“Marriage and the Military: Evidence That Those Who Serve Marry Earlier and Divorce Earlier”
I will first say that I have a general dislike for studies. It is simply a guessing game. A paid guessing game at that.They are dependent upon very few people and select/limited information and/or situations. They tend to give a broad stroke hypothesis based on limited groups, therefore generalizing information for the masses. Broad studies, well, I can get more on board with those, in theory. I generally do not put much stock in any study. Tomorrow another study (slanted the other direction) will come out to rebut the previous study. Right? :)
Anyway, I read this. Then (because I am a military family member and was interested in reading the entire 'study' - and I like detailed facts, especially regarding 'studies') I wanted to read this. But it is not available to read for free.
I also read a rebuttal to this study here.
Why do things like this bother me so? Because people in high places with power make decisions that will impact me and fellow military families - often based on 'studies' such as this. Does that mean that this particular study and the suggestions within will ever come to fruition? I don't know. But I do know that if there are studies being done and paid for that will impact the military, I darn sure want to know about it and want to personally be able to read and examine the finite details.
I will take out a few excerpts from this article for comment below. Remember that I cannot read the entire study, therefore I am commenting solely on what has been written in articles regarding this study. Sarcasm included.........
In a new study, economist Paul Hogan and social psychologist Rita Seifert suggest that while the military needs to be supportive of family life — more than half of all active-duty troops are married — the Pentagon should not, in essence, encourage single troops to marry.
Gee, thanks for saying family life needs to be supported. How great and generous of you.
When exactly did the Pentagon begin encouraging troops to marry? I think that I missed out on that Memo, WARNO or OPORD! I have never heard one person in the military ever encourage anyone to get married. Unless it was a personal discussion about love. Do people get married for benefits? I am sure that some do, in the military and civilian world. Is the Pentagon encouraging marriage - um, no. If the numbers here are correct, military members marrying at an early age is nothing new. See pg 8 specifically.
Previous research, the authors say, “has shown that retention of married service members is influenced by family support and satisfaction with the military.”
“However, there does not seem to be evidence that married service members are more productive or of greater value to the military than single service members. The military does not need to encourage single service members to marry. Other employer markets do not differentiate compensation and benefits by marital status.”
Para 1: Well of course it does because for married folks, if Momma/Daddy and the kiddos aren't happy, the Soldier will likely be moving on to a new job and lifestyle!
Para 2: No one is of greater value. Period. The military does not encourage singles to marry. Period. The only difference in compensation is housing and BAH.
While many have argued the BAH issue over the years and encouraged a flat rate for all within a each rank, it is still very simple - single people (w/out children) do not need the same amount of BAH to rent an apartment or house as does a married person (or single person) with children and in need of a larger home. Maybe the way to fix this argument is that there should be a rate for people (married or single) with children and a rate for people without children. That type of change would seem more reasonable based on housing needs, no? Oh, wait, that wouldn't be politically correct either. Yikes, what a dilemma!
In most areas (not all) BAH is decent. It is even generous in some areas. Singles can rent (and only need) smaller homes at a cheaper rate. Some of them room together in a larger home, spending even less of their individual BAH, thus pocketing some money. They may or may not be overly concerned with neighborhood safety or whether or not sex offenders live nearby. They will not be concerned with living in an area where the schools are excellent. They will not be concerned with living in an area where activities for children are wonderful and abundant. These things do make a difference when it comes down to $$ - like it or not. This does not include single service members with children because they are given BAH at the "with dependent" rate just as married people are, with or without children. That being said, I refer back to the above paragraph if change is really needed.
To better understand this, here is an example - In our current area BAH for people of my husband's rank that have dependents (spouse and/or children) is only $234 more per month than for those that are single or without dependents. Telling, no? See, it is not an astronomical difference. So what is the true argument for a flat rate?
Hogan and Seifert say a revised compensation policy would phase in family benefits, such as better housing, so that married troops receive more benefits the longer they serve.
Then, compensation and benefits could move toward a system that rewards performance rather than dependency status, they say. In this way, they argue, the military would both support families and encourage the best performers to stay in the service.
Really? Did they understand the military at all before they were paid to do this study?
The military already rewards (in theory) rank with better housing.
In the past you knew you would live amongst certain ranks in certain types of housing. With promotion of rank came opportunities for different areas to live in and better (cough) housing. It was a benefit (one of the few other than a raise) of the service member climbing the totem poll - today that is not always the case. With rank does not (or rarely does) necessarily come housing privileges anymore.
I cannot speak to the study issues regarding divorce. I married later in age than many of my friends. I have only been married once (and am gladly still married) and do not come from a home of divorced parents. While I do agree that marrying earlier might possibly lead to higher chance of divorce, I also think that there are too many factors regarding the stresses of military life to generalize age as the largest issue.
Another quote regarding this same study found here:
Under the compensation system of the U.S. Armed Forces, members who are married or have dependents receive higher rates of pay and greater benefits than those who are single with no dependents.This statement is entirely incorrect. You do not receive higher rates of pay for being married. Base Pay is Base Pay, decided only according to your rank/pay grade. Period. The only greater benefit is BAH, as previously discussed. For the sake of basics in the military, I am not discussing COLA, Sep Pay or any other special pay that varies.
Like I said previously, I tend to take 'studies' with a grain of salt. With a little research you can find a study to support a cause or a study to rebut a cause. The facts/information used in any study are always questionable and generally very small. All that any of us can to do is gather and examine the facts and then make an educated guess about things - that is what a study is in very basic terms that make sense to me. And they do not utilize common sense - that is not the intent.
If you find the 'study' accessible from any free locale, please let me know. I would still love to read the entire thing.
Labels: studies
posted by LoveMyTanker @ 9:09 PM
2 Comments:
Glad you posted this. If nothing else I enjoyed reading you tear it apart a bit.
I have a copy of the article. I'm happy to send it to you but I can't find a way to post it to your blog or email it to you directly.
FYI, the article shows only that lower enlisted rates of marriage and divorce are higher than for similar civilians. They have no causal data to be able to link either trend to BAH or some other military policy despite their claims. They do, however, show that marriage rates among junior enlisted are higher for Active Duty than Reserves and deduce that this comparison allows them to isolate a comparison between a population that has an incentive to want to move off post as oposed to a population that does not have any such incentive since they do not have to live in the barracks. It's a decent study but a weak conclusion.
Post a Comment
<< Home