with loss, 95–98 Defense Authorization Act, 95 expectation of, 90 gratuity, 94 grief counseling, 96–97 in Afghanistan or Iraq, 92, 94–95 loss of financial aid in earlier times, 94 notification, 91–92 Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance (SGLI), 93–94 surrendering base housing, 95 Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), 97 Defense Authorization Act. See Domestic violence ; also death Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence. See Domestic violence Defense Women’s Health Research Program. See Deployment Dengue fever, 7. See also Disease Department of Defense Dependent Schools. See Education Deployment, 58–75 and divorce, 68–70, 75 and infidelity, 67–68, 82 children of deployed parent(s), 60–61 communications with spouse, 67 Defense Women’s Health Research Program, 60–61 Deployment Cycle Support Program, 69 extension of duty, 66 getting help, 72 keeping busy, 71–72 marriage retreat, 70 National Military Family Association and divorce, 69–70 of mothers, 61–62 performance of deployed mothers, 61 reactions of wives, 58–60

returning from deployment, 72 wartime stress, 63 Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University Survey Project, 58–60 Diphtheria, 7. See also Disease) Disease, 7 Dole, Senator Elizabeth, 71 Domestic Dependent Elementary & Secondary School System. See under Education Domestic violence, 76–89 and death, 80–83 child abuse, 84 counseling, 87 Defense Authorization Act, 88 Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, 78, 81, 85–88 disagreement over definition, 88 domestic violence training, 88 financial help, 78 incidence, 76 infidelity, 82 Mentors in Violence Prevention, 89 Miles Foundation, 87 overseas, 87 promotion and, 77 punishment for, 86, 88 reasons for, 77–80 reporting of, 77 spouse isolation, 84–85 suicide, 83–84 Transitional Compensation Program (TC), 78 Donahue Institute. See under Education Dual-career family, 49–50 child care, 50 designated caregiver, 54 family care document, 50 nanny/au pare, 54 DuPuy, Colonel (Ret.) Ernest R., 9–10 Early, Lieutenant General Jubal A., 4 Education, 29–35 acceptance of transfer credits, 31 base schools vs. civilian schools, 31–32

Index college admittance, 35 control by local communities, 32 Department of Defense Dependents’ Schools (DoDDS), 31 Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA), 33 Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary School System (DDESS), 31–32 Donahue Institute study, 31 effects of changing schools, 29–30 home schooling, 34 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 33 “No Child Left Behind Act,” 32 overseas schools, 33 private schooling, 34 School Legal Defense Association, 34 special education classes, 34 teacher controversy, 33–34 Employed spouses, 36–55 American Association of University Women, 45 Army Emergency Relief, 45 Army Spouse Employment Partnership, 52 Blue Ribbon Panel, 38–39 conflict in marriage, 40–41 child care, 52–55 Civil Service, 44, 51 discrimination, 43 educational needs and assistance, 44–45, 51 entry level jobs, 43 Home Depot, 51–52 husband as commander, 38 husbands of female personnel. See Male spouses IMPACT JAMS (Jobs/Employment for Military Spouses), 52 job opportunities from corporations, 51–52 nursing careers, 50 Rand National Research Institute brief, 42 repeated interviews, 41–42

135

Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC), 44 Status of Forces Agreement, 56–57 teaching careers, 50–51 “teleport project,” 56 traditional attitudes toward, 37 underemployment, 44 unemployment compensation/benefits, 43–44 unemployment rates, 42 working from home, 55–57 Enlisted wives frontier life, 7–8 hired as servants on frontier posts, 8 makeshift quarters, 10–11 socializing with officers’ wives, 7–8 Falling bricks, 5–6 Family Readiness Center, 54 Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance (FOSSA), 46 Farrar, Lieutenant Colonel Jay, 58 food stamps, 45–46, 59 Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance (FOSSA), 46 statistics on use, 46 Force Health Conference (2005), 61 Forts Banning, 21, 59 Bowie, 4 Bragg, 80–81, 84, 86, 91 Carson, 28, 71, 82 Conch, 7 Gibson, 29 Hacker, 4 Hamilton, 94 Heliac, 6 Sam Houston, 11 Kearney, 21, 91 Leaven worth, 29 Leonard Wood, 14 Lincoln, 7 Lyon, 8 McRae, 7 Robinson, 5 Rucker, 65 D. A. Russell, 5

136

Index

Forts (cont.) Sanders, 6 Selden, 29 Sill, 5 Union, 8 Whipple Barracks, 6 Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper, 4

overseas, 35 permanent change of station (PCS), 23 privatized, 27–28 Temporary Living Expense (TLE), 23 Wherry plan, 22 Iraq, 69, 82, 92, 94–95

Gates, General Horatio, 2 Gibbon, General John, 6 Gibson, Captain Francis, 91 Gibson, Katherine, 7, 91 Gordon, Mrs. John B., 3 Grant, Julia, 3 Grant, General Ulysses, 3 Greene, General Nathaniel, 2 Grierson, Alice Kirk, 4, 6–7, 29, 64 Grierson, General Benjamin, 4, 6–7, 29, 64 Grone, Philip, deputy undersecretary of defense, 28 Grummond, Frances Courtney, 90–91 Grummond, Lieutenant George, 90 Gulf War, 61, 67, 74 “Gypsy wives,” 12 Hardison, Katherine, 53 Helmick, Elizabeth, 9 Heritage Foundation study. See All Volunteer Force Higgs, Gina, 31 Hilton, Eula, 12 Home Depot. See Employed spouses Housing. See also Forts area nicknames, 25–26 Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), 24–25 Capehart Housing Act, 22 DITY move (do-it-yourself move), 23 DLA (dislocation allowance), 23 during Korean War, 14 during World War II, 12–13 enlisted, 5, 8, 10–11, 21 maintenance, 24 national disgrace, 10–11, 21 new construction, 10 officer, 2–6, 8, 10, 21

Johnson, Louis W., secretary of defense, 21 Jordan, Captain W. H., 5 Kadena Air Force Base, 25, 33 Kaiser Family Foundation and the Boston Globe, 59, 67, 90 Kelley, Michele, 60 Kelly USA, 25 Knox, General Henry, 2 Korean War, 14–15, 94 Lackland Air Force Base, 83 Langley Air Force Base, 25 Laubach, Colonel (Ret.) Bruce J., 18 Laundresses (washerwomen), 2, 5, 36 Lee, Lieutenant J. M., 5 Letterman, Captain William J., 90 Letterman massacre, 91 Lever, Jim, 24, 41, 47–48, 72 Little Big Horn, 91 Little Creek Naval Base, 25 Ludson, James, 47–48 MacArthur, General Douglas, 29 Male spouses, 46–49 Career problems, 47–49 “Main mom,” 47 Marine Corps Air Station New River, 84 Maringer, Private Nicholas, 4 Married personnel, 9–14, 17, 21–22 after World War II, 21 permission needed, 9–10, 12 Martinez, Mildred Schwab, 15 McCorkle, Emily, 64 McDonald, Major Deborah, 50

Index McDonald, Major Ken, 50 Mestas, Lindsey, 65 Mexican War, 3 Miles Foundation. See Domestic violence Military Affiliate Radio stations (MARS), 15 Montville, Nancy, 51, 74 Moskos, Charles, 17 Mountain Home Air Force Base, 82 National Assessment of Educational Progress. See Education National Guard, 17–19 active-duty call-up, 18 dual-career personnel, 49 family needs, 18, 46, 59, 62–63, 71 family support, 63 National Guard Family Programs, 63 protection of civilian jobs, 73–74 statistics, 17 Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 74 National Military Family Association. See Deployment National Priorities Project. See All Volunteer Force North Carolina Child Advocacy Institute. See Domestic violence Officers’ wives, 37–41 Commanding Officer’s Wife (COW), 38, 40 duties, 38–40 education, 37 frontier diversions, 7 working wives. See Employed spouses Operation Desert Storm, 53 Osborne, Jane, 65–66 Palmer, Maude, 9 Parkis, Sharon, 15–16, 51 Parkis, Steve, 15 Pearl Harbor, 11, 21 Permanent Change of Station (PCS), 23 Perry, Stephanie, 24, 26, 60

137

Perry, Lieutenant Ted, 60 Peterson Air Force Base, 24 Pope Air Force Base, 84 Post-traumatic stress syndrome, 81 Ptacek, Florence, 13 “Q” allotment, 14 Quarters. See Housing Rand National Defense Institute, 42 Report of the President’s Commission on Mental Health, 29 Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC), 11 Reserves, 17–19 active duty call-up, 18 dual-career personnel, 49 family needs, 18, 46, 59, 62–63, 71 family support, 63 in Korean War, 14 Naval Reserves Family Readiness Program, 63 Presidential Selected Reserve Call-up (PSRC), 17 protection of civilian jobs, 73–74 recruitment and retention, 18 Title 10 U.S.C. 12301, 17 Title 10 U.S.C. 12304, 17 Total force policy, 17 Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 74 R&R (rest and rehabilitation), 15 Revolutionary War, 1–2, 11, 94 Ricketts, Mrs. James B., 3 Ritzus, Lucille, 12–13. Roe, Frances, 8 Rowe, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret.) Barbara, 61 Schoch, Stacey Evans, 66 School Legal Defense Association. See Education Segal, Mady Wechsler, 40 Selective Service Act (Draft), 11–12 Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges. See Employed spouses

138 Servicemen’s Dependents Allowance Act, 12 Shea, Nancy, 36, 41 Smith, Captain Ephraim, 3 Smrekar, Claire, 32–33 Spanish American War, 9 “Soapsuds Row,” 5 Sowers, Gunnery Sergeant Cecil, 14–15 Sowers, Kiku, 14 Status of Forces Agreement. See Employed spouses Status of Forces Surveys, 18 “Strikers,” 8 Subcommittee on Children snd Families, 18, 71 “Sudsville,” 5 Sullivan, Ginger, 14 Summerall, General Charles P., 10 Summerhayes, Martha, 5–6, 8 Swain, Maureen, 25, 65 Temporary duty (TDY), 63 Typhoid fever, 7

Index United States Armed Forces married personnel, 1953, 13–14 Vean, Forrest, 15 Vean, Julia, 14 Veterans’ administration, 94–95 grief counseling, 94–95 medical benefits, 94 widow’s pension, 94 Vietnam War era, 15, 63–64 Volunteering, 41 War of 1812, 3 Washington, General George, 2 Wherry, Senator Kenneth, 22 Wherry plan/sponsors. See Housing Wives’ clubs, 41 Women, Infants and Children program (WIC), 59 Woomera, South Australia, 26 World War I, 21, 91, 94 World War II, 11–13, 15, 64, 91–92, 94 Zouaves, 3

About the Author BETTY L. ALT is the co-author of two books on the military wife: Uncle Sam’s Brides (Walker, 1990) and Campfollowing: A History of the Military Wife (Praeger, 1991).