posted on July 2, 2005 06:32:09 PM new
NEW YORK — While U.S. casualties steadily mount in Iraq, another toll is rising rapidly on the home front: The Army’s divorce rate has soared in the past three years, most notably for officers, as longer and more frequent war zone deployments place extra strain on couples.
“We’ve seen nothing like this before,” said Col. Glen Bloomstrom, a chaplain who oversees family-support programs. “It indicates the amount of stress on couples, on families, as the Army conducts the global war on terrorism.”
Army offers help
Between 2001 and 2004, divorces among active-duty Army officers and enlisted personnel nearly doubled, from 5,658 to 10,477, even though total troop strength remained stable. In 2002, the divorce rate among married officers was 1.9 percent — 1,060 divorces out of 54,542 marriages; by 2004, the rate had tripled to 6 percent, with 3,325 divorces out of 55,550 marriages.
With divorce rates that have risen more sharply than other service branches, the Army has broadened its efforts to help — offering confidential counseling hot lines, support groups for spouses, weekend couples’ retreats, even advice to single soldiers on how to pick partners wisely. Bloomstrom says he wants all 2,400 of the Army’s chaplains to be available for marriage-support work.
Staff Sgt. Allen Owens, a 15-year Army veteran, and his wife, Linda, praised a recent marriage retreat that they and 20 other couples from Fort Campbell, Ky., participated in with their chaplain at a hotel in Nashville, Tenn.
Reconnecting on a retreat
Owens was part of a 101st Airborne Division unit that advanced into Baghdad in the early phases of the Iraq war, and he expects at least one more stint in Iraq. That would again leave his wife alone with their four children. The weekend retreat, he said, offered a chance to “decompress and do an in-depth study of your relationship and your personalities.”
“Even if there’s nothing going wrong,” Linda Owens said, “it’s a great way to learn about your spouse.”
While some of the Army’s programs aim to prepare couples for their first deployment-related separation, others try to help couples with the often-difficult adjustments when a spouse returns from combat-zone duty to a mate who has been shouldering extra responsibilities at home.
“Our hope is to change the culture,” Bloomstrom said. “Initially there’s a stigma about any program to do with relationships. We need to teach that there’s nothing wrong with preventive maintenance for marriage.”
Second tour a tipping point
Martha Rudd, an Army spokeswoman, attributed the recent surge in divorces to the stress and uncertainty caused by a stepped-up deployment cycle.
“An awful lot of people are going back to Iraq for a second tour — that must be hard to take,” she said. “You can get through one tour, but then you think, ’Please, no more.”’
Bloomstrom said the high divorce rate among officers was no surprise because they bear the brunt of implementing major changes in Army operations, often working 18 or more hours a day.
“Every aspect of the Army is changing,” he said. “We’ve got some very loyal, dedicated military professionals stepping up to the plate, sometimes to the detriment of their families.”
Sylvia Kidd, director of family programs for the private Association of the U.S. Army, urges military couples to seek help when needed but fears many spouses are too isolated.
“So many of these couples are very young — they tend to get married just before deployment, and then the wife is here alone and doesn’t know what to do with herself,” Kidd said. “The people who need support the most are the least likely to go get it.”
Problem could get worse
For those troops who do divorce, military breakups can pose unique legal and logistical challenges, especially when one spouse is deployed overseas.
Mark Sullivan, a former Army lawyer who now practices privately in Raleigh, N.C., says soldiers in often-deployed units may have trouble winning child custody and — when posted abroad — arranging visits from their children. In one recent case, Sullivan has represented a Tennessee father whose ex-wife is now seeking custody of their daughter because the man’s National Guard unit was sent overseas.
Kidd said the divorce problem could get even worse, as long the campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere require frequent deployments.
“All kinds of couples have problems, but they don’t necessarily break up,” Kidd said. “When you add the additional stress of these separations, it’s the straw that breaks the camel’s back.”
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
Isnt that something you see in the dessert? How can you protect that when it isn't really there to begin with?
If Uncle Sam had wanted troops to have wives, they would have been issued one in boot camp.
Another sexist statement from Bear. Let me guess the only soldiers in the military are men. In your eyes, there are no women soldiers in the military??
Based on that statement, you mean soldiers shouldn't marry and if they do, they marry so their spouse will get to claim their military benefits?
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
[ edited by logansdad on Jul 3, 2005 07:52 AM ]
posted on July 3, 2005 12:14:18 PM new
Yes, they did. But you need to understand that logansdad is famous for repeating old stories, especially when they point out how marriage is failing...and that, in his mind, somehow supports his agenda that gays should be allowed to marry.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on July 3, 2005 02:50:56 PM new"especially when they point out how marriage is failing...and that, in his mind, somehow supports his agenda that gays should be allowed to marry."
Linda, instead of poking fun at Logan, why don't you try and listen to him. He's not for gay marriage, he's for equal rights, which includes marriage.
posted on July 3, 2005 03:18:43 PM newYes, they did. But you need to understand that logansdad is famous for repeating old stories,
Linda you dont mind Bush repeating the same old story over and over and over. But yet you have a problem when someone else does it. One more of your double standards.
especially when they point out how marriage is failing...and that, in his mind, somehow supports his agenda that gays should be allowed to marry.
Wrong Linda. I pointed it out for people like you who refuse to see the real reason why the "sanctity of marriage" is being undermined - that reason being divorce. You can continue to blame other oustide factors all you want and it will never stop the declining marriage rate in this country.
Where is your support for all the military people who end up getting a divorce. Why isnt the government doing more to help these people cope with the stresses that lead them to divorce.
Linda, instead of poking fun at Logan, why don't you try and listen to him.
She can't because, my views go against her religious and political agenda.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on July 3, 2005 04:54:05 PM new
Ron in your opinion, who is wasting the tax payer money the tax payer who doesn't want gay marriages or the tax payer who does.
No matter which ones does it, it is tax payer money. Maybe it is 50/50 who knows. I doubt if there are any statistics on this.
_________________
posted on July 3, 2005 05:17:05 PM new
Combat Vets Much More Likely to Divorce, Separate
20-Dec-02
PROVO, Utah--A new study by a Brigham Young University professor has found that combat veterans' first marriages are 62 percent more likely to end in separation or divorce than other men's, a fact he hopes will be considered by defense policy-makers.
"We found that combat experience is an important risk factor for divorce or separation," said Sven Wilson, an assistant professor of political science, whose study is reported in the new issue of the academic journal "Armed Forces & Society." "Traumatic experiences like combat seem to have a persistent impact on the ability of people to form and maintain successful relationships."
Wilson and his fellow researchers compared divorce and separation rates between veterans who had seen combat and those who had not. The study analyzed the results of men's marriages throughout most of the past century, including before, during and after World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War.
Wilson called for more research and for government officials to take a closer look at the total effect war has on the families of veterans.
"The impact of war and military service on families of veterans is relatively understudied. A portion of these costs fall not just upon the men and women who serve, but upon those who stay home," Wilson said. "Do members of the military and their spouses need special counseling? Does the military need to more closely monitor what's going on in families? What kinds of support do veterans and their spouses need after their service ends? These are some issues that need to be added to the equation. We just don't know that much about them."
Wilson used information from the National Survey of Families and Households, a nationwide study of more than 13,000 individuals conducted in the early 1990s. Using a statistical method called duration analysis, Wilson and his team examined the relationship between military service and men's first marriages, controlling for year and age at marriage, religion, socioeconomic status, education and other social variables.
Surprisingly, marital dissolution rates are highest for Korean War veterans, not for Vietnam veterans as is commonly thought. The findings indicate that Vietnam veterans were 28 percent more likely to divorce than non-veterans from the same time period, but Korean War vets were 45 percent more likely to divorce over the subsequent 10 years than were non-veterans in their era.
"There is a notion that Korea was much like World War II, but that Vietnam really messed people up," Wilson said. "We find quite the opposite. It's true that Vietnam vets were getting divorced at high rates, but so was everyone else at the time. We suspect that people often ignore general social trends when thinking about the effects of the Vietnam War."
Veterans who married following the Korean and Vietnam Wars had significantly higher rates of marital dissolution when compared to non-veterans and World War II veterans.
"After controlling for things like combat, age and religion, the effect of serving in Korea was more than twice as high as it was in World War II. There was a real sea change between World War II and Korea," Wilson said.
Wilson says the results need to be interpreted in light of overall trends in marriage stability.
"Starting in the '60s and continuing through the early '80s there was an unraveling of marriage and the social fabric in general," Wilson said. "For veterans it looks like this started much earlier than we would have anticipated."
The study is co-authored by William Ruger, a visiting instructor in government at Wesleyan University, and Shawn Waddoups, a U.S. Foreign Service Officer who holds a master's degree in public policy from BYU.
posted on July 3, 2005 06:02:46 PM new
OK, let's say traditional marriage is no longer practical for many. Is that so bad? The pressures of today don't compare to what our parents experienced, so isn't it just a sign of the times and not a dig against marriage?
posted on July 3, 2005 08:20:53 PM new
Talk about wasting money, how about Govy Arnold down in California... Can't make a decision for himself because he doesn't want the turmoil involved in it, so he presents referendums for Californians to decide. How many millions of dollars will it cost to promote those referendums, advertise, etc? My point is that each side throws fodder at each other for spending, but they both do it and do it more often than we realize. Bush does it every time he opens his stupid fat mouth about Social Security "reform". He wasted how much money promoting that failed agenda? Why aren't conservatives screaming their heads off about that waste? Oh, I forgot, they're too busy with their heads up their rear crying about everything else.
Tick tock... The neocon wall is starting to crumble. Tomorrow will be even better when new info is released about the Downing Street Memo. Oooooohhhhh.... I can't wait to see what those crooked bastards on the Hill have been hiding... All of my assumptions so far have come true. I must be psychic.
posted on July 3, 2005 08:31:11 PM newIMO, yeah it is, because I still believe in a Traditional Marriage
And what exactly is traditional marriage - a white man marrying a white woman out of love, settling in a house with a white picket fence, having 2.3 kids and a dog?? If that is your idea of traditional marriage it did not evolve until the 1950's. There is no such thing as traditional marriage. Marriage has changed and evolved with each passing generation and each prior generation blaming the next generation for ruining the sanctity of marriage.
Not sure if you remember, but at one point in time a traditional marriage was a marriage in which the parents chose the who the son or daughter was going to marry - an arranged marriage. A traditional marriage was two people marrying for class status, not out of love. While you many see this in some cultures, it is not the norm. It is not what you consider a "traditional marriage" is today.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on July 3, 2005 08:47:26 PM newNot sure if you remember, but at one point in time a traditional marriage was a marriage in which the parents chose the who the son or daughter was going to marry - an arranged marriage
So! It still was a traditional marriage. A marriage between a man and a women.
posted on July 3, 2005 09:00:36 PM new
Your right then logansdad, I don't believe in an arranged marriage, or what you describe above, and it was also before my time
Now the getting married, having 2.3 kids, picket fence, yeah, a man and a woman, together
and they have children (well it does take a male and female, traditionally anyway) and yeah some like the white picket fence. Myself? I have an open front yard, and a fenced back yard, to keep the rotty in
posted on July 3, 2005 09:16:35 PM new
I beg your pardon logansdad it was way before 1950. My parents marriage was not arranged. Although our family didn't have a dog my parents had a traditional marriage. House, 1 car 3 children. He had a job, my mother stayed home. They were married in 1932. Way before you 1950 projection.
I can trace my ancestors back to before the Revolutionary War and there was not one out of several that any marriage was arranged.
NTS an arranged traditional marriage is still a marriage between a man and a women. The white picket fence is only logansdad dream.
_________________
posted on July 3, 2005 10:03:05 PM new
a type of arranged marriage was the norm in my family and culture, as recently as my grandparents. The families of the bride and groom had as much or more to say about the arrangement as did the two prospective spouses. Those unions lasted a heck of a lot longer than the average one today does...maybe in those days people were just better at suffering in silence, I don't know.
I do know that I do and will have a great deal to say about who my girls and son marry.
Gotta make sure they do it right, wouldn't want the homos to be able to threaten their marriages.
____________________________________________
Fue por lana y salió trasquilado...
posted on July 3, 2005 10:03:35 PM new
KD - Linda, instead of poking fun at Logan, why don't you try and listen to him. He's not for gay marriage, he's for equal rights, which includes marriage.
I wasn't "poking fun" at him....I was telling the truth. It has been his actions and his statements. And I HAVE listened to him over and over and over and over and over again.....stating he IS for gay marriage....so don't try and say he's not. That's what about 50 threads he and yeager started on these boards were ALL about. How you kidding, KD? Not me.
Marriage has been the foundation of our society since it's inception. As we watch marriages crumble...as we watch more choose not to marry we have seen a detoriation of our society, imo, because of just that.
I disagree that things are harder/tougher now. They AREN'T anywhere NEAR as stressful as they were for past generations, imo. And that's why we have this 'I deserve it' mind think and why so many think they're 'entitled' to so much rather than actually earning it themselves.
And Libra - I'd read something similar to your article before. It was about how it's a normal, but sad, fact that during times of war marriages suffer...divorce increases. I think most can understand how hard it is on both the soldiers and their families.
And yes, I believe we should protect marriage and support/encourage that lifestyle.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on July 3, 2005 10:08:57 PM newhow about Govy Arnold down in California... Can't make a decision for himself because he doesn't want the turmoil involved in it, so he presents referendums for Californians to decide.
LOL....I think it's FANTASTIC!!! Nothing short of WONDERFUL!! But I can understand why someone further left than a progressive would find it offensive and wasteful to actually want to HEAR how the voters want their government handled.
Arnold is the BEST thing that's happened to CA in years and years.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on July 4, 2005 05:10:19 AM newI wasn't "poking fun" at him....I was telling the truth. It has been his actions and his statements. And I HAVE listened to him over and over and over and over and over again.....stating he IS for gay marriage....so don't try and say he's not. That's what about 50 threads he and yeager started on these boards were ALL about. How you kidding, KD? Not me.
Psychic Linda has returned. Once again Linda knows more about me than I do. You don't know what I want in life, what my goals are, what my ambitions are, so don't try telling people here what I stand for and what I do not stand for. Linda, if you want to have sex with your sons go ahead and start a campaign if you feel it is just. People who share your beliefs will stand behind you if you feel you want equality and it is your right.
If you don't like my posts don't respond to them. It is simple. But it is people like you who complain and complain, but still respond when it is easier not to. But you rather complain and complain and tell the world how you are the victim. That everyone is against you. Well go ahead if that will make you feel better.
Marriage has been the foundation of our society since it's inception. As we watch marriages crumble...as we watch more choose not to marry we have seen a detoriation of our society, imo, because of just that.
I guess two people that are in love will help restore society. It is just in your view those two people in love must be a man and a woman.
I guess the 4,000+ gay marriages in MA this past year have destroyed marriage even further. Tell me how one of those marriages has imapcted your life? Do you even know one gay couple that has gotten married? No different than any other "traditional" couple getting married in your own neighborhood. But it seems as if you are more concerned about what a gay couple does in the bedroom than you are your neighbor.
All the fears of how gay marriage will destroy society is just a scare tactic from the right. As you have noticed none of them have come true since gay marriage has been legal in MA.
As we watch marriages crumble...as we watch more choose not to marry we have seen a detoriation of our society, imo, because of just that.
Read what you just said a little more carefully. It is not marriage that is leading to the detoriation of society, it is divorce.
What would the "traditional family" do if divorce was outlawed? How would they feel? I am sure you would have the same uprising of "I deserve", "It's my right" that you get from any other group that feels they are being discriminated against.
Continue blaming the decline of marriage on other factors other than what is really causing it - divorce. You have nobody to blame but yourselves (ie straight people) for the "destruction of marriage".
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
[ edited by logansdad on Jul 4, 2005 08:05 AM ]
posted on July 4, 2005 03:23:26 PM new
I found this post odd
From Linda_K
But I can understand why someone further left than a progressive would find it offensive and wasteful to actually want to HEAR how the voters want their government handled.
From what I've read in here you are a Bush supporter. Isn't he the one who doesn't care about other people's opinions or what polls show? It seems to me the people of this country can't get him to listen to any discussion of his policies.
posted on July 4, 2005 08:52:48 PM new
The post you are copying from isn't about Bush but Schwartznager in California. The question was about all the referendums he is having and the money he is costing the state
_________________
posted on July 4, 2005 09:14:58 PM new
I'm perfectly aware of what that post is about . I was addressing this statement
""But I can understand why someone further left than a progressive would find it offensive and wasteful to actually want to HEAR how the voters want their government handled"
posted on July 4, 2005 09:31:55 PM new
logansdad - Once again you show just how vulgar you can be.
And as far as what I've said above....you have publically stated on these threads you are gay. You have pubically supported and argued for gay marriage. To say otherwise is to show yourself a liar. Don't know who you think you're fooling....but it's certainly not anyone whose read here for any length of time.
You fool no one....except maybe yourself.
-------------
mingotree- I'm sure you're aware that putting issues to the voters to VOTE ON is quite different that taking "polls" or caring what they say.
Pres. Bush was just re-elected....all the complaints the left threw at him....didn't keep the majority of American's from deciding HE was the one they wanted to stay in office.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
