Developing Fitness and Resilience in Military Couples

BACKGROUND:

Service members on active duty or returning from deployment must work through significant life changes. Service members with increased sleep difficulties, sexual problems and dissociation resulted in lower relationship satisfaction with their female significant others (Nelson-Goff et al., 2007). However, resilient couples learn to adapt and overcome, therefore continuing together in satisfying relationships. In recent studies, military couples demonstrated higher functioning with their relationships when higher levels of resilience were present, regardless of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS; Melvin et al., 2012). Based on the Military Family Fitness Model (MFFM) we have analyzed individual, family and external resource areas that couples and families use to create greater well-being (Bowles, et al., in press). The present study examines these three resources, and their impact on military couples’ well-being, as well as indicators of physical and mental health.

METHODS:

Forty deployed service members and their spouses completed instruments examining the MFFM resources. Stepwise multiple regressions were used to assess the effects of resources on health outcomes. Outcome variables included emotional well-being, PTSS, and mental and physical health.   Predictors included: external resources that are social resources, and community support; family resources included communication and family cohesion, and individual resources included problem-focused coping and hardiness.

RESULTS:

Significant models were identified for all three outcome measures.  For emotional well-being, the sole significant predictor was an External factor, social resources (standardized beta = .31, p < .005). For the overall model, F (78, 1) = 8.47, p < .005, with an R-square of .10.

For PTSS, significant predictors were the External factor of social resources (standardized beta= -.28, p < .01), and the Individual factor of problem-focused coping (standardized beta = -.23, p < .04).   For the overall model, F (77,2) = 6.87, p < .002, with an R-square of .15.

For symptoms (somatic, depression and anxiety), significant predictors were the Family factor of family cohesion (standardized beta= -.26, p < .01), and the Individual factor of problem-focused coping (standardized beta = -.40, p < .001).   For the overall model, F (77,2) = 11.04,  p < .001, with and R-square of .22.

 CONCLUSION: 

Results confirm aspects of the Military Family Fitness Model, showing that individual , family and external  resources all contribute to healthy outcomes in military couples.  Future work will explore additional features of the model, to include influence of leaders, use for wounded warriors, and variations associated with different levels of stress exposure.