Microsoft Word - Blanchard article final bb _________ Lieutenant Colonel Samantha Blanchard, LCSW, BCD, ABD is the Director of Behavior Medicine, Nellis Family Medicine Residency, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and should not be interpreted as the policy or opinions of the United States Air Force. The author would like to acknowledge the dedication and hard work of Eileen Brennan in making this article a reality. Copyright © 2012 Advances in Social Work Vol. 13 No. 1 (Spring 2012), 83-97 Are the Needs of Single Parents Serving in the Air Force Being Met? Samantha E. Blanchard Abstract: The military has taken extraordinary steps in establishing programs to support not only the member serving but their families as well. This article will examine military policy as it impacts single parents serving in the Air Force, highlighting existing programs, and calling for more research on this valuable population. Keywords: Single parents, policy, military INTRODUCTION The Air Force has the predictable aspects of a bureaucracy (i.e. fixed jurisdictional areas, firmly ordered office hierarchy, belief that holding office is a vocation, and more or less stable rules; Weber, 1978), and in particular those of a 'greedy' bureaucracy (Coser, 1974), which have implications for recruitment and retention of qualified personnel to defend our country. According to Coser (1974), “Members of greedy institutions must be so fully and totally committed to them that they become unavailable for alternative lines of action” (p. 8). These organizational attributes present stress for all, but particularly for service members who are single parents. Social support theory predicts that attention to family and other social support could mitigate some of these stressors (Boss, 2002; Karney & Crown, 2007). The military has in place program and policy steps to help increase social support, so that personnel are available for the task of protecting our country. In light of recent demographic increases in the proportion of Air Force single parents, the military should continue to build targeted family support programs and policies as a strategy to help maintain a ready workforce. This article will argue that although the Air Force’s prime mission is not to provide social support for this group, it is in the organization’s best interest to understand and provide for single parents. The number of active duty members serving in the Air Force in 1990 was 525,000; by 2005 that number decreased to 325,000. Although the actual number of single parents decreased from 21,000 to 16,000, the proportion of personnel who are single parents increased from 4% to 5.1% (Air Force Personnel Center, 2010). One difference that emerges when comparing the single parents in the armed forces with those in the civilian world is that the single parents in the military are mostly male while those in the civilian world are mostly female (Bowen & Orthner, 1986). Single parents, those without a partner sharing day-to-day parenting responsibilities for minor children, will be the focus of this article. This review will first explore the military environment, and allow the reader to more fully understand the demands and issues facing single parents serving in the United States Air Force and how those demands and obligations affect their relationship with their families. Air Force basic Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 84 family policy, social support policy, policy enforcement, military stressors, and supporting research addressing the situation of military single parents will be discussed as well as the supports that need to be added to improve the experiences of those personnel. Finally, research recommendations will be made. This review will conclude with recommendations for possible policy changes for single parents currently serving in the Air Force. MILITARY SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT As an organization, the military functions similarly to civilian institutions by revealing and communicating social expectations and values to its personnel and their families. Concomitant with social expectations and family values are military work expectations. As a work organization, the military requires a range of personal and family sacrifices that dominate the lifestyles of military personnel and their families in accommodating to its work mission. Many unique and adaptive challenges are presented, because the military’s environmental context requires readiness and preparedness for missions crucial to national security (Bowen, 1985; Bowen, Orthner, & Zimmerman, 1993; Chapin, 2009; Jensen, Lewis, & Xenakis, 1986; Walker, 1985; Wheeler & Kiorb, 2009). These demands of the armed forces dictate the selection of a lifestyle that pervades almost every facet of a person’s life. There are few civilian occupations that require such a high level of commitment and dedication from employees (Bowen & Orthner, 1986; Hoshmand & Hoshmand, 2007). Albano (1994) and Segal (1986) used Lewis Coser’s (1974) notion of the “greedy institution” to describe the great demands that the military as an organization places on the time, energy, and commitments of service members and their families, demands that are unrivaled in the civilian workplace. A key difference between the military as a work organization compared to a civilian company is how intensely the military family is dominated by the requirements of the “greedy” organization. The military requires many sacrifices by the personnel employed by the military and their family including frequent relocations, extended separations and the subservience of the needs of the family to the requirements and objectives of the military (Bowen, et al., 1993; Chapin, 2009; Wheeler & Kiorb, 2009). In exchange the military provides many economic and social supports to compensate the family for those sacrifices, combined with a community lifestyle which allows the family members and service members an interpersonal support network (Bowen, et al., 1993; Bowling & Sherman, 2008). MILITARY POLICY: IMPACT ON JOINING AND JOB CHOICES FOR SINGLE PARENTS The military has policy solutions that attempt to resolve the dynamic tension between maintaining a ready workforce that is available to meet the security of the nation and ensuring support is given to members to combat the multitude of stressors that come from serving in the armed forces. Max Weber (1978) declared a basic premise of organizational functioning as a bureaucracy: tasks are put before people. Several researchers have documented stress ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 85 arising from conflicts between the family and work lives of individuals (Bianchi, Casper, & King, 2005; Boles, 2001; Chow & Berheide, 1988). Since the foundational research of Reubin Hill (1949), there has been ongoing study of the interrelationships of family stress and military work life (Boss, 1987; Britt, 2006; Britt, Adler, & Castro, 2005; Burr, 1973; Drummet, 2003; Faber, 2008; Finkel, 2003; McCubbin, Joy, Cauble, Comeau, Patterson, & Needle, 1980; Pincus, 2001; Rothrauff, 2004). In research that was focused on the Army, it was shown that families could contribute to readiness, and that support to families was a cost effective way to enhance readiness (Kirkland & Katz, 1989) The following policy review will show how the military, and in particular the Air Force, has screened applicants, and after their induction has created a social support system that attempts to serve all of its members and their families. Policy on Personnel Selection Due to the specialized needs of the nation’s armed forces strict guidelines and regulations must be met by applicants seeking to join any of the military branches. These specialized needs allow the military to accept or reject applicants based on their personal characteristics such as number of dependents, financial stability, and their age. While it might be difficult for the average citizen to understand the requirements of the selection process maintained by the armed forces, these requirements have been examined and approved by the Supreme Court in the case Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez (1963): The military is, by necessity, a specialized society (separate) from the civilian societies…The military must insist upon a respect for duty and a discipline without counterpart in civilian life,’ in order to prepare for and perform its vital role … The essence of the military service ‘is the subordination of the desire and interests of the individual to the needs of the service.’ The history of the courts deferring to the judgment of military leaders on matters affecting the Armed Forces is one of the most consistently upheld principles of constitutional law. Furthermore, serving in the military is a privilege and sometimes an obligation, conferring neither the right to serve nor the right to avoid service. Policy dictates how the military controls parent status at entry. The United States Department of Defense (DoD) generally prohibits the enlistment of any individual who has responsibility for two or more dependents under the age of 18 at the time of the enlistment. The various military services have the ability to waive this requirement and many of them have even stricter requirements than the standard DoD policy. The Air Force in particular requires an examination of an applicant’s financial situation if the individual has any dependents including a spouse. This is done to ensure that the individual will be able to support his or her family with a military salary (U.S. Code, Title 10, Armed Forces 2007. United States) Policy on Job Assignments The second policy area that could potentially affect single parents would be that governing job assignments. Here the fundamental value of ‘equity’ of tasks for all in the same job group is the rule. Policy does not limit or vary work assignments with regard to Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 86 parental status. The demands that the military places equally on all employees make it a difficult environment in which to be a single parent. There are no exceptions made in the assignment of orders, duty stations, deployments or time off for individuals who have become a single parent due to divorce or death of their spouse (U.S. Code, Title 10, Armed Forces 2007. United States). Social support theory would predict that individuals with strong social support would better cope with these demands (Young, 1999). The military takes this into account at the point of assignment by putting safeguards in place to assure that the service member has taken care of family obligations and will be fully available to all assignments. In these cases the single parent is required to have a local individual who is not a member of the military agree in writing that he or she will accept the responsibility of those children with no notice in the event that the parent who is in the military is deployed or otherwise called to duty. An individual who fails to comply with these regulations could receive an immediate discharge from service (U.S. Code, Title 10, Armed Forces 2007. United States). Another area where policy might apply differently for single parents is the case of emergencies. When an individual serves in the military there is a limited amount of flexibility with regard to family emergencies and the needs of the military come before the needs of the family. By being a single parent and a member of the military the difficulties become more complicated because there is not another parent available to assist with the rearing of the children. The accumulation of stressors could lead to an unplanned crisis that would put the single parent into an emergency situation such as losing childcare, unstable housing, or financial difficulties. Although family emergencies sometimes occur without warning, the point is to not accumulate stressors to the point they result in emergencies. Policy changes could help prevent the accumulation of stressors that could lead to emergency situations. Military single parents are required to fulfill the terms of the contract that was signed during the enlistment process. There is no way to renegotiate the contract unless there is a medical reason, such as a service-related injury or condition. The individual who either enlisted or accepted a commission must fulfill the terms of the contract signed or be dismissed from military service (U.S. Code, Title 10, Armed Forces 2007. United States). Military Policy and Social Support for Single Parents As well as increasing demands, policy can also establish supports for family members. In recognizing and responding to the needs of the service members and their families, Albano (1994) has stated that there have been landmark shifts in military family policy over the past two centuries. These shifts have been made from informal implicit obligations to help meet the needs of military families to formal supports that have been institutionalized through the DoD in the form of directives, public laws, policy statements, A prime example of formal supports established by policy are the Airman and Family Readiness Centers in which parents can receive the support and services that they need in order to meet the demands created by the family. Several of these services include the Air Force Aid Society (AFAS), the Relocation Assistance Program (RAP), Family Life ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 87 Education (FLE), the Family Readiness Program (FRP), and the Transition Assistance Program (TAP). The AFAS helps with interest free loans in cases of emergencies such as traveling home for deaths, illness or accidents of immediate family members. AFAS also can help with emergency car repairs and other unexpected financial difficulties. The RAP program is designed to ease the transition to another duty station by providing information about the new assignment, tips on moving, and expectations on making the move to another base. The FLE program offers educational classes on parenting, spousal communication, and overall successful living in a military lifestyle. The FRP program offers services to the family members of those that deploy to a combat area. Services can include activities for the family members, phone calls for morale purposes, and monthly dinners with all the family members left behind. The TAP program is utilized by members of the service either retiring or leaving the service after their commitment is over. This program offers resume services, interview skills, and job hunting techniques (Air Force Instruction 36-3009, 2008). These policy supports clearly reflect the manner in which mutual benefits are shared between the military as an organization and its constituents: service members and their families. Albano (1994) noted that “The more the military institution adapts to family needs, the more it will preserve itself as an institution. As family members become increasingly integrated into the military community, there is an increased commitment to the organization” (p.13). In essence, the military provides economic and social support to compensate families for their sacrifices in meeting the demands of the military lifestyle. Likewise, the military prides itself on facilitating an informal work and community context from which service members and their families can derive organizational and interpersonal support, and develop a sense of mutuality (Bowen, et al., 1993). Policy Enforcement with Changing Demographics There has been a growth in the need for family-related supports due to changes in demographics in the population from which the military recruits. Based on Defense Manpower Data Center records from 2005, almost half of the Air Force population is comprised of parents, with 10% of those being single parents without partners (Air Force Personnel Center, 2010). Events in the world precipitated a mass deployment of the various services to the Middle East in the early 90s. During the staging of the troops for deployment it was discovered that the majority of the single parents had not made the proper arrangements for the care of their children while they were deployed. This caused the deployment to be delayed resulting in a slower reaction time for the armed forces (Albano, 1994). This also resulted in some individuals being reassigned to different units leaving at different times, creating situations in which deployed military units were not fully staffed for the mission requirements. Units going to a combat area being understaffed can result in higher casualties and increased risk (Albano, 1994). Consequently, the military had to reexamine the enforcement of policy surrounding single parents. In order to prevent a similar situation from occurring again the instructions governing single parents were more strictly enforced to comply with the military’s primary mission Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 88 of protecting the United States. Single parents were required to create Family Care plans detailing how their children would be cared for when the parent was deployed (Department of Defense Instruction 1342.19). These plans required that the individual assuming responsibility for the children be available at a moment’s notice. The plan calls for short term care as well as long term care. Short term caregivers have to be co-located in the local area. Long term caregivers would step in if the parent would be gone for an extended period of time. Short and long term caregivers are given powers of attorney in order to enroll children in school and to make medical decisions during the parent’s absence. Access to funds to help offset the cost of taking care of these children also had to be established. Instructions as to how these children would be transported from short term to long term caregivers are also required. Parents who were unable or unwilling to create these plans were dismissed from the Air Force so that they could care for the children without placing the primary mission of the Air Force at risk (Department of Defense Instruction 1342.19). The military’s shift to a more voluntary service has provided more opportunities for personnel to have family members accompany them to peace time bases all over the world. Over time, family members at bases have outnumbered military personnel (Drummet, 2003; Goldman & Segas, 1983). As the changing demographics of the military has evolved from predominantly single males to include various types of family units the military’s behavioral and social science research program was expanded. The Air Force’s original focus on achieving adaptation of the individual service member to military life shifted to understanding the adaptation patterns of the families of service members, specifically in adapting to the changes required by the military lifestyle (Bowen, et al., 1986; Drummet, 2003). Military Stressors and Policy Responses The extent to which families accept, internalize, and exhibit behaviors indicative of military expectations reflects the degree to which they are able to manage the stress and demands of the organization (McCubbin, 1979). The military requires a cadre of contextual changes which produce varying degrees of stress. Some of these changes include: frequent relocations; extended family separations; spouse/parent separation; absence and reunion; hazardous duty assignments; possibility of injury, captivity, or death in combat or in other dangerous environments; social and cultural isolation of families on bases in remote areas overseas; uncertainty of future careers; and fast-paced deployment (Albano, 1994; Bowen, 1985; Bowen, Mancini, Martin, Ware, & Nelson, 2003; Bowen, et al., 1993; Drummet, 2003; Jensen, et al., 1986; Rosen & Moghadam, 1989; Rosen & Moghadam, 1988; Wilson, 1994). There are important differences between single parenting in the civilian world compared to single parenting in the armed forces. In sharp contrast to American society at large where females comprise the majority of single parents, single parents in the military are more likely to be males who are faced with the dual challenge of raising a child or children largely on their own while balancing their responsibilities to their respective service (Air Force Child Programs, 2011). ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 89 Importantly, military duty takes on many different forms. Some servicemen and women work for eight hours a day, five days a week, and enjoy a certain degree of stability in their schedules without the added concern of being deployed at a moment’s notice. Other military occupational specialties involve long work days (in some cases 12 hours or more) and weekly schedules that frequently involve working or training on weekends and holidays. The latter category of military service may place inordinately high levels of stress on parents in general and single parents in particular as they struggle to balance their military responsibilities with their parenting. It is also important to take these issues into account when formulating support programs for single parents in the military because individual circumstances may differ greatly with military service being one of the only common denominators. A study of Air Force women serving in the U.S. Air Force during the First Persian Gulf War deployment conducted by Pierce (1998) revealed a number of work-family conflicts that contributed to the resignation of these service personnel once their enlistments were completed. Such conflicts were identified by 25% of those leaving military service and rated as critically important by 11%. Many respondents commented that there was simply insufficient time to meet all the demands placed on them. Although some parents had successfully managed their work lives, the anticipation of having children had caused a reappraisal of their commitment to the military. The Air Force was losing highly trained personnel because of parental status. According to Hammelman (1995), although lengthy separations of family members are a natural and expected consequence of military service, there have been some significant changes in recent years. For instance, Hammelman emphasized that, during the Persian Gulf conflict, families were separated. Although this typical for previous wars, more single parents were called to serve than previous wars. In February 1991, there were approximately 16,300 single parents serving in the theater (Hammelman, 1995). Hammelman pointed out that the “Literature on stress and the military has emphasized two-parent families in which the man was called to duty; timely and relevant studies concerning the stress experienced by single-parent military families, though, remain virtually nonexistent” (p. 143). The following describes how the military has responded to these unique stressors by providing programs and services to address the needs of the members serving, to include family members. All the programs described below were created to serve the population as a whole. Although these programs are needed and utilized, policy changes to address the unique needs of single parents could improve the lives of single parents serving in the Air Force. In 1994, $2.7 billion was allocated to improve the quality of life in the armed forces (Serrano, 1994). These funds were to be used to modernize and build new military housing, enhance family-support programs, and increase military paychecks for those living in high cost areas. The armed services have come to realize that helping families become stronger can also help service members do their job more safely and efficiently. If service members do not worry about their families, their minds are clear (Heubner, Mancini, Bowen, & Orthner, 2009). The armed services are also helping families to cope Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 90 with military life through many other programs. These programs include health care, childcare, drug and alcohol abuse programs, spousal and child abuse prevention programs, child development centers, youth programs, parenting programs, family services, family support groups, legal assistance, spouse clubs, and the Red Cross (Heubner, et al., 2009). Stress from frequent moves, base closings, and force reductions were found to be related to spousal and child abuse (Segal, 2006). In 1981, the DoD mandated cooperation among the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines to address prevention, evaluation, and treatment of child abuse and neglect, and spousal abuse (Moss, 1994). During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the number of spousal abuse cases rose from 12 per 1,000 to 18 per 1,000. In that same period, confirmed child abuse cases increased from 6.0 per 1,000 to 6.6 per 1,000, and on average, every year, one child or spouse died at the hands of a relative in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marines (Moss, 1994). In 1995, military spousal abuse rose slightly, and the rate of child abuse slightly dropped (Jowers, 1996). Over time, support programs have been developed to counteract negative trends. In 1996, lawmakers added $30 million to the defense authorization bill for the Family Advocacy Program (Jowers, 1996). This program deals with aspects of spousal and child abuse— preventing, identifying, reporting, and treating. The New Parent Support Program was initiated to address “at risk” parents and children in early 2000. This program was developed to identify and offer resources to parents and children that met certain standards, such as age of parents, single parents, high risk pregnancy, multiple child birth, and high levels of stress (Salas & Besetsny, 2000). Programs and initiatives of this kind are considered crucial to the “readiness and retention of quality people” (Jowers, 1996). In the last thirty years, the armed forces have risen to the challenges of spouse and child abuse, alcoholism, quality of life, and child care issues, and research has documented the need for support programs addressing these issues, and has established program effectiveness. Now is the time to document the needs of single parents in the military, and conduct intervention and evaluation research. SUPPORTING RESEARCH ON MILITARY SINGLE PARENTS The majority of the research on work and family issues done throughout the years has focused on two-parent family units rather than the single parent households. When single parent households were examined the researchers more typically chose single parents employed in the civilian job market. The literature reveals little in the way of research surrounding single parents in the military. Since most of articles on military single parents are fifteen to twenty years old, I have included studies on single parents in general to help bridge this gap in the literature. Military families struggle with the same basic issues as mainstream America. There is little doubt that stressors experienced on the job or in the family are often interrelated. The interactive nature of role overload in both the workplace and the family constitutes one of the more serious stressors for families, particularly for single women and parents of young children (Allen & Armstrong, 2006; Hall, 2007). Job-related stress and work-family conflict can be detrimental to a worker’s well-being and health, ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 91 including the over-stressed single parent (Hammer, Cullen, Neal, Sinclair, & Shafiro, 2005; Quick, Horn, & Quick, 1987). Major causes of stress can be the characteristics of a job, demands of the job, and employment-related life events. These factors can lead to behavioral changes that cause the individual to be less responsive to the feelings and needs of his or her family members, as well as to become less productive on the job (Quick, et al., 1987). In a ten year old article describing stress among single parents serving in the Air Force Heath and Orthner (1999) concluded that when members received or perceived support from their environment their stress level decreased. According to Bowen et al. (1993), single parents in the military face many challenges. Often, they encounter institutional discrimination and are discouraged from reenlisting if they become single parents while on active duty. Potentially, they face greater role strain and role conflict in fulfilling work and family obligations. Unlike single parents in the civilian labor force, single military parents must deal with norms of the military, such as unaccompanied family tours, deployment to foreign battlefields or extended tours with limited or no advanced notice, and frequent disruption in informal community networks and extended families. There are frequent changes in duty stations and long absences from their families; therefore, single parents may not also have access to their extended family for support while raising their children. These demands and norms are enforced by both social and legal sanctions. In contrast to their counterparts in civilian life, single military parents are offered an important asset: reasonable job security with fringe benefits (medical, housing, and childcare subsidies; Bowen, et al., 1993). Although these benefits exist, the military should examine its policies to insure that they also meet the needs of this increasing proportion of the military population. In essence, Bowen (1987) has stated that a working knowledge of this segment of the military culture, and sensitivity to the diversity of their needs within it, provides a value-added contribution both to effective leadership by military decision makers and delivery of services by military and civilian employees. WHAT’S MISSING FOR SINGLE PARENTS? The following is a discussion of programs available to military family members as a whole with a focus on what could be improved to entice single parents to participate. The military is aware of the stresses that being employed by the military places on the family structure. Many of the family life classes offered assist married couples to deal with the stress caused by deployment rather than the stress caused by being a single parent in an emotionally demanding job (Air Force Instruction 36-3009, 2008). By not designing the classes to assist single parents as well as married parents employed by the military the single parent does not have the access to the support groups that are essential for strengthening the family unit. The military is also aware of the stresses on the family unit caused by long term deployments. In order to minimize the amount of stress on the family unit and the member, programs and initiatives have been created to help provide the necessary Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 92 support which results in minimizing the negative effects of long term deployments. While the military’s main focus is in responding to situations requiring military force they understand that by providing for the dependents left at home they can create an atmosphere where the service men and women can focus on the responsibilities of their jobs with the knowledge that their family left behind at home is supported by the branch of the military that they serve (Segal, 2006). Single parents who have completed the Family Care Plan also know that their children are taken care of; however, the individual watching their children is most likely off base and not close to the services located on base. While the children have access to these services, by not being close to those services, it is less likely for them to be utilized. Childcare is crucial due to an increase in the number of single parents and dual military career couples, along with their odd working hours, rotating shifts, deployment, and frequent moves. The Defense Department provides childcare in both child development centers and in homes. The DoD currently oversees 800 Child Development Centers (CDCs) located on military installations worldwide. These centers offer a safe child care environment and meet professional standards for early childhood education (Military.com, 2011). Child care is typically available through these centers for children ages six weeks to twelve years. Military childcare facilities are certified to meet the standards of the National Academy of Early Childhood Programs (Jowers, 1994). This accreditation is separate from the requirements set forth by the armed services and the Defense Department. Other available family childcare providers and facilities are regulated by military officials. These facilities are specifically designed to accommodate military parents who work long and/or erratic hours (Jowers, 1994). Another program designed to help parents as well as children are military youth programs. They were developed to reach pre-teens and teens. These programs provide this population with structured activities. There is also a wide variety of programs that are designed for school-age children (Jowers, 1994; Air Force Child Programs, 2011). Mobilization deployment and relocation programs are designed to assist single and married service members cope with mobility requirements. The information and referral programs assist with answering questions regarding all aspects of military life, locating and facilitating personnel in fulfilling needs, and providing information about installations and communities, as well as about foreign customs, languages, and cultural differences. Educational programs offer workshops and classes regarding parenting, stress management, self-esteem, and strengthening family ties (Air Force Instruction, 36- 3009, 2008; Jowers, 1994). Legal assistance is available for dealing with creditors, understanding rental contracts, solving personal financial problems, and other legal matters (Air Force Instruction, 36-3009, 2008; Jowers, 1994). CONCLUSION AND CALL FOR RESEARCH In this dynamic environment, identifying opportunities to improve the support services provided to servicemen and women is a timely and worthwhile enterprise because of its capacity to contribute both to quality of life issues as well as the primary mission of the armed forces to remain combat ready. In this regard, Wingo (2002) reported that: ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 93 The military force must increasingly rely on women, thus, comprehensive family programs that recognize changes in military families… and improving policies regarding childcare are necessary to maintain combat readiness and to continue to recruit and retain highly skilled military personnel (p. 18). The studies done by researchers over the years have virtually ignored a substantial proportion of the population of the United States Air Force. Although there has been some recent research on single parents serving in the Armed Forces, much is conducted on the Army or the Navy (Taylor, Wall, Liebow, Sabatino, Timberlake, & Farber, 2005). While the percentage of single parents in the armed forces should be decreasing through the recruitment policies and regulations of the armed forces, they are not. As long as the possibility of becoming a single parent still exists through a divorce or the death of a spouse, single parents will remain involved in the Air Force. As long as the proper instructions are followed and the Family Care Plan created they will be allowed to remain on active duty. More research is needed with the population of military single parents in the areas of services addressing domestic violence, childcare needs, housing issues, and workplace challenges. However, what stands above all is the need to understand the issues facing this population because before any real policy changes can be made, one must understand the challenges and the strengths of this dynamic population. One of the themes that quickly emerges from the review of the relevant literature is just how few studies have been devoted to how best to provide timely support services for those on active duty, especially single parents. Additionally, it has been indicated that there will likely be more single parents and more overseas deployment in the years to come rather than less (Wingo, 2002). As Wingo (2002) concluded when writing about military life: Since it is not likely that there will be fewer global nomads among our population in the future, or around the world for that matter, there is room for even more research into the problems and advantages of this lifestyle (p. 31). References Air Force Child Programs. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.afchildprograms.com/ Air Force Instruction 36-3009. (2008). Air Force Personnel Center. (2010). Unpublished data from password secured website. Albano, S. (1994). Military recognition of family concerns: Revolutionary war to 1993. Armed Forces and Society, 20(2), 283-302. Allen, T. D., & Armstrong, J. (2006). Further examination of the link between work- family conflict and physical health: The role of health-related behaviors. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 1204-1221. Bianchi, S. M., Casper, L. M., & King, R. B. (Eds.). (2005). Work, family, health, and well-being. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 94 Boles, J. S. (2001). An investigation into the inter-relationships of work-family conflict, family-work conflict and work satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(3), 376-390. Boss, P. (2002). Family stress management: A contextual approach, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN: 0-8039-7390-X. Boss, P. (1987). Family stress. New York: Plenum. Bowen, G. L. (1987). Single fathers in the air force. Social Casework 68(6), 339-344. Bowen, G. L. (1985). Families in blue: Insights from Air Force families. Social Casework, 66(8), 459-466. Bowen, G. L., Mancini, J. A., Martin, J. A., Ware, W. B., & Nelson, J. P. (2003). Promoting the adaptation of military families: An empirical test of a community practice model. Family Relations, 52, 33-44 Bowen, G. L., & Orthner, D. K. (1986). Single parents in the U.S. Air Force. Family Relations, 35(1), 45-52. Bowen, G. L., Orthner, D.K., & Zimmerman,L.I. (1993). Family adaptation of single parents in the United States Army: An empirical analysis of stressors and adaptive resources. Family Relations, 42(3), 293-304. Bowling, U. B., & Sherman, M. D. (2008). Welcoming them home: Supporting service members and their families in navigating the tasks of reintegration. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 451-458. Britt, T. W. (2006). Military life: The psychology of serving in peace and combat: The military family. Westport, CT: Praeger. Britt, T. W., Adler, A., & Castro, C. (Eds). (2005). Military life: The psychology of serving in peace and combat. Reducing the negative impact of work-family conflict on military personnel: Individual coping strategies and multi-level interventions. Westport, CT: Praeger. Burr, W. R. (1973). Theory construction and the sociology of the family. New York: John Wiley. Chapin, M. (2009). Deployment and families: Hero stories and horror stories. Smith College Studies in Social Work 79, (3/4), 263-282. Chow, E. N., & Berheide, C. W. (1988). The interdependence of family and work: A framework for family life education, policy and practice. Family Relations, 37, 23- 28. Coser, L. A. (1974). Greedy institutions: Patterns of undivided commitment. New York: Free Press. Department of Defense. (1992, July 13). Family care plans. Department of Defense Instruction 1342.19. ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 95 Drummet, A. R. (2003). Military families under stress: Implications for family life education. Family Relations, 52, 279-287. Faber, A. (2008). Ambiguous absence, ambiguous presence: A qualitative study of military reserve families in wartime. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(8), 222-230. Finkel, L. B. (2003). Geographic mobility, family, and maternal variables as related to the psychosocial adjustment of military children. Military Medicine, 168(12), 1019- 1024. Goldman, N., & Segas, D. (Eds). (1983). The social psychology of military service. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Hall, W. A. (2007). Imposing order: A process to manage day-to-day activities in two- earner families with preschool children. Journal of Family Nursing, 13(1), 56-67. Hammelman, T. L. (1995). The Persian Gulf conflict: The impact of stressors as perceived by army reservists. Health and Social Work, 20(2), 140-145. Hammer, L. B., Cullen, J. C., Neal, M. B., Sinclair, R. R., & Shafiro, M. V. (2005). The longitudinal effects of work--Family conflict and positive spillover on depressive symptoms among dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(2), 138-154. Heath, T. D., & Orthner, D. K. (1999). Stress and adaptation among male and female parents. Journal of Family Issues, 20(4), 557-587. Heubner, A. J., Mancini, J. A., Bowen, G. L., & Orthner, D. K. (2009, April). Shadowed by war: Building community capacity to support military families. Family Relations, 58, 216-228. Hill, R. (1949). Families under stress: adjustment to the crises of war, separation and reunion. New York: Harper. Hoshmand, L. T., & Hoshmand, A. L. (2007). Support for military families. Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 171-180. Jensen, P. S., Lewis, R. L., & Xenakis, S.N. (1986). The military family in review: Context, risk, and prevention. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 25(2), 225-234. Jowers, K. (1994). Military day care tops civilian sites. Navy Times. Jowers, K. (1996). Feeling good? Tell them how. Air Force Times. Karney, B. R., & Crown, J. S. (2007). Families under stress: An assessment of data, theory, and research on marriage and divorce in the military. Arlington, VA: Rand. Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez. 372 U.S. 144. 1963. Kirkland, F. R., & Katz, P. (1989). Combat readiness and the Army family. Military Review, 69, 64-74. Blanchard/NEEDS OF AIR FORCE SINGLE PARENTS 96 McCubbin, H. I. (1979). Integrating coping behavior in family stress theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 237-244. McCubbin, H. I., Joy, C. B., Cauble, A. E., Comeau, J. K., Patterson, J. M., & Needle, R. H. (1980). Family stress and coping: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 855-871. Moss, D. (1994). Military massing against new enemy-reports of abuse in families on upswing. USA Today. Pierce, P. F. (1998). Retention of Air Force women serving during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Military Psychology, 10(3), 195-213. Pincus, S. H. (2001). The emotional cycle of deployment: A military family perspective. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, 4, 15-23. Quick, J. D., Horn, R. S., & Quick, J. C. (1987). Health consequences of stress. Journal of Organizational Behavioral Management, 8(2), 19-36. Rosen, L. N., & Moghadam, L. Z. (1988). Social support, family separation, and well- being among military wives. Behavioral Medicine, 14, 64-70. Rosen, L. N., & Moghadam, L. Z. (1989). Impact of military organization on social support patterns of army wives. Human Organizations, 48(3), 189-193. Rothrauff, T. (2004). All that you can be: Negotiating work and family demands in the military. Journal of Teaching in Marriage and Family, 4(1), 1-25. Salas, M., & Besetsny, L. (2000). Transition into parenthood for high-risk families: The New Parent Support Program. In J. A. Martin, L. N. Rosen, & L. R. Sparacino (Eds.), The military family: A practice guide for human service providers (pp. 197-208). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Segal, M. W. (1986). The military and the family as greedy institutions. Armed Forces and Society, 13(1), 9-38. Segal, M. W. (2006). Military family research. In A. D. Mangelsdorff (Ed.), Psychology in the service of national security (pp. 225-234). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Serrano, R. A. (1994). $2.7-billion plan drafted to enhance military life. Los Angeles Times, Sec. A, Home Edition. Taylor, N. E., Wall, S. M., Liebow, H., Sabatino, C. A., Timberlake, E. M., & Farber, M. (2005). Mother and soldier: Raising a child with a disability in a low income military family. Council for Exceptional Children, 72, 83-99. U.S. Code, Title 10, Armed Forces, 2007. Walker, A. J. (1985). Reconceptualizing family stress. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 827-837. ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2012, 13(1) 97 Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society (4th ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. Wheeler, W. T., & Kiorb, L. J. (2009). Military reform: An uneven history and an uncertain future. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press Wilson, G. (1994). What’s going on here? Navy Times. Wingo, J. D. (2002). Growing up as a global nomad. Minerva: Quarterly Report on Women and the Military, 20(3-4), 30-31. Young, M. (1999). Work-family backlash: Begging the question, what’s fair? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 562(1), 38-40. Author’s note Address correspondence to Lieutenant Colonel Samantha Blanchard, Director of Behavior Medicine, Nellis Family Medicine Residency, 4700 Las Vegas Blvd N, Nellis AFB, NV 89191. E-Mail: samantha.blanchard@us.af.mil