Protective Factors for Military Veteran Fathers’ Parenting Functioning and Satisfaction

Abstract

Employing a strengths-based perspective, this study examined protective factors related to fathers’ positive parenting behaviors and parenting satisfaction. The sample included 3,810 active duty veteran fathers who separated from the active component and had at least one child 18 years and younger. Logistic regression analyses indicated that financial status, health functioning, resilience, social support, positive social functioning with community and friends, and positive social functioning with relatives were all associated with parenting functioning. The interaction of the number of deployments and resilience was related to parenting functioning. Furthermore, health functioning, resilience, social support, positive social functioning with community and friends, and positive social functioning with relatives were associated with parenting satisfaction. Among fathers in a romantic relationship, the interaction of the number of deployments and romantic relationship functioning and the interaction of the number of deployments and romantic relationship satisfaction were both related to parenting functioning and parenting satisfaction.

Keywords

military father parenting protective factors veteran

Introduction

The majority of military families thrive. Military children function well on outcomes such as self-regulation, academic performance, and emotional well-being (Easterbrooks et al., 2013), and military couples are less likely to divorce than civilian couples (Karney et al., 2012). Although some parents who return from combat deployment experience symptoms of depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the majority of parents (i.e., 75–85%) do not (Bonanno et al., 2012; Polusny et al., 2017).

The focus of much of the literature on military families, especially those families with military fathers, has been on those families who are having difficulties. Much of this literature seeks to either describe parent or child dysfunction or identify risk factors for parental and family dysfunction in order to inform policies to reduce risks to military families or to highlight areas where treatment opportunities are needed (see Karre et al., 2018 for a review). Through this research, several factors have been found to be related to post-deployment difficulties (e.g., PTSD symptoms, depression, psychosocial difficulties). These include pre-deployment factors such as less preparedness (Polusny et al., 2017), concerns for life/family disruption, and prior life stress (Polusny et al., 2011); during deployment factors such as traumatic experiences (Bonanno et al., 2012; Polusny et al., 2017) and perceived threat (Polusny et al., 2017); and post-deployment factors such as life stressors (Polusny et al., 2017).

In the parenting domain, specifically, these risks are important to understand as combat deployment can influence parenting difficulties (Kritikos et al., 2018; Mustillo et al., 2014). Moreover, PTSD can play a role in the quality of the father–child relationship (Ruscio et al., 2002), effective parenting (Gewirtz et al., 2010), parenting satisfaction (Samper et al., 2004), and family difficulties (Kritikos et al., 2018). The PTSD symptom of emotional numbing is related to less parenting satisfaction (Samper et al., 2004), parenting stress (Tomassetti-Long et al., 2015), and the quality of a father’s relationship with his child (Ruscio et al., 2002). Experiential avoidance, another PTSD symptom, is related to family problems (Brockman et al., 2016). Similarly, traumatic combat exposure is related to major depression, which, in turn, is related to parenting difficulties (Mustillo et al., 2014).

Although these data play an important role in our understanding of military families that are struggling and how to help them, focusing solely on risk factors leaves out an important source of information—families that are thriving. Research on families that are functioning well can help us better understand what protective factors influence their well-being. These protective factors may then inform how to help distressed families.

Within the last decade, research has begun to examine protective factors related to military families. Protective factors for PTSD include pre-deployment military preparedness, pre-deployment unit social support, post-deployment social support (Polusny et al., 2011), and resilience (Pietrzak et al., 2009, 2010). Post-deployment social support is also a protective factor for psychosocial difficulties (Pietrzak et al., 2010). For parenting, social support (Gewirtz et al., 2010), preparing children before deployment (Louie & Cromer, 2014), and father’s hardiness (Tomassetti-Long et al., 2015) have been found to influence parenting stress (Louie & Cromer, 2014; Tomassetti-Long et al., 2015) and effective parenting, both directly and indirectly through the couple adjustment (Gewirtz et al., 2010).

Present Study

The purpose of this study is to replicate and extend the literature on protective factors for fathers related to their combat deployment and their parenting behaviors and satisfaction. Much of the extant literature related to parents engaged in recent military conflicts examines National Guard and Reserve component families (e.g., Gewirtz et al., 2010; Mustillo et al., 2014). This investigation, however, will examine recent active duty veterans. Fathers, specifically, are being examined as there has been a dearth of research on the positive behaviors in which military fathers engage (Karre et al., 2018). The strengths-based approach taken here will expand on the literature related to positive father involvement of military fathers, and it will also inform on what protective factors could help fathers who are struggling with parenting after a combat deployment. The protective factors that will be examined in this investigation include financial security; healthy behaviors; resilience; social support; social functioning; romantic relationship functioning; and romantic relationship satisfaction.

For this investigation, protective factors were hypothesized to be related to better parenting functioning and more parenting satisfaction. Moreover, we also hypothesized that when a father experienced more deployments, more traumatic combat exposure, or more emotional numbing, the protective factors would be a stronger predictor of parenting satisfaction and functioning than when they experienced fewer deployments, less traumatic combat exposure, or less emotional numbing. Finally, relationship functioning and satisfaction was hypothesized to be related to better functioning and more parenting satisfaction for fathers who were in a romantic relationship.

Methods

The Veteran Metric Initiative Study (TVMI) is a public–private collaboration led by the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine. Researchers from the Veterans Health Administration, private industry, and the academic/university setting have collaborated to understand service member transition to civilian life during the first three years after discharge. The current study examines data from the first wave, which was when participants were within three months after discharge from the military.

Procedures

As discussed in detail in Vogt et al. (2018) and Perkins et al. (2019), 48,965 veterans were invited to participate in the study. This included the entire population of veterans who had separated from the military within three months of survey distribution (i.e., September to October 2016); were either active duty or National Guard/Reserve who were activated for at least 180 days; and had a mailing address in continental United State. Veterans received a pre-incentive of US$5 and a post-survey US$20 gift card for the first wave of data collection. When complete, this study will include six waves of data collection, each occurring six months apart. Almost all of the 9,566 veterans who completed the first assessment did so online. Only 11 participants completed a paper-and-pencil version of the survey.

Sample

The sample includes 3,810 male veterans who had separated from active duty military component within the last 90 days and had at least one child 18 years old or under. A subsample of veteran fathers who were in romantic relationships was also examined (n = 3,613). The average age of the veteran fathers was 37.12 years (SD = 8.36); approximately 91% of fathers were 25 years old and older. Seventy-six percent were enlisted; 40% were Army, 21% were Navy, 22% were Air Force, and 18% were Marines. Eighty-two percent were deployed to a combat zone at least once. Sixty-eight percent were White; 11% were Black; 13% were Hispanic; 3% were Asian, Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; 4% were multiracial; and 1% identified as other. Two percent were never married; 65% were married for the first time; 23% were married for the second or more time; and 10% were separated, divorced, or widowed.

Measures

Several variables were entered as control variables. These variables were age, pay grade, ethnicity, Service branch, military occupation, education, marital status, spouse/partner’s military status, discharge status, physical health, and presence of a mental health diagnosis.

A measure of well-being was developed for this study. The goals of scale development were to (a) capture the construct of interest and (b) keep the number of scale items manageable so as to not overburden participants and keep them engaged for the duration of this large, longitudinal study. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed to establish the factor structure of the well-being measure (Vogt et al., 2019).

Hypothesized protective factors

Twelve protective factors were hypothesized to be related to parenting functioning and parenting satisfaction. All protective factors were components of the overall well-being measure.

Secure financial status

Secure financial status was assessed with a six-item scale intended to measure the household financial circumstances, including having at least three months of income set aside in case of unexpected financial event, whether the household has been contacted by credit card company for failure to make debt payments (reverse coded), whether the participant has been concerned they would lose their home and unable to find stable housing (reverse coded), and if the household has begun to set aside money for retirement (Vogt et al., 2019). Response options were 0 (no) or 1 (yes). Three categories of financial status were created (i.e., secure, at-risk, and problematic). Secure versus not secure financial status was used in the logistic regression models (α = 0.72).

Absence of mental health symptoms

Veterans were asked about PTSD symptoms (Prins et al., 2016). Veterans were first asked if anything happened that was unusual or frightening, horrible, or traumatic before the age of 18 years, after 18 years but before joining the military, while in the military, and since separating from the military. If participants answered yes to any items, they were asked if they had nightmares; tried hard not to think about the event; been constantly on guard, watchful, or easily startled; felt numb or detached from people, activities, or their surrounding; or felt guilty or unable to stop blaming themselves or others for the event. Possible responses to each question were 1 (yes) or 0 (no). A sum PTSD score was computed.

Veterans were asked if they experienced two depression-related items within the last two weeks: little interest or pleasure in doing things; feeling down, depressed, or hopeless (Kroenke et al., 2009). Response options ranged from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). A sum depression score was computed.

Veterans were asked if they experienced two anxiety-related items within the last 2 weeks: feeling nervous anxious or on edge; not being able to stop or control worrying (Kroenke et al., 2009). Response options ranged from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). A sum anxiety score was computed.

In order to obtain an absence of mental health symptoms score, PTSD, depression, and anxiety scores were summed. Sum scores of 0 were coded as 1 (absence of mental health symptoms), and sum scores of greater than 0 were coded as 0 (presence of mental health symptoms).

No self-reported physical health or mental health conditions

Two questions were asked about health conditions: do you have an ongoing physical health condition, illness, or disability (e.g., high blood pressure, chronic pain)? Do you have an ongoing mental health condition, illness, or disability (e.g., depression and anxiety). Response options were 1 (yes) and 0 (no). Responding no to both was recoded as no self-reported health conditions.

Health functioning

Health functioning was measured with four items, modified from Topolski et al. (2006), that asked about physical activity (at least 2 hours and 30 minutes of moderate physical activity OR 1 hour and 15 minutes of vigorous activity each week), muscle-strengthening exercise at least two days a week, healthy diet, and the quality of sleep. Response options included 0 (never) to 4 (most or all of the time). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.75.

Resilience

A six-item scale tapped into one’s ability to get through and bounce back after difficult life events (Smith et al., 2008). Response options ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.88. Items were averaged to create a mean score. Then, the mean score was dichotomized. A mean score of 4.31–5 was categorized as 1 (high resilience); a mean score of 1–4.3 was categorized as 0 (low or average).

Social support

Social support was measured by a four-item scale that assesses whether there are people in the father’s life who are available for activities such as having a good time with, to turn to for suggestions about how to deal with a personal problem, who understand the father’s problems, and who makes the father feel wanted (Sherbourne & Stewart, 1991). Response options ranged from 0 (none of the time) to 4 (all of the time). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.94.

Positive social functioning with community and friends

A six-item scale tapped into the father’s adherence to community norms (i.e., followed rules and expectations of your community, helped out with your community needs, gotten along well with members in your community, provided support to friends, gotten along well with friends, and been available when friends wanted to spend time together; Vogt et al., 2019). Response options were from 0 (never) to 4 (most or all of the time). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.83.

Positive social functioning with relatives

A three-item scale assessed whether the father provides support to relatives other than children or significant other when needed, has been available when relatives want to spend time together, and gets along well with relatives (Vogt et al., 2019). Response options ranged from 0 (never) to 4 (most or all of the time). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.86.

Romantic relationship functioning

A six-item scale tapped into positive relationship behaviors such as sharing thoughts and feelings, doing a fair share of household tasks, and spending time together doing things both partners enjoy (Vogt et al., 2019). Response options ranged from 0 (never) to 4 (most or all of the time). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.88. The scale was mean-centered for the analyses.

Romantic relationship satisfaction

A six-item scale measured the father’s satisfaction with their significant other’s contribution to the relationship in areas such as emotional closeness, intellectual connection, and division of household labor (Vogt et al., 2019). Response options ranged from 0 (never) to 4 (most or all of the time). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.93. The scale was mean-centered for the analyses.

Risk factors

Three risk factors were examined in this investigation.

Deployment

This was a one-item question that asked how many times the father was deployed to a combat zone during their military service, during which he received hazardous duty pay and/or combat zone tax exclusion benefits. Deployment was explored as both a continuous variable and a categorical variable. As a continuous variable, there was a range of 0–10 deployments, with a mean of 2.59. For the categorical variable, it was categorized as 0 (no deployments), 1 (1 deployment), 2 (2 deployments), or 3 (3 or more deployments). For the second model discussed in the data analysis section, deployment was allowed to remain continuous.

Traumatic combat exposure

A nine-item scale was modified from King et al. (2006). It asks about the traumatic experiences that the father may have encountered during his deployment, such as encountering roadside bombs, seeing civilians who had been severely wounded, and seeing the bodies of dead enemy combatants (α = 0.93). Response options were 0 (never), 1 (once or twice), 2 (several times), or 3 (many times). Due to non-normal distribution, response options were recoded into a dichotomized variable 1(at least once) and 0 (never). Exploratory factor analysis was conducted separately for veteran fathers and mothers. A single factor was identified for fathers.

Emotional numbing

A single item asked if, over the last month, the father felt numb or detached from people, activities, or his surroundings (Prins et al., 2016). Response options were 1 (yes) and 0 (no).

Outcome variables

Parenting functioning

Parenting functioning was a five-item scale that tapped into positive parenting behaviors such as providing a heathy environment, being a good example, and meeting his children’s emotional needs (Vogt et al., 2019). Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.90. Response options ranged from 0 (never) to 4 (most or all of the time) and the mean was calculated. Due to non-normal distribution, the scale score was recoded into a dichotomous variable: 1 (scale score was 4; i.e., responded most or all of the time to all questions) and 0 (scale score less than 4; i.e., did not respond most or all of the time to all questions).

Parenting satisfaction

Parenting satisfaction was a three-item scale, modified from Vogt et al. (2004), that asks about the father’s satisfaction with his closeness with his children, with the amount of enjoyment he gets from parenting, and with how his child is doing in life (α = 0.85). Response options ranged from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied), and the mean was calculated. Due to non-normal distribution, the scale score was recoded into a dichotomous variable: 1 (scale score was 5; i.e., responded very satisfied to all questions) and 0 (scale score less than 5; i.e., did not respond very satisfied to all questions).

Data Analysis

Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the association between hypothesized protective factors and parenting function and parenting satisfaction. The following variables were entered as control variables: age, pay grade, ethnicity, service branch, military occupation, education, marital status, spouse/partner’s military status, and discharge status. There was less than 2% random missing for most covariates. Therefore, missing data were imputed using SAS Proc MI (Schafer, 1999).

Two models were run for each parenting satisfaction and parenting functioning, once for the full sample, and once for the subsample of those in a romantic relationship. The first model (n = 3,810) included protective factors of no mental health symptoms, financial security, health functioning, high resilience, social support, social functioning with community and friends, and social functioning with relatives. Risk factors included deployment (i.e., one time, two times, and three or more times vs. no deployments), exposure to combat events, and emotional numbing. The interaction of deployment and each of the protective factors was also explored.

The second model included a smaller sample of fathers who were in a relationship (n = 3,613). It included the same control variables and protective factors as the first model. However, it also included relationship satisfaction and relationship functioning as protective factors. In addition, the deployment variable remained continuous in this model. Interactions between deployment and relationship satisfaction and functioning were also examined.

As discussed earlier, because parenting satisfaction and parenting function were highly positively skewed, these variables were dichotomized. For parenting functioning, fathers who engaged in positive parenting behaviors all of the time were contrasted with fathers who engaged in positive parenting behaviors less than all of the time (44% and 56% of the sample, respectively). For parenting satisfaction, fathers who were very satisfied with their relationship with their children were compared to fathers who were less than very satisfied with their relationship with their children (49% and 51% of the sample, respectively).

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Bivariate correlations, means, standard deviations, and ranges are shown in Table 1. In addition, approximately one-third (33.8%) of the sample did not report mental health symptoms; approximately one-fourth (27%) of the sample reported no self-reported physical health or mental health conditions; and approximately one-fourth (27%) of the sample had high resilience.

Table 1.

Bivariate Correlations and Descriptive Statistics of Protective Factors and Outcome Variables.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
1. Financial security^a
2. Health functioning^a	0.20
3. Resilience^a	0.32	0.30
4. Social support^a	0.22	0.22	0.37
5. Social functioning—community and friends^a	0.26	0.29	0.43	0.53
6. Social functioning—relatives^a	0.18	0.21	0.34	0.51	0.65
7. Romantic relationship Functioning^b	0.24	0.31	0.46	0.53	0.52	0.47
8. Romantic relationship satisfaction^b	0.22	0.22	0.38	0.60	0.44	0.41	0.40	0.71
9. Deployed (continuous)^{a, c}	0.05	−0.03	−0.06	−0.10	−0.05	−0.12	−0.13	−0.10
10. Traumatic combat exposure^a	−0.09	−0.06	−0.15	−0.16	−0.12	−0.14	−0.20	−0.16	0.52
11. Emotional numbing^a	−0.27	−0.20	−0.45	−0.36	−0.33	−0.27	−0.41	−0.37	0.15	0.35
12. Parenting functioning^a	0.22	0.23	0.36	0.37	0.45	0.38	0.50	0.39	−0.12	−0.15	−0.28
13. Parenting satisfaction^a	0.20	0.18	0.33	0.38	0.39	0.36	0.42	0.39	−0.13	−0.16	−0.25	0.70
Mean	1.11	0.75	3.75	2.84	3.02	2.85	2.79	3.91	1.85	3.68	0.38	3.48	4.47
Standard deviation	0.78	1.18	0.81	1.08	0.78	1.03	0.85	1.02	1.15	3.44	0.49	0.70	0.76
Range	0–2	0–4	1–5	0–4	0–4	0–4	0–4	1–5	0–3	0–9	0–1	0–4	1–5
Skewness	−0.19	1.47	−0.36	−0.73	−0.74	−0.73	−0.49	−0.87	−0.41	0.35	0.50	−1.84	−1.91
Kurtosis	−1.33	0.98	−0.23	−0.33	0.37	−0.01	−0.20	−0.03	−1.33	−1.44	−1.75	4.36	3.98

Note: All correlations are significant at the p < 0.001 level. ^a(n = 3,810); ^b(n = 3,613); ^c = continuous with three or more collapsed,

Parenting Functioning

Several of the control variables were related to parenting functioning. Veteran fathers reported better parenting functioning when they were 24 years old or younger, compared to over 25 years; were Black non-Hispanic, compared to White non-Hispanic; were junior enlisted (E1–E4) as opposed to officers (O1–O7); chose not to re-enlist in the National Guard or Reserve; or their spouse/partner was serving in the military at the time of the assessment. See Table 2 for the significant findings from the hierarchical logistic regression.

Table 2.

Factors Related to Parenting Functioning and Parenting Satisfaction for Veteran Fathers.

	Parenting Functioning Odds Ratio [95% CI](n = 3,810)	Parenting Satisfaction Odds Ratio [95% CI](n = 3,810)
Age 25 years and older (vs. age 24 years and younger)	0.57 [0.42, 0.78]**	0.85 [0.62, 1.17]
Enlisted E5–E6 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.96 [0.75, 1.24]	0.76 [0.59, 0.98]*
Enlisted E7–E9 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.76 [0.56, 1.02]	0.55 [0.41, 0.74]*
Officers O1–O3 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.58 [0.40, 0.84]**	0.65 [0.45, 0.94]*
Officer O4–O7 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.57 [0.41, 0.78]**	0.45 [0.33, 0.62]*
Black non-Hispanic (NH) (vs. White NH)	1.45 [1.13, 1.86]**	1.08 [0.85, 1.37]
Left active duty status and currently serving NG/R	0.77 [0.62, 0.96]**	0.85 [0.68, 1.05]
Married first and only (vs. single, separated, widowed, divorced, and married second or more)	0.96 [0.82, 1.13]	1.52 [1.30, 1.78]***
Military partner is currently serving	1.53 [1.02, 2.29]*	1.13 [0.76, 1.69]
No mental health symptoms	1.11 [0.93, 1.32]	1.26 [1.05, 1.50]*
Financial security	1.27 [1.07, 1.51]**	1.17 [0.99, 1.39]
Health functioning	1.39 [1.27, 1.53]***	1.15 [1.05, 1.25]**
High resilience	1.58 [1.26, 1.97]***	1.64 [1.30, 2.06]***
Social support	1.31 [1.20, 1.43]***	1.34 [1.23, 1.45]***
Social functioning—help community friends	1.61 [1.40, 1.86]***	1.43 [1.25, 1.63]***
Social functioning—help relatives	1.31 [1.19, 1.45]***	1.38 [1.26, 1.52]***
Deployed once (vs. none)	1.14 [0.86, 1.51]	1.07 [0.80, 1.42]
Deployed twice (vs. none)	0.89 [0.64, 1.22]	0.93 [0.67, 1.27]
Deployed three or more times (vs. none)	0.94 [0.68, 1.30]	0.88 [0.64, 1.21]
Exposure to traumatic combat events	0.93 [0.74, 1.17]	1.02 [0.81, 1.29]
Emotional numbing	0.86 [0.71, 1.03]	0.88 [0.74, 1.06]
Deployed three or more times × high resilience	0.69 [0.50, 0.96]*	0.89 [0.64, 1.24]

Note: Nonsignificant covariates were omitted from the table for easier viewing (e.g., Hispanic, other race, branch, married to a veteran, no health problems, honorable discharge status, military occupation–support service). *p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001.

For the full sample, above and beyond the control variables, veterans who rated their financial status as secure (OR 1.27, [95% CI: 1.07–1.51]; p < 0.01; i.e., were 27% more likely to report better parenting functioning than those without financial security), and those who had better health functioning (OR 1.39, [95% CI: 1.27–1.53]; p < 0.001), high resilience (OR 1.58, [95% CI: 1.26–1.97]; p < 0.01), social support (OR 1.31, [95% CI: 1.20–1.43]; p < 0.001), positive social functioning with community and friends (OR 1.61, [95% CI: 1.40–1.86]; p < 0.001), and positive social functioning with relatives (OR 1.31, [95% CI: 1.19–1.45]; p < 0.001) also reported better parenting functioning. After including the interaction of deployment by resilience, the main effect for being deployed three or more times (vs. not deployed) was no longer significant (OR 0.94, [95% CI: 0.68–1.30]; p = 0.59). In this sample, neither traumatic combat exposure (OR 0.93, [95% CI: 0.74–1.17]; p = 0.53) nor emotional numbing (OR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71–1.03; p = 0.10) was related to parenting functioning.

Interactions between deployment and the protective factors were also examined. One interaction was significant; the interaction between the number of deployments (i.e., deployed three or more times vs. no deployments) and high resilience was significantly related to parenting functioning (OR 0.69 [95% CI: 0.50–0.96]; p < 0.05). The odds of reporting very high parenting function can be found in Figure 1. Examination of odds ratios indicated that veteran fathers who reported high resilience and were deployed three or more times were 3.2 times more likely to report better parenting functioning than fathers with average or low resilience and were deployed three or more times. Veteran fathers who reported average or low resilience but did not get deployed were 73% more likely to report better parenting functioning than fathers with average or low resilience and were deployed three or more times. Finally, veteran fathers who reported high resilience and who were not deployed were 5.1 times more likely to report better parenting functioning than fathers with average or low resilience and were deployed three or more times.

Figure 1.

The odds of reporting very high for parenting function, based on the interaction of number of deployments and level of resilience.

Similar patterns for the covariates were found in the model that included the romantic relationship variables. Veteran fathers reported better parenting functioning when they were 24 years old or younger, as opposed to over 25 years; were Black non-Hispanic, compared to White non-Hispanic; chose not to re-enlist in the National Guard or Reserve; or their spouse/partner was serving in the military at the time of the assessment. Junior enlisted (E1–E4) were more likely to report better parenting functioning than officers (O1–O7). Significant findings from the hierarchical logistic regression can be found in Table 3.

Table 3.

Factors Related to Parenting Functioning and Parenting Satisfaction for Veteran Fathers Who Are in a Romantic Relationship.

	Parenting Functioning Odds Ratio [95% CI](n = 3,613)	Parenting Satisfaction Odds Ratio [95% CI](n = 3,613)
Age 25 years and older (vs. age 24 years and younger)	0.55 [0.39, 0.77]**	0.76 [0.54, 1.07]
Enlisted E5–E6 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.96 [0.73, 1.25]	0.75 [0.58, 0.98]*
Enlisted E7–E9 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.74 [0.54, 1.01]	0.51 [0.38, 0.69]***
Officer O1–O3 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.58 [0.39, 0.85]**	0.63 [0.43, 0.93]*
Officer O4–O7 (vs. junior enlisted E1–E4)	0.57 [0.42, 0.79]**	0.45 [0.32, 0.62]***
Black non-Hispanic (NH) (vs. White NH)	1.85 [1.42, 2.41]***	1.16 [0.90, 1.50]
Left active duty status and currently serving NG/R	0.81 [0.65, 1.02]*	0.92 [0.74, 1.16]
Married first and only (vs. single, separated, widowed, divorced, and married second time or more)	1.14 [0.96, 1.35]	1.67 [1.41, 1.97]***
Military partner is currently serving	1.63 [1.07, 2.47]**	1.15 [0.76, 1.74]
No mental health symptoms	1.03 [0.85, 1.23]	1.18 [0.98, 1.41]
Financial security	1.23 [1.03, 1.47]*	1.15 [0.96, 1.36]
Health functioning	1.27 [1.15, 1.40]***	1.07 [0.97, 1.18]
High resilience	1.18 [0.98, 1.42]	1.48 [1.23, 1.77]***
Social support	1.19 [1.05, 1.32]**	1.15 [1.05, 1.27]**
Social functioning—help community friends	1.40 [1.21, 1.63]***	1.30 [1.12, 1.49]**
Social functioning—help relatives	1.27 [1.14, 1.41]***	1.35 [1.22, 1.49]***
Relationship satisfaction (mean centered)	1.14 [0.98, 1.32]	1.44 [1.25, 1.66]***
Relationship functioning (mean centered)	2.19 [1.89, 2.54]***	1.41 [1.22, 1.62]***
Deployed (continuous variable)	0.99 [0.95, 1.03]	0.99 [0.95, 1.03]
Exposure to combat events	0.98 [0.78, 1.18]	1.02 [0.84, 1.25]
Numbing	1.03 [0.85, 1.26]	1.00 [0.83, 1.21]
Deployed x relationship satisfaction	0.95 [0.92, 0.98]*	0.96 [0.93, 0.99]*
Separate model with different interaction included
Deployed x relationship functioning	0.95 [0.91, 0.99]*	0.95 [0.91, 0.99]*

Above and beyond the control variables, veterans who rated their financial status as secure (OR 1.23, [95% CI: 1.03–1.47]; p < 0.01; i.e., were 23% more likely to report better parenting functioning than those without financial security), and those with better health functioning (OR 1.27, [95% CI: 1.14–1.41]; p < 0.001), social support (OR 1.19, [95% CI: 1.05–1.32]; p < 0.001), social functioning with community and friends (OR 1.40, [95% CI: 1.21–1.63]; p < 0.001), and social functioning with relatives (OR 1.27, [95% CI: 1.14–1.41]; p < 0.001) also reported better parenting functioning. In this subsample, resilience was no longer significant (OR 1.18, [95% CI: 0.98–1.42]; p = 0.07). Fathers who reported better than average relationship functioning were more than two times more likely to report better parenting functioning than those who reported worse relationship functioning (OR 2.19 [95% CI: 01.89–2.54]; p < 0.001). The interaction between the number of deployments and relationship satisfaction was significantly related to better parenting functioning (OR 0.95 [95% CI: 0.92–0.98]; p < 0.01). In the post hoc analyses of the interaction, high and low relationship satisfaction and more and fewer deployments, as discussed later, are one standard deviation above and below the mean. Figure 2 provides a graph of the odds that were revealed during post hoc analyses. Examination of the odds ratios indicated that veteran fathers with high relationship satisfaction and more deployments were 4.6 times more likely to report better parenting functioning than fathers with low relationship satisfaction and more deployments. Veteran fathers with low relationship satisfaction and fewer deployments were 14% more likely to report better parenting function than fathers with low relationship satisfaction and more deployments. Finally, veteran fathers with high relationship satisfaction and fewer deployments were 7.7 times more likely to report better parenting functioning than fathers with low relationship satisfaction and more deployments.

Figure 2.

Odds of reporting very high parenting functioning, based on the interaction between deployments (mean) and romantic relationship satisfaction.

Similarly, the interaction between the number of deployments and relationship functioning was significantly related to better parenting functioning (OR 0.95 [95% CI: 0.91–0.99]; p < 0.05).

Parenting Satisfaction

As with parenting functioning, several control variables were related to parenting satisfaction. Veteran fathers reported more parenting satisfaction when they were junior enlisted, as opposed to senior enlisted or senior officer; married for the first time, as opposed to single, married for the second time or more, separated, widowed, or divorced; or had no mental health symptoms. Significant findings from the hierarchical logistic regression can be found in Table 2.

Above and beyond the control variables, health functioning (OR 1.15, [95% CI: 1.05–1.25]; p < 0.01), high resilience (OR 1.64, [95% CI: 1.30–2.06]; p < 0.001), social support (OR 1.34, [95% CI: 1.23–1.45]; p < 0.001), positive social functioning with community and friends (OR 1.43, [95% CI: 1.25–1.63]; p < 0.001), and positive social functioning with relatives (OR 1.38, [95% CI: 1.26–1.52]; p < 0.001) were associated with more parenting satisfaction. There was no direct association between one deployment (OR 1.07, [95% CI: 0.80–1.42]; p = 0.67), two deployments (OR 0.93, [95% CI: 0.67–1.27]; p = 0.64), or three or more deployments (OR 0.88, [95% CI: 0.64–1.21]; p = 0.44), traumatic combat events (OR 1.02, [95% CI: 0.81–1.29; p = 0.86), or emotional numbing (OR 0.88, [95% CI: 0.74–1.06]; p = 0.17) and parenting satisfaction. The interaction between the number of deployments and resilience was not significantly related to better parenting satisfaction (OR 0.89 [95% CI: 0.64–1.24]; p = 0.49).

Again, the same model was replicated with additional covariates of relationship satisfaction and relationship functioning. Similar patterns for the covariates were found. Veteran fathers reported better parenting satisfaction when they were junior enlisted (E1–E4) compared to senior enlisted (E5–E9) and officers (O1–O7), and married for the first time compared to single, married two or more times, separated, divorced, or widowed. Significant findings from the hierarchical logistic regression can be found in Table 3.

Above and beyond the control variables, high resilience (OR 1.48, [95% CI: 1.23–1.77]; p < 0.01), social support (OR 1.15, [95% CI: 1.05–1.27]; p < 0.01), positive social functioning with community and friends (OR 1.30, [95% CI: 1.12–1.49]; p < 0.001), and positive social functioning with relatives (OR 1.35, [95% CI: 1.22–1.49]; p < 0.001) were associated with better parenting satisfaction. Neither financial security (OR 1.15, [95% CI: 0.96–1.36]; p = 0.12) nor health functioning (OR 1.07, [95% CI: 0.97–1.18]; p = 0.16) was related to parenting satisfaction. For the romantic relationship variables, fathers who reported better than average relationship satisfaction were 44% more likely to report better parenting satisfaction (OR 1.44 [95% CI: 1.25–1.66]; p < 0.01). Fathers who reported better than average relationship functioning were 41% more likely to report better parenting satisfaction (OR 1.41 [95% CI: 1.22–1.62]; p < 0.01). The interaction between the number of deployments and relationship satisfaction was significantly related to better parenting satisfaction (OR 0.96 [95% CI: 0.93–0.99]; p < 0.01). In a separate model, the interaction between the number of deployments and relationship functioning was also significantly related to better parenting satisfaction (OR 0.95 [95% CI: 0.91–0.99]; p < 0.01.

Discussion, Limitations, and Future Directions

Although much of the research related to military fathers has focused on parent or child dysfunction, there is a growing body of research that focuses on the families that thrive (Karre et al., 2018). The findings in this study support previous research that has found that social support and couple adjustment are related to parenting (Gewirtz et al., 2010). Moreover, this study is consistent with past studies that have shown the protective effect of social support and resilience on post-deployment outcomes such as PTSD symptoms and psychological difficulties (Pietrzak et al., 2009, 2010; Polusny et al., 2011). In addition, this investigation extends findings to additional protective factors.

Fathers who were more financially secure, engaged in heathier behaviors, had more social support, functioned well within their community and with friends, and functioned well with relatives were more likely to report better parenting functioning. There was a main effect of resilience on parenting functioning; however, it must be considered within the context of its interaction with the number of deployments. Within this study, resiliency—the ability to bounce back—seems to protect veteran fathers. The analyses do suggest that being deployed three or more times can negatively impact parenting functioning. Yet, veteran fathers who deployed three or more times, but had high resilience, fared better in parenting functioning than fathers who deployed three or more times and had average or low resilience.

Understanding how these factors are related to parenting behaviors is important as they are malleable. Because the data in this investigation are cross-sectional, additional longitudinal research needs to be conducted to examine the causal nature of this association. If causality is found, these factors can be promoted as behaviors that can help fathers who may be having difficulty.

Similar to the parenting functioning outcome, veteran fathers who engaged in healthier and less risky behaviors, reported more resiliency, had more social support, functioned well within their community and with friends, and functioned well with relatives were more likely to report more parenting satisfaction. In contrast to parenting functioning, however, neither financial security nor deployment was related to parenting satisfaction.

In a subsample of fathers who were in romantic relationships, romantic relationship functioning was related to parenting functioning, and both romantic relationship functioning and satisfaction were related to parenting satisfaction. In addition, there was an interaction between the number of deployments and both romantic relationship functioning and romantic relationship satisfaction. For fathers with higher than average relationship satisfaction, as the number of deployments increased, parenting functioning decreased. Yet, these fathers were much more likely to have higher parenting functioning than those veteran fathers without a satisfying relationship, regardless of the number of deployments. Note that there may be limitations with the measurement of the relationship satisfaction and functioning constructs as they are highly correlated (r = 0.72) and likely not identifying two distinct dimensions of the marital relationship.

In this sample, neither traumatic combat experiences nor emotional numbing was related to either parenting functioning or parenting satisfaction. The wide confidence intervals suggest that there may be variability in the way fathers handle those stressors. This should be explored further, as it does diverge from previous research (Mustillo et al., 2014; Ruscio et al., 2002).

Although primarily unmalleable, several control variables were related to parenting functioning and deserve further exploration in future studies. Veteran fathers who were Black non-Hispanic, 24 years or younger, did not re-enlist in the National Guard or Reserves, or whose spouse/partner was serving in the military at the time of the assessment had better parenting functioning. Similarly, a completely nonoverlapping set of control variables was related to parenting satisfaction. Veteran fathers who were junior enlisted, married for the first time, and did not have a mental health diagnosis reported being more satisfied with parenting. These associations should be probed further in order to understand the mechanism behind the associations.

In addition to the previously discussed limitation related to the cross-sectional nature of the data in these analyses, one other limitation should be noted. Officers were slightly overrepresented; they represent 24% of this sample, but they are only 18% of the currently serving active duty military population (Department of Defense, 2018).

Conclusion

This study identified several factors that may serve as protective factors for fathers who are navigating typical experiences of fatherhood, the unique environment of the military, and the subsequent transition from military to civilian life. Financial security, healthy behaviors, resilience, social support, social functioning, and romantic relationship quality may impact fathers’ parenting functioning, while healthy behaviors, resilience, social support, social functioning, romantic relationship quality, and romantic relationship satisfaction may influence parenting satisfaction. This study contributes to the understanding of military fathers from a strengths’ perspective of military fathers and the growing body of literature that focuses on fathers’ positive behaviors and protective factors that may influence fathering.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was managed by the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc. (HJF) and collaboratively sponsored by the Bob Woodruff Foundation, Health Net Federal Services, The Heinz Endowments, HJF, Lockheed Martin Corporation, May and Stanley Smith Charitable Trust, National Endowment for the Humanities, Northrop Grumman, Philip and Marge Odeen, Prudential, Robert R. McCormick Foundation, Rumsfeld Foundation, Schultz Family Foundation, Walmart Foundation, Wounded Warrior Project, Inc., and the Veterans Health Administration Health Services Research and Development Service.

Disclosure

The opinions and assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of any of the sponsor organizations listed.

ORCID iD

Jennifer K. Karre

References

Bonanno

G. A.

Mancini

A. D.

Horton

J. L.

Powell

T. M.

LeardMann

C. A.

Boyko

E. J.

Wells

T.S.

Hooper

T. I.

Gackstetter

G. D.

Smith

T. C.

, & Millennium Cohort Study Team (2012). Trajectories of trauma symptoms and resilience in deployed US military service members: Prospective cohort study. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 200, 317–323.

Brockman

Snyder

Gewirtz

Gird

S. R.

Quattlebaum

Schmidt

Pauldine

M. R.

Elish

Schrepferman

Hayes

Zettle

DeGarmo

(2016). Relationship of service members’ deployment trauma, PTSD symptoms, and experiential avoidance to postdeployment family reengagement. Journal of Family Psychology, 30, 52–62.

Department of Defense. (2018). 2016 Demographics: Profile of the military community. http://download.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/Reports/2016-Demographics-Report.pdf

Easterbrooks

M. A.

Ginsburg

Lerner

R. M.

(2013). Resilience among military youth. Future of Children, 23, 99–120.

Gewirtz

A. H.

Polusny

M. A.

DeGarmo

D. S.

Khaylis

Erbes

C. R.

(2010). Posttraumatic stress symptoms among National Guard soldiers deployed to Iraq: Associations with parenting behaviors and couple adjustment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, 599–610. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020571

Karney

B. R.

Loughran

D. S.

Pollard

M. S.

(2012). Comparing marital status and divorce status in civilian and military populations. Journal of Family Issues, 33, 1572–1594. https://doi.org10.1177/0192513X12439690

Karre

J. K.

Perkins

D. F.

Aronson

K. R.

(2018). Research on fathers in the military context: Current status and future directions. Journal of Family Theroy & Review, 10, 6411–656.

King

L. A.

King

D. W.

Vogt

D. S.

Knight

Samper

R. E.

(2006). Deployment risk and resilience inventory: A collection of measures for studying deployment-related experiences of military personnel and veterans. Military Psychology, 18(2), 89–120. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327876mp1802_1

Kritikos

T. K.

Comer

J. S.

Curren

L. C.

Tompson

M. C.

(2018). Combat experience and posttraumatic stress symptoms among military-serving parents: A meta-analytic examination of associated offspring and family outcomes Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 47, 131–148.

10.

Kroenke

Spitzer

R. L.

Williams

J. B. W.

Löwe

(2009). An ultra-brief screening scale for anxiety and depression: The PHQ–4. Psychosomatics, 50(6), 613–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-3182(09)70864-3

11.

Louie

A. D.

Cromer

L. D.

(2014). Parent-child attachment during the deployment cycle: Impact on reintegration parenting stress. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 45, 496–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036603

12.

Mustillo

Wadsworth

S. M.

(2014). Traumatic combat exposure and parenting among National Guard fathers: An application of the ecological model. Fathering, 12, 303–319.

13.

Perkins

D. F.

Aronson

K. R.

Morgan

N. R.

Bleser

J. A.

Vogt

Copeland

L. A.

Finley

E. P.

Gilman

(2019). Veterans’ use of programs and services as they transition to civilian life: Baseline assessment for the Veteran Metrics Initiative. Journal of Social Service Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2018.1546259

14.

Pietrzak

R. H.

Johnson

D. C.

Goldstein

M. B.

Malley

J. C.

Rivers

A. J.

Morgan

C. A.

Southwick

S. M.

(2010). Psychosocial buffers of traumatic stress, depressive symptoms, and psychosocial difficulties in veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom: The role of resilience, unit support, and postdeployment social support. Journal of Affective Disorders, 120, 188–192.

15.

Pietrzak

R. H.

Johnson

D. C.

Goldstein

M. B.

Malley

J. C.

Southwick

S. M.

(2009). Psychological resilience and postdeployment social support protect against traumatic stress and depressive symptoms in soldiers returning from Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. Depression and Anxiety, 26, 745–751.

16.

Polusny

M. A.

Erbes

C. R.

Kramer

M. D.

Thuras

DeGarmo

Koffel

Litz

Arbisi

P. A.

(2017). Resilience and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in National Guard soldiers deployed to Iraq: A prospective study of latent class trajectories and their predictors. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 30, 351–361.

17.

Polusny

M. A.

Erbes

C. R.

Murdoch

Arbisi

P. A.

Thuras

Rath

M. B.

(2011). Prospective risk factors for new-onset post-traumatic stress disorder in National Guard soldiers deployed to Iraq. Psychological Medicine, 41, 687–698.

18.

Prins

Bovin

M. J.

Smolenski

D. J.

Marx

B. P.

Kimerling

Jenkins-Guarnieri

M. A.

Kaloupek

D. G.

Schnurr

P. P.

Kaiser

A. P.

Leyva

Y. E.

Tiet

Q. Q.

(2016). The primary care PTSD screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5): Development and evaluation within a veteran primary care sample. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 31(10), 1206–1211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-016-3703-5

19.

Ruscio

A. M.

Weathers

F. W.

King

L. A.

King

D. W.

(2002). Male war-zone veterans’ perceived relationships with their children: The importance of emotional numbing. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 15, 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1020125006371

20.

Samper

R. E.

Taft

C. T.

King

D. W.

King

L. A.

(2004). Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and parenting satisfaction among a national sample of male Vietnam veterans. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17, 311–315.

21.

Schafer

(1999). Multiple imputation: A primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8, 3–15.

22.

Sherbourne

C. D.

Stewart

A. L.

(1991). The MOS social support survey. Social Science & Medicine, 32(6), 705–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(91)90150-B

23.

Smith

B. W.

Dalen

Wiggins

Tooley

Christopher

Bernard

(2008). The brief resilience scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 15(3), 194–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705500802222972

24.

Tomassetti-Long

V. J.

Nicholson

B. C.

Madson

M. B.

Dahlen

E. R.

(2015). Hardiness, parenting stress, and PTSD symptomatology in U.S. Afghanistan/Iraq era veteran fathers. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16, 239–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037307

25.

Topolski

T. D.

LoGerfo

Patrick

D. L.

Williams

Walwick

Patrick

M. M. B.

(2006). The rapid assessment of physical activity (RAPA) among older adults. Preventing Chronic Disease, 3, 4, 1–8.

26.

Vogt

D. D.

King

D. W.

King

L. A.

Savarese

V. W.

Suvak

M. K.

(2004). War-zone exposure and long-term general life adjustment among Vietnam veterans: Findings from two perspectives. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 9, 1797–1824.

27.

Vogt

Nillni

Y. I.

Taverna

E. C.

Tyrell

F. A.

Booth

Perkins

Copeland

L. A.

Finley

E. P.

Gilman

C. L.

(2019). Development and validation of a tool to assess military veterans’ status, functioning, and satisfaction with key aspects of their lives. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 11, 328–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12161

28.

Vogt

Perkins

D. F.

Copeland

L. A.

Finley

E. P.

Jamieson

C. S.

Booth

Lederer

Gilman

C. L.

(2018). The Veterans Metrics Initiative study of US veterans’ experiences during their transition from military service. BMJ Open, 8, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020734