The Impact of Deployment on Children From Canadian Military Families

Abstract

Children in military families experience various stressors associated with the demands of military life, such as parental absences due to deployments. However, there is a limited understanding of children’s well-being to parental deployment from Canadian military families. This study was conducted to examine the impact of deployment on the well-being of school age children from Canadian Armed Forces families and to consider the resilience factors in their well-being. Focus groups with children (N = 85) showed that deployment negatively impacted children’s well-being, routines, and family dynamics. Active distraction and social support seeking served as the most effective protective factors against deployment stress. Recommendations for mitigating the impact of deployment are offered.

Keywords

children military well-being deployment resilience

Over 40,000 Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel have been deployed in support of the mission in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2012 (Boulos & Zamorski, 2013). As such, recent research has mostly focused on investigating the impact of deployment on the well-being of CAF personnel and their spouses (e.g., Boulos & Zamorski, 2013; Skomorovsky, 2014). However, there is very little empirical research on the impact of deployment on children from CAF families. While limited in nature, evidence from the United States reveals that children and adolescents experience lower well-being, disruptions to their routines, and lower family functioning during deployment.¹

Notwithstanding, there are several limitations with the extant literature. Foremost, the majority of studies have relied on the perspectives of adults such as parents when there is a replete with calls for more evidence from the child’s perspective (Flake, davis, Johnson, & Middleton, 2009; Lester et al., 2010). This is because parents’ assessments may be biased in terms of what they choose to disclose, their own well-being, the parent and child sex, child age, and their perceptions of the child primarily within the home context (Card et al., 2011; Chandra, Burns, Tanielian, Jaycox, & Scott, 2008; Flake et al., 2009). It is argued that research on children’s well-being from the child’s perspective is needed because they may be the most accurate at judging their emotional states and cognitive styles, and as such, children can provide unique insights into their internalized distress (Card et al., 2011; Flake et al., 2009). Moreover, research on both military and civilian samples has demonstrated that parent reports of children’s well-being are usually different than children’s self-reports (Crow & Seybold, 2013; Lopez-Perez & Wilson, 2015). Also, the few studies from children’s perspectives are based on adolescents who, because of their enhanced cognitive development and previous deployment experiences, may have a better understanding of the dangers of deployment to the military parent and the challenges faced by the at-home parent than younger children, and as such, may respond differently (Clever & Segal, 2013). Finally, not all children from deployed families are adversely affected; many demonstrate resilience (Lester et al., 2011). However, there is little research on the resources for resilience that children use to overcome the challenges of deployment (Cozza & Lerner, 2013).

Impact of Deployment on Children

Deployment is a continuous process characterized by specific phases: predeployment (i.e., period when military members receive official notification of an operation), deployment (i.e., military member is away on the operation), and postdeployment (i.e., return of the military member to his or her family; Military Family Services (2015). Deployments can be “normative,” which refers to routine, noncombat missions for a clearly defined period of time, or “catastrophic,” which refers to deployments under times of crises, where there is a higher risk of danger, for an undetermined period of time (McCubbin & Figley, 1983).

Researchers have found that the phases of deployment have emotional and psychological influences on family members.² During predeployment, families experience increased stress and anxiety because of the uncertainties about the deployment (e.g., concern over the ability to community with the military member). As well, conflict in the family tends to increase and the family emotionally withdraws from the military member in an attempt to cope with the pain of the upcoming separation. Family members experience a period of disorientation and disorganization in the deployment phase, as they try to adjust to the absence of the military member. There is added stress, as the household roles and responsibilities shift. Finally, postdeployment is marked by increased stress for families, as marital, parenting, and household roles are renegotiated and emotional ties between spouses and parent and child are reestablished.³

The impact of deployment on children’s well-being can be understood from attachment theory (Riggs & Riggs, 2011). Child–parent relationships are pivotal to one’s well-being from early childhood to adulthood (Cassidy, 2001). Children develop a sense of security when they experience a warm and continuous relationship with a caregiver who is available and responsive to his or her needs and maintains an open line of communication (Bowlby, 1969). When children experience prolonged caregiver separations, they display a range of negative emotions including anxiety, anger, sadness, and emotional disengagement (e.g., Booth & Amato, 2001).

Accordingly, children from deployed families may experience poor well-being because the deployed parents are less accessible and responsive. As well, because deployment is the norm of the military lifestyle, the child may be less likely to perceive the military parent as a reliable source of support (Schaetti, 2002). Depending on the type of mission, maintaining communication through the use of technology may be limited, which reduces the opportunity for the child to obtain support from the deployed parent when distressed (Lester & Flake, 2013). Furthermore, children’s attachment system may be chronically activated because they fear for the military parents’ safety (Paley, Lester, & Mogil, 2013).

Previous research has shown small but significant associations between deployment and children’s increased internalizing, externalizing, and academic problems (Card et al., 2011). Of note, these associations are more pronounced with parent reports, which underscore the need to obtain reports directly from children. Wong and Gerras (2010) also found that according to the deployed parents’ perspective, approximately one third of adolescents coped poorly, whereas from the adolescents’ perspective, the majority indicated that they coped well. This discrepancy highlights the importance of obtaining the child’s perspective. Indeed, other studies using focus groups with adolescents revealed increased negative affect, greater physical ailments, and lower academic functioning due worrying about the deployed parent (Huebner & Mancini, 2005; Huebner et al., 2010; Huebner et al., 2007). As well, adolescents reported less support from the military parent for performing routine activities (Huebner et al., 2007; Knobloch, Pusateri, Ebata, & McGlaughin, 2015).

Deployment may also disrupt the stability within the family. Family systems theory (Cox & Paley, 1997) posits that individual family members each have an ongoing and mutual impact on one another and the family members must always be understood in the context of the larger family system. Thus, the way one family member responds to stressors affects other family members. During deployment, at-home parents experience greater stress, anxiety, and depression.⁴ This is found to negatively influence the child–parent interaction (Chandra et al., 2008; Huebner et al., 2007). Furthermore, poor well-being among at-home parents is found to adversely affect children’s well-being (Chandra, Lara-Cinisomo, et al., 2010; Lester et al., 2010). For example, Flake et al. (2009) found that parents who were more likely to report psychosocial difficulties among their children also reported high levels of parenting stress. This suggests a possible reporting bias and points to the need to obtain impartial reports of children’s well-being.

Furthermore, roles and routines within the family change during deployment, and the child–parent boundary is not always maintained (Cozza, Chun, & Polo, 2005). Children and adolescents reported disruptions to their routines and increased responsibilities at home, the latter of which increased their stress.⁵

Coping With Deployment Stress

Resilience refers to the ability to maintain a positive adjustment when experiencing adversity (Masten, 2011). Children’s resilience is developed from individual attributes (e.g., coping strategies), attachment to others, and community-based resources. Coping strategies can be broadly categorized as approach (i.e., attempts to change the stressor or emotional reaction such as problem focused, support seeking, problem-solving) and avoidant (i.e., attempts to avoid the stressor such as emotion focused, distancing, distraction avoidance; Ayers, Sandler, West, & Roosa, 1996). Hiew (1992) reported that children from Canadian military families were most likely to use emotion-focused coping, followed by social support seeking, and least likely to use problem-focused coping during deployment. Support seeking was negatively related to conduct problems. Children also engage in avoidant coping, which is related to increase emotional problems (Chandra et al., 2008; Morris & Age, 2009).

In terms of children’s attachments to others, some adolescents maintain communication with the deployed parent, which makes them feel closer to the parent (Huebner et al., 2010; Wong & Gerras, 2010). Adolescents also cope better with supportive adults (e.g., at-home parent, teachers) and peers at-home parent and supportive mentors.⁶ Finally, adolescents experience improved well-being from attending formal support programs designed for deployed military families (Huebner et al., 2010).

Current Study

Previous research suggests that deployment negatively influences child well-being, routines, and family functioning. However, children who engage in approach coping, have close relationships to parents and peers, and attend support programs for deployed military families appear to positively adapt to deployment. As it stands, there is little understanding about the effect of deployment on children from CAF families. Thus, the present study examined the influence of deployment on child well-being and the factors that contributed to their resilience.

A qualitative approach was used because our goal was to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how children from deployed families think, feel, and act when they experience separation from the military parent (Bernard & Bernard, 2012; Vaughn, Schumm, & Sinagub, 1996). This approach was also taken in order to identify themes or constructs of interests to inform the design of a future quantitative study on children from this unique context. We used focus groups because it has the advantages of obtaining local, subjective perspectives of cultural insiders about the questions being asked and provides the moderator with the flexibility to probe themes that emerge during the discussions, which is not possible with quantitative methods (Bernard, 1994). As well, in comparison to the quantitative methods, focus groups allow participants to respond to questions without being constrained by predetermined response options and provides for more in-depth and detailed discussions (Vaughn et al., 1996). Moreover, this methodology is used in past research on adolescents’ experiences of deployment (e.g., Huebner et al., 2010; Mmari, Roche, Sudhinaraset, & Blum, 2009).

Method

Participants

The sample consisted of N = 85 school-aged children, aged 8–13 years from Regular Force CAF families (38 boys, 42 girls, 5 did not indicate). Participants were from various geographic locations including Ottawa, Petawawa, Trenton, Edmonton, Victoria, and Valcartier (n = 40, 3, 6, 10, 12, 8, respectively). For most of the children (n = 55), the father was in the military; for the rest, both father and mother (n = 24) or the mother (n = 7) was in the military. The vast majority of the families (n = 76) owned their residence, while the rest (n = 9) were living in private military quarters. Most children (n = 60) experienced one to five deployments; the rest experienced more than five parental deployments (n = 14) or none⁷ (n = 10). To ensure that participants in the focus groups are homogeneous, which may allow for more conversational flow (Vaughn et al., 1996), two sets of focus groups were established: a younger group with children aged 8–10 (n = 46) and an older age-group with children aged 11–13 (n = 39).

Procedure

Participants were randomly selected, stratified by their military parent(s)’s rank and environment, with an oversampling of children from Regular Force CAF members who were 1) deployed or recently deployed, (2) recently returned from a deployment, and (3) part of the Joint Personnel Support Unit⁸ (JPSU) or involved in JPSU initiatives. Families’ contact information was obtained from the Director Human Resources Information Management⁹ and JPSU. Upon receiving Department of National Defence (DND) Social Science Research Review Board approval, families were contacted to ask if their children would participate in the focus groups. The focus groups were held in the winter of 2012 at base Military Family Resource Centres, with the exception of several groups that were conducted at a DND office in Ottawa. The research team for the focus groups consisted of the moderator who is a social scientist with a doctor of philosophy and the notetaker. A social worker also attended all the focus groups to provide aid to children who experienced distress during or after participating in the focus groups. Written informed consent from parents and verbal assent from children were obtained before the focus group began. Participants were informed that although they cannot remain anonymous within the focus groups, they should keep the discussions confidential. To ensure anonymity of participants, the data were analyzed in aggregate and were presented in such a way that the identities of individual respondents will not be discernable.

The number of children in the focus groups varied by location, but in general, a random selection of six same-sex participants was in each group (Vaughn et al., 1996). The focus groups lasted between 60 and 90 min. A structured interview protocol was used to facilitate the focus group discussions. Probes and the “graffiti wall” technique, which involves writing questions on flip charts and instructing participants to go around the room responding to the questions after which the moderator discusses the responses, were used to gain further insight into the topics surveyed (Vaughn et al., 1996).

The current study was part of a larger project that examined the types of military stressors, with specific focus on deployment and relocation, and their impact on the well-being of children from CAF families. The roles of risk and resilience factors in the well-being of children in military families were also examined. Some of these questions were adapted from previous research with adolescents in focus groups (Huebner & Mancini, 2005), and the author specifically constructed some for the purposes of the study. In the interview guide, the first set of questions addressed the stressors that children face with deployment. Next, participants were asked about the impacts of deployment on their well-being (psychological health, physiological problems, behavioral changes, academic functioning) and changes that occur in their routines and family functioning. The final set of questions assessed participants’ strategies for coping with deployment. The interview guides were the same for children in both age-groups, although the word of the questions slightly changed to accommodate the age difference. At the end of the focus groups, participants were debriefed, and the rationale of the study was explained.

Data Analysis

The research strategy used in the present study was grounded theory (Goulding, 1998). According to the protocols outlined by Saldaña (2009), two researchers independently coded the focus group transcription, and the codes were compared to identify any discrepancies between the coders. Such a check for intersubjective agreement is a marker of the trustworthiness of the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1990). The coding discrepancies were discussed between the researchers until a consensus was made. If new codes emerged as more transcripts were read, the previous transcripts were reread to identify if there were any missed evidence that now falls into those codes. Saturation was achieved when no new codes were identified. Subsequently, similar codes were categorized into broader themes, and the researchers discussed any discrepancies between the codes and themes until there was agreement.

Results

Impact of Deployment on Children

Four themes emerged from children’s descriptions of their experiences of deployment, including (1) deployment as a stressor, (2) negative impact of deployment on well-being, (3) changes to routine and activities, and (4) changes in the family dynamics.

Deployment as a stressor

Most children described deployment as the most or as one of the most stressful experiences they have had. One of the stressors reported was that children felt they received less support and reduced interaction with the deployed parent. One child said, “I could talk to my Dad [about a problem] and he could walk me through it. If I started crying he could hug me instead of calming me down through devices.” Additionally, for many children, concern over the safety of the deployed parent was a major stressor. One child said, “Not everything he does is safe, and I worry that he is going to get hurt.” Similarly, a second child noted, “[I was] afraid Dad would hit a bomb, because he is a [VEHICLE OCCUPATION] goods.” Most children indicated that fear that something could happen to the parent without them knowing about it made the deployment experience stressful. This was best illustrated by one child’s comment: “You don’t know what is happening. You don’t know if he is dead or has a broken arm or in prison or at the hospital. You just don’t know what could happen to him.”

Negative impact on well-being

The majority of children reported that deployment negatively influenced their emotions, physical health, and school functioning. Firstly, children reported a range of negative emotions. One child said, “I cried a lot, was really unhappy.” Another stated, “I felt disappointed, sad, scared, outraged, unhappy, worried, and mad.” Some children’s problems manifested physically, affecting their sleep, appetite, and eating habits. Many reported they were unable to fall asleep, whereas others indicated that they slept more than usual. Some younger children had difficulties sleeping alone and would often sleep with the at-home parent. One child stated, “[My] little brother had a lot of sleep disruptions, [he] would sleep with Mom when Dad was away (…).” A few others also displayed psychosomatic symptoms in which they developed physical pain from the deployment-related stress. One child said, “I get stressed at school and get too many headaches [when my Dad is away].”

Further, some children indicated school problems, whereas others did not. Difficulty concentrating in school because of deployment-related stress was often cited for lower school performance. One child said, “I was miserable at concentrating at school. I was miserable because he is risking his life and he could die.” Another reported feeling “Unfocused—[my] mind would wonder off and think about Dad.” Others also indicated that their grades declined in the subjects that their military parents helped them with before being deployed. For example, one child said, “Mom is not very good at math and that is usually Dad’s responsibility, so I have to figure it out myself.” A second child mentioned, “Doing homework makes me upset—it’s boring and difficult when my Dad is away.” Furthermore, some children felt that their grades declined because they were experiencing a high level of stress. For some, it was helpful to think that concentrating on school would make their deployed parent proud. Some children also reported obtaining support from their teachers. For example, one child said, “[My] teacher was aware [that my] Dad was deployed; when I broke down, they were very supportive and understood.” Another child mentioned, “[The] teachers that I’ve had, have partners that are in the military and really understand what you’re going through. They don’t give you a hard time.”

Changes in routine

Children reported changes in their roles and responsibilities when their parent was deployed. Older children with younger siblings reported increased responsibilities around the house, including taking care of their siblings. One child mentioned, “As the older sibling, I have to do my Mom’s jobs to make sure the house is clean and the routine stays the same.” Similarly, a second child said, “I have to take care of my sister more because my Mom has other things to do.” Furthermore, some children indicated feeling more mature during this time. For example, one child reported,
We were both really upset and my little sister was crying. She moved over and I calmed her down. It’s almost like I’ve matured. It’s like I’m older than I actually am. It’s the way that it just kind of happens.
As well, many children reported that deployment resulted in a reduction in extracurricular activities due to financial and logistical difficulties (e.g., driving). In cases with multiple siblings, the at-home parent had to choose which child could attend his or her activity. Moreover, some reported that the activities they were typically involved in changed because it was the military parent who was more involved in those social aspects of their lives. For instance, one child said, “I feel lonely because I do a lot of stuff with my Dad, and he encourages me at my hockey games.” A different child noted, “Since we are not with our father, our social life has changed, especially what we do in the evening. It’s not just the family, but people around; they know that he is gone.” Some also reported that their social environment changed, in that, they needed to stay longer at school in the after-school program when their parent was deployed. The main reasons were the at-home parents’ work schedule and cost of babysitting.

Changes in family dynamics

Another theme that emerged from children’s discussion of how deployment influenced their lives was the change in sibling relationships and child and at-home parent relationships. The majority of children reported fighting less with their siblings and instead being more supportive of each other. One child stated, “[I experienced] no fighting with siblings. We go our own ways and help each other more.” Another mentioned, “[We] stopped fighting when Dad was gone to [LOCATION], [because we] wanted to support each other.” Older children in particular were often able to understand the importance of staying together and helping each other during the absence of the parent. Notwithstanding, there were some children who reported increased fighting. For example, one child said, “We fight a lot. We’re always yelling at each other, and it stresses my Mom out.” A second child noted, “The relationship with my brother and sister is worse. We fight a lot, just for the television, for the video games.” Notably, the increase in fighting was reported in families with children close in age and when the at-home parent was experiencing higher levels of stress. As well, the level of fighting tended to stay the same in cases where it had been quite high before the deployment, which points to the negative dynamics in the home, rather than to the impact of deployment. Additionally, children reported more negative interactions and greater tension within the family. Few children discussed an increase in fighting and verbal abuse coming from the at-home parent.

As well, many children noted that the deployment was stressful for the at-home parent, which took a toll on his or her well-being. One child said, “She has to be more responsible; she is more stressed because she has to do everything, manage, and cook.” Another reported, “She started to smoke again, and to me means she’s stressed and she doesn’t have any other way to let it out.” Some children also noticed that the at-home parent would distance himself or herself from the family and become distracted with other things. For example, one child stated, “Dad spent more time at work [when Mom was deployed].” Similarly, a second child said, “Dad stayed at work till 6:00 in the morning one time, and then came for breakfast, and then left again.”

Deployment Stress and Children’s Strategies

Six themes emerged from children’s discussion of the strategies they used to deal with deployment, including (1) coping strategies, (2) bonding with the at-home parent, (3) communicating with the deployed parent, (4) cultivating the psychological presence of the deployed parent, and (5) attending support groups.

Coping strategies

Children discussed several strategies they had used to deal with the stress of deployment. One strategy was seeking social support. All children believed that seeking social support was helpful. Although most preferred support from their friends, a few preferred support from other adults, including the at-home parent, relatives, and teachers. One child said, “When I’m upset, my Mom does comfort me, and she tells me her point of view of the situation. That makes me feel better, and I calm down about it.” As well, another child stated, “For me, it is teachers at school or the childcare service. It helps me a lot because I can let out all of my emotions.” A different child commented, “They [teachers] say to try not to think about it too much, talk about it—otherwise it will stay in your head and you will be stressed all the time.”

Another strategy that children believed was helpful was normalizing or rationalizing the experience by putting it into perspective. One child stated, “You have to remember that there are other kids who go through the same thing. I have to constantly remind myself of this.”

In addition, children mentioned various ways they distracted themselves to cope with the stress associated with deployment, including listening to music and being involved in activities. For example, one child indicated, “I release my stress and express myself through dance. [That] releases my anger and stress without hurting anyone.” A second child mentioned,
I have a few songs on my iPod, and I listen to this song on repeat and that will just calm me down and remind me that you’re fine, you’ll wake up tomorrow, and everything will be the same as today.
Moreover, some reported using an avoidance strategy by distancing themselves from others, including their teachers and peers when they experienced stress. For example, one child reported, “When I feel sad, I lock myself in my room and want to be alone.” Similarly, another said, “I didn’t talk to many people when my Dad was away.” Although children felt that avoidance was a good strategy at the time, they also reported feeling very lonely and, overall, did not seem to be coping well using this strategy. The children who stayed alone when stressed also reported having problems with making friends, and it took longer for them to adjust to the deployment. Most children mentioned using more than one coping strategy.

Bonding with at-home parent

Children also reported that spending more time with their at-home parent helped them cope with the absence of their other parent. One child said, “[I felt] happy because I would get to do more things with my Mom.” A second child noted, “My Mom takes me out for more activities (cinema, etcetera), so that I am not sad.”

Communication with deployed parent

Another strategy that children used to cope with the stress of deployment was communicating with the deployed parent. Typically, children communicated with their parent via telephone or Internet (e.g., Skype). Most children felt it was helpful to communicate with the deployed parent. One child said, “It’s good that we have Skype, so now we can talk to him every night and that makes me feel good.” Nonetheless, some children found it more distressing to speak to the deployed parent and preferred not to communicate. For example, one child said, “I tried to kind of stay away from talking over the phone. I don’t want to start crying and make him feel even worse.”

Psychological presence of deployed parent

Maintaining the psychological presence of the deployed parent was another helpful strategy for some children. Several children mentioned that their military parents gave them a toy or an object before leaving on deployment as a reminder of them. For example, one child said,
I have a little doggie at home. We recorded his voice and we put it in inside. When we push on the stomach, we hear the voice of my Dad when he is gone. My Dad gave it to me when he came back from somewhere and, when I have it, it makes me think of him.
In other instances, children themselves identified an object that could serve as a reminder of the parent. For example, one child said, “When I was younger, I would use Dad’s shirt to go to bed.” Another child said,
I met my best friend who had this doll with a picture on it. It’s like a little stuffy doll. So I got one, and it’s easier sleeping [because I] put a picture of [my] Dad on it. It’s like he’s there.

Attending support groups

Finally, some children mentioned that it is helpful to attend support groups with other children who are experiencing a parent on deployment. One child noted, “[It] sort of helps when others are in a similar situation all around.” Other children expressed an interest in attending one because they believed it would help them cope. One child said, “It would help a bit, and I would definitely attend.”

Meaning of Having a Military Parent

Children were asked to discuss the meaning of having a parent in the military and their perceptions of being a part of the military family. The main topics that arose in this discussion were feeling different from nonmilitary children and feeling happy and proud of the military parent.

Feeling different

Many children mentioned that they felt different from children whose parents are not in the military. The main sources of this feeling were as follows: (a) other children cannot relate when their parents never leave for long period of time and cannot understand how it makes children feel when a parent is away; (b) other children do not have a good understanding of what the military is or have a skewed perception of it and can be insensitive in asking questions about the military.
Their parents aren’t in the military; they don’t know what it feels like to have parents go away.

I feel different because the first day of school everyone had their mom and dad pick them up, and I had to take the bus home. All I wanted was my dad to come pick me up.

Feeling proud

Quite a few children said they were proud of their military parent. Children’s self-worth was greater due to feelings of respect for their military parent.
I also feel proud that my dad is in the military, and happy because I have had the chance to go to other countries and then come back and say I have seen this, this, and this.

Dad is doing something honorable, not curled up in a ball.

I read a book, A Father to be Proud Of. Even though it means he can’t be with his family all the time, it’s a job that not everyone can handle and that you’re special and that’s why I’m special because my Dad does this.
In addition, to feeling proud, children mentioned the following as the primary aspects that are good about having a parent in the military: seeing many new places and meeting new people, feeling safe, and receiving special benefits.

Discussion

Children in military families experience various stressors associated with the demands of military life (Wiens & Boss, 2006). To date, little empirical attention has been given to the well-being of children from CAF families. As such, the present study aimed to fulfill a noticeable gap in the literature by focusing on the impact of deployment on the well-being of children from CAF families and the factors that protect them against the adverse effects related to deployment.

The main sources of deployment stress reported by most children included having fewer interactions with and receiving less support from the deployed parent, being concerned about the deployed parents’ safety, and a lack of knowledge about what was happening with the deployed parent. Indeed, from an attachment perspective, children turn to parents for support, particularly when they are distressed (Cassidy, 2001). For children from deployed families, the lack of availability of the deployed parent may be damaging to their well-being. In addition, because younger children are less cognitively developed as their older counterparts and may have had fewer deployment experiences, they may have a lesser comprehensive understanding of the deployment (Clever & Segal, 2013). As well, if children are exposed to sensationalized media accounts of deployments, they may perceive the deployment experience as distressing.

The majority of children experienced decreased well-being during deployment. Most children experienced sadness, which is consistent with research on child–parent separations, including deployment (e.g., Booth & Amato, 2001; Chandra et al., 2008; Huebner & Mancini, 2005). Children’s physical health was also affected in different ways. For example, some children reported sleeping more, whereas others slept less. This is consistent with past studies on adolescents (Huebner et al., 2010). Some age differences emerged in that; younger children would often sleep with the at-home parent. This may be because parents during this developmental period provide security when children are distressed (Bowlby, 1969).

Most children reported achieving lower grades in school, which they attributed to difficulties concentrating and increase worry about the deployed parents. This is consistent with Huebner and Mancini’s (2005) findings with focus groups conducted with adolescents and quantitative evidence, which showed a negative association between deployment and academic problems (Card et al., 2011). A unique finding was that some children reported they worked harder at school because they wanted to make their parents proud. This may suggest that some children positively reframe the experience as an opportunity to excel at school to make their parents proud. Alternatively, academic achievement may be highly valued in those families.

Children’s roles and routines also changed during deployment. Consistent with past studies (e.g., Knobloch et al., 2015; Mmari et al., 2009), older children had more household chores and childcare duties and children engaged in fewer activities because of greater financial strain and logistic issues. A novel finding was that some children engaged in fewer activities because it was the military parent who was more involved in these activities with the children. This may imply that military parents spend a lot of time with their children before leaving on deployment. Alternatively, it may be that the activity in question represents an interest shared mainly between the child and military parent. It may also be possible that the child has a stronger bond with the military parent than with the at-home parent. It is suggested that future research explore the quality of the child–military parent relationship across the deployment process.

Further, the dynamics within the family changed during deployment. There were often increased negative interactions between the at-home parent and child, which may be due to the increased stress and poorer well-being that spouses of CAF personnel experience during deployment (Skomorovsky, 2014). Indeed, several children reported that the at-home parent appeared depressed and distant, which supports previous research (e.g., Chandra et al., 2008; Huebner et al., 2010). Mixed reports were found on the effects of deployment on sibling relationships, with some children indicating more conflict and others less. Notably, conflict between siblings appeared to increase in families that were already dysfunctional. This suggests that deployment may exacerbate negative family relationships. Together, in keeping with family systems theory (Cox & Paley, 1997), deployment has a reverberating effect throughout the family and the response of one family member influences another member.

The results from the present study suggest that seeking support from peers, teachers, relatives, and at-home parents as well as using active distraction were the most effective coping strategies that children used. The benefit of support from teachers is a unique finding compared to other studies that found that support from teachers was usually lacking or ineffective in improving children and adolescents’ well-being (Chandra et al., 2008; Mmari et al., 2009). Avoidant coping such as distancing was considered a less effective strategy as children who reported using it experienced loneliness. Previous research has shown that distancing oneself from opportunities for social interaction is associated with greater loneliness (Krause-Parello, 2008). Other avoidant coping styles is also related to lower well-being among military (Morris & Age, 2009) and nonmilitary adolescents (Frydenberg & Lewis, 2009).

It was also found that attachment to parents facilitated children’s resilience during deployment. Specifically, bonding with the at-home parent, maintaining the psychological presence of the deployed parent, and communicating with the deployed parent were useful in helping children positively adapt. From an attachment perspective, these strategies were effective because children were able to obtain support and have their emotional needs met (Bowlby, 1969). For some children, communicating with the deployed parent worsened their outcomes, which is consistent with the findings by Houston et al. (2013). Lastly, some children reported that attending support groups was helpful in dealing with deployment, whereas others indicated an interest based on the belief it would help them adjust. Children and adolescents have reported that support programs for deployed families are helpful because they feel comfortable expressing their emotions with peers who have similar experiences (Chandra et al., 2008; Huebner & Mancini. 2005; Mmari et al., 2009). Deployment-specific support groups may also provide role models who use positive coping strategies for others.

Overall, despite the stress related to the parental deployment, the vast majority of children saw some positive aspects about having a parent in the military, including feeling proud of the military parent(s), seeing many new places and meeting new people, feeling safe, and receiving special benefits. Although children felt different from children from civilian families, the majority of the children believed it is good thing to be part of a military family.

Recommendations

Findings from this research suggest that parents should increase children’s knowledge about the details of the deployment, as it would help them make sense of the experience. As well, parents could discuss the normal responses to deployment (e.g., worry) and the changes in roles and responsibilities that will occur in order to provide children with a sense of predictability. Further, given that psychological distress experienced by the at-home parent can negatively influence the child well-being (e.g., Chandra et al., 2008; Flake et al., 2009), it is recommended that parents encourage effective coping strategies to help them reduce their stress. Parents could also encourage children to seek social support from others. Moreover, it is recommended that existing programs (e.g., Children’s Deployment Workshops) are readily available to children to ensure they understand the importance of active distraction and social support, while reducing the use of distancing and isolation.

Conclusion, Caveats, and Future Directions

The results from this study showed that children felt different and proud for growing up in a military family. As well, deployment negatively affected children’s well-being, routine, and family dynamics. However, to cope with deployment, children engaged in several different strategies including coping behaviors (e.g., seeking social support), bonding with the at-home parent, communicating with the deployed parent as well as maintaining the psychological presence of the deployed parent, and attending formal support programs. Notwithstanding, there are some limitations that should be considered in the interpretation of the findings. Firstly, we did not differentiate between the impact of normative and catastrophic deployment, which may influence child well-being in different ways. Secondly, our study focused on a small sample of children from Regular Force military families, which may not be transferable to all children from Regular Force families. Further, there should be research that examines whether the experiences are different for children from reserve families. Finally, a quantitative study should be conducted to follow up on the results of this qualitative research to examine the extent of the deployment stress for children from military families. Nonetheless, the qualitative study provided rich and context-specific insight into the lives of children from CAF families.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

This article has not been published elsewhere and has not been submitted simultaneously for publication in another outlet.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

References

Ayers

Sandler

West

Roosa

(1996). A dispositional and situational assessment of children’s coping: Testing alternative models of coping. Journal of Personality, 64, 923–958.

Bell

D. B.

Schumm

W. R.

(1999). Family adaptation to deployments. In McClure

(Ed.), Pathways to the future: A review of military family research (pp.109–118). Scranton, PA: Military Family Institute, Marywood University.

Bernard

H. R.

(1994). Research methodology in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bernard

H. R.

Bernard

H. R.

(2012). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Boulos

Zamorski

(2013). Deployment-related mental disorders among Canadian Armed Forces personnel deployed in support of the mission in Afghanistan, 2001-2008. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 185, 545–552.

Bowlby

(1969). Attachment: Attachment and loss. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Booth

Amato

P. R.

(2001). Parental predivorce relations and offspring postdivorce well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 197–212.

Booth

Segal

M. W.

Bell

D. B.

Martin

J. A.

Ender

M. G.

Rohall

D. E.

Nelson

(2007). What we know about Army families: 2007 update. Arlington, VA: Family and Morale, Welfare and Recreation Command.

Card

N. A.

Bosch

Casper

D. M.

Wiggs

C. B.

Hawkins

S. A.

Scholmer

G. L.

Borden

L. M.

(2011). A meta-analytic review of internalizing, externalizing, and academic adjustment among children of deployed military service members. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 508–520.

10.

Cassidy

(2001). Truth, lies, and intimacy: An attachment perspective. Attachment & Human Development, 3, 121–155.

11.

Chandra

Burns

R. M.

Tanielian

Jaycox

L. H.

Scott

M. M.

(2008). Understanding the impact of deployment on children and families: Findings from a pilot study of Operation Purple Camp participants. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

12.

Chandra

Lara-Cinisomo

Jaycox

L. H.

Tanielian

Burns

R. M.

Ruder

Han

(2010). Children on the homefront: The experience of children from military families. Pediatrics, 125, 16–25.

13.

Chandra

Martin

L. T.

Hawkins

S. A.

Richardson

(2010). The impact of parental deployment on child social and emotional functioning: Perspectives of school staff. Journal of Adolescent Health, 46, 218–223.

14.

Clever

Segal

D. R.

(2013). The demographics of military children and families. The Future of Children, 23, 13–39.

15.

Cox

M. J.

Paley

(1997). Families as systems. In Spense

J. T.

(Ed.), Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 243–267.

16.

Cozza

S. J.

Chun

R. S.

Polo

J. A.

(2005). Military families and children during operation Iraqi freedom. Psychiatric Quarterly, 76, 371–378.

17.

Cozza

C. S. J.

Lerner

R. M.

(2013). Military children and families: Introducing the issue. The Future of Children, 23, 3–11.

18.

Crow

J. R.

Seybold

A. K.

(2013). Discrepancies in military middle-school adolescents’ and parents’ perceptions of family functioning, social support, anger frequency, and concerns. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 1–9.

19.

Esposito-Smythers

Lemmon

K. M.

Wolff

Bodzy

Swenson

Spirito

(2011). Military youth and the deployment cycle: Emotional health consequences and recommendations for intervention. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 497–507.

20.

Finkel

L. B.

Kelley

M. L.

Ashby

(2003). Geographic mobility, family, and maternal variables as related to the psychosocial adjustment of military children. Military Medicine, 168, 1019–1024.

21.

Flake

E. M.

Davis

B. E.

Johnson

P. L.

Middleton

L. S.

(2009). The psychosocial effects of deployment on military children. Journal of Developmental & Behavioural Pediatrics, 30, 271–278.

22.

Frydenberg

Lewis

(2009). Relations among well-being, avoidant coping, and active coping in a large sample of Australian adolescents. Psychological Reports, 104, 745–758.

23.

Goulding

(1998). Grounded theory: The missing methodology on the interpretivist agenda. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 1, 50–57.

24.

Hiew

C. C.

(1992). Separated by their work: Families with fathers living apart. Environment and Behaviour, 24, 206–225.

25.

Houston

J. B.

Pfefferbaum

Sherman

M. D.

Melson

A. G.

Brand

M. W.

(2013). Family communication across the military deployment experience: Child and spouse report of communication frequency and quality and associated emotions, behaviors, and reactions. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 18, 103–119.

26.

Huebner

A. J.

Mancini

J. A.

(2005). Adjustments among adolescents in military families when a parent is deployed. Final report to the Military Family Research Institute and Department of Defense Quality of Life Office. Falls Church, VA: Virginia Tech, Department of Human Development.

27.

Huebner

A. J.

Mancini

J. A.

Wade

K. E.

McElhaney

S. J.

Wiles

B. B.

Ford

J. L.

(2010). Resilience and vulnerability: The deployment experiences of youth in military families. Final report submitted to the Army Child, Youth, and School Services, and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Retrieved July 17, 2013, from www.fcs.uga.edu/cfd/docs/resilience_and_vulnerability.pdf

28.

Huebner

A. J.

Mancini

J. A.

Wilcox

R. M.

Grass

S. R.

Grass

G. A.

(2007). Parental deployment and youth in military families: Exploring uncertainty and ambiguous loss. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 56, 112–122.

29.

Knobloch

L. K.

Pusateri

K. B.

Ebata

A. T.

McGlaughlin

P. C.

(2015). Experiences of military youth during a family member’s deployment: Changes, challenges, and opportunities. Youth & Society, 47, 319–342.

30.

Krause-Parello

C. A.

(2008). Loneliness in the school setting. The Journal of School Nursing, 24, 66–70.

31.

Lester

Flake

L. C. E.

(2013). How wartime military service affects children and families. The Future of Children, 23, 121–141.

32.

Lester

Mogil

Saltzman

Woodward

Nash

Leskin

… Beardslee

(2011). Families overcoming under stress: Implementing family-centered prevention for military families facing wartime deployments and combat operational stress. Military medicine, 176, 19–25.

33.

Lester

Peterson

Reeves

Knauss

Glover

Mogil

…, Beardslee

, (2010). The long war and parental combat deployment: effects on military children and at-home spouses. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 49, 310–320.

34.

Lincoln

Y. S.

Guba

E. G.

(1990). Judging the quality of case study reports. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 3, 53–59.

35.

Lopez-Perez

Wilson

E. L.

(2015). Parent-child discrepancies in the assessment of children’s and adolescents’ happiness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 139, 249–255.

36.

Masten

A. S.

(2011). Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice, and translational synergy. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 493–506.

37.

McCubbin

Figley

C. R.

(Eds.). (1983). Stress and the family, Volume I: Coping with normative transitions. New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.

38.

Mmari

Roche

K. M.

Sudhinaraset

Blum

(2009). Exploring the issues faced by adolescents and their families. Youth & Society, 40, 455–475.

39.

Morris

A. S.

Age

T. R.

(2009). Adjustment among youth in military families: The protective roles of effortful control and maternal social support. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 695–707.

40.

Military Family Services (2015). A family guide to the military experience. Retrieved from https://www.familyforce.ca/EN/Documents/MFS%20A%20Family%20Guide%20to%20the%20Military%20Experience%20ENG.pdf

41.

Paley

Lester

Mogil

(2013). Family systems and ecological perspectives on the impact of deployment on military families. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 16, 245–265.

42.

Pincus

S. H.

House

Christenson

Adler

L. E.

(2001). The emotional cycle of deployment: A military family perspective. US Army Medical Department Journal, 4, 15–23.

43.

Riggs

S. A.

Riggs

D. S.

(2011). Risk and resilience in military families experiencing deployment: The role of the family attachment network. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 675–687.

44.

Saldaña

(2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

45.

Schaetti

B. F.

(2002). Attachment theory: A view into the global nomad experience. In Ender

M. G.

(Ed.), Military brats and other global nomads (pp. 103–119). Westport, CT: Praeger.

46.

Skomorovsky

(2014). Deployment stress and well-being among military spouses: The role of social support. Military Psychology, 26, 44–54.

47.

Tollefson

T. T.

(2008). Supporting spouses during a military deployment. Family & community health, 31, 281–286.

48.

Vaughn

Schumm

Singagub

(1996). Focus group interviews in education and psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

49.

Wiens

T. W.

Boss

(2006). Maintaining family resilience before, during, and after military separation. In Castro

Adler

Britt

(Eds.), Military life: The psychology of serving in peace and combat. The military family, Vol. 3 (pp. 13–38). Westport, CT: Praeger.

50.

Wong

Gerras

(2010). The effects of multiple deployments on army adolescents. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute.