Go Back   Professional Soldiers > At Ease > General Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

AP: Violence more common among kids of combat veterans
Old 11-02-2011, 15:46   #1
SouthernDZ
Quiet Professional
 
SouthernDZ's Avatar
 
SouthernDZ is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 553
AP: Violence more common among kids of combat veterans

Here we go...


Oct 31, 2011
Violence more common among kids of combat veterans
By MIKE STOBBE AP Medical Writer

ATLANTA (AP) -- A new study suggests that when parents are deployed in the military, their children are more than twice as likely to carry a weapon, join a gang or be involved in fights. And that includes the daughters. "This study raises serious concerns about an under-recognized consequence of war," said Sarah Reed, who led the research of military families in Washington state.

Last year, nearly 2 million U.S. children had at least one parent serving in the military. Deployment can hurt a family in a variety of ways. There's stress while that parent is overseas and in danger, as the remaining parent has to shoulder all responsibilities and family roles shift. There can also be challenges after deployed parents' return, especially if they were physically or psychologically damaged.

The effect of military deployment on kids is an emerging field of research. The new study is considered the first of its kind to focus on those affected by deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. It's unique in that it looked at a statewide swath of the population in comparing the behavior of kids in military families to children in non-military families. The study, to be presented Monday at a public health conference in Washington, D.C., was based on a 2008 questionnaire survey of about 10,000 students in the 8th, 10th and 12th grades in Washington. That state has the sixth largest active duty population in the country. About 550 of surveyed children said they had a parent deployed to a combat zone in the previous six years.

The study tried to account for potential differences in educational background and other issues between military families and the general population that might skew the results. Even after taking steps to account for such differences, the researchers found that high school-age daughters of deployed parents were nearly three times more likely than civilian girls to be in a gang or get into a fight. They were more than twice as likely to carry a weapon to school. There were similar increases among boys of deployed families when compared to civilians. To be sure, such behavior in boys is more common - the rate of boys from deployed families involved in such violent behaviors was twice as high as for girls in deployed families. For example, 14 percent of girls from these military families said they had been in fights, compared to 28 percent of boys. Nevertheless, experts say the findings contradict the traditional view that girls under stress exhibit "internalizing" behaviors, like becoming depressed or thinking about suicide, while boys are the ones who "externalize" through violent behavior

The new research may be something of a wake-up call for health professionals who deal with military families, one expert suggested. "Maybe if we make assumptions about children, we may overlook other ways they may be suffering," said Dr. Gregory Gorman, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. Additional research is needed to confirm the findings, said Reed, who has since left the University of Washington and is now a social worker with the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. For example, the survey found that 10 to 20 percent of the adolescents in deployed families said they were in gangs. That's surprisingly high - more like something seen in New York City in the 1950s. Perhaps a larger, more national study would produce a lower number.

But it's not surprising that kids in deployed families would seek out other kids to help them deal with stress, said Gregory Leskin, a UCLA psychologist who is director of a military family program at the National Child Traumatic Stress Network. "Adolescents may be able to get lost in social networks," he said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...ALTH&TEMPLATE=
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-02-2011, 18:04   #2
rdret1
Quiet Professional
 
rdret1's Avatar
 
rdret1 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wilson,NC
Posts: 1,512
I found several sources to the article you referenced however, I could find no links to the actual study. I would be interested to read that study and see how they defined "gang"and "weapon". I would also be interested to see how they worded the questions and the selectable answers. It doesn't sound right to me.
__________________
"Solitude is strength; to depend on the presence of the crowd is weakness. The man who needs a mob to nerve him is much more alone than he imagines."

~ Paul Brunton (1898-1981)



R.D. Winters
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-02-2011, 20:09   #3
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
The Reaper is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,287
Yeah, but the military is overcompensated, has an overly generous retirement system, and offers too many health benefits.

Just ask the Dims.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2017
  Reply With Quote

Study and Washington,DC
Old 11-03-2011, 19:50   #4
alright4u
Quiet Professional
 
alright4u is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Nashville
Posts: 977
Study and Washington,DC

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdret1 View Post
I found several sources to the article you referenced however, I could find no links to the actual study. I would be interested to read that study and see how they defined "gang"and "weapon". I would also be interested to see how they worded the questions and the selectable answers. It doesn't sound right to me.
Don't those words conflict? A study . kids in DC? And they know which ones are military brats? Amazing. DC would make any sane person carry a weapon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2011, 20:02   #5
Sigaba
Area Commander
 
Sigaba is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdret1 View Post
I found several sources to the article you referenced however, I could find no links to the actual study. I would be interested to read that study and see how they defined "gang"and "weapon". I would also be interested to see how they worded the questions and the selectable answers. It doesn't sound right to me.
QP rdret1--

As of the writing of this post, I've been unable to find a copy of the study discussed in the OP.

FWIW, Ms. Reed and Diane Pilkey discussed the study in a recent issue of the NorthwestBulletin. Attached is that specific issue's cover page and the two page discussion.

IMO, Mr. Strobbe and his editor[s] at AP took a sensationalistic approach to the study. Only after grabbing the readers' attention does he point out that Reed herself thinks that a lot more research needs to be done.
Quote:
Additional research is needed to confirm the findings, said Reed, who has since left the University of Washington and is now a social worker with the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. For example, the survey found that 10 to 20 percent of the adolescents in deployed families said they were in gangs. That's surprisingly high - more like something seen in New York City in the 1950s. Perhaps a larger, more national study would produce a lower number.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Sarah Reed study overview.pdf (163.7 KB, 15 views)
  Reply With Quote

Lots of military kids........
Old 11-03-2011, 20:02   #6
Pete
Quiet Professional
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Pete is online now
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Fayetteville
Posts: 12,070
Lots of military kids........

.................running around Fayetteville - not too many on the Murk though.
  Reply With Quote

The Washington Healthy Youth Study data
Old 11-03-2011, 20:14   #7
Sigaba
Area Commander
 
Sigaba is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,475
The Washington Healthy Youth Study data

FWIW, the project's reports for the last five surveys are here.

Pages 4 and 5 of the 2010 report outline some of the "cautions" about the data set.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2011, 20:32   #8
Razor
Quiet Professional
 
Razor's Avatar
 
Razor is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 4,296
Quote:
The study, to be presented Monday at a public health conference in Washington, D.C., was based on a 2008 questionnaire survey of about 10,000 students in the 8th, 10th and 12th grades in Washington. That state has the sixth largest active duty population in the country. About 550 of surveyed children said they had a parent deployed to a combat zone in the previous six years.
So, 5.5% of the study's participants had a deployed parent at some point of a 6 year period, and that is statistically significant enough to derive the findings it did? Kind of a reach in my opinion.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2011, 11:15   #9
GratefulCitizen
Area Commander
 
GratefulCitizen's Avatar
 
GratefulCitizen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Page/Lake Powell, Arizona
Posts: 2,867
Can't find the part where they sample exclusively children of deployed military personnel.
Sampling a population set and then assuming a subset has a behavior which has a rate consistent with the larger set is a logical error.
__________________
__________________
Waiting for the perfect moment is a fruitless endeavor.
Make a decision, and then make it the right one through your actions.
"Whoever watches the wind will not plant; whoever looks at the clouds will not reap." -Ecclesiastes 11:4 (NIV)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2011, 12:01   #10
greenberetTFS
Quiet Professional (RIP)
 
greenberetTFS's Avatar
 
greenberetTFS is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Carriere,Ms.
Posts: 6,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor View Post
So, 5.5% of the study's participants had a deployed parent at some point of a 6 year period, and that is statistically significant enough to derive the findings it did? Kind of a reach in my opinion.
Now that makes real sense........ Excellent point,Razor..............

Big Teddy
__________________
I believe that SF is a 'calling' - not too different from the calling missionaries I know received. I knew instantly that it was for me, and that I would do all I could to achieve it. Most others I know in SF experienced something similar. If, as you say, you HAVE searched and read, and you do not KNOW if this is the path for you --- it is not....
Zonie Diver

SF is a calling and it requires commitment and dedication that the uninitiated will never understand......
Jack Moroney

SFA M-2527, Chapter XXXVII
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2011, 12:20   #11
Badger52
Area Commander
 
Badger52 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western WI
Posts: 4,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen View Post
Sampling a population set and then assuming a subset has a behavior which has a rate consistent with the larger set is a logical error.
Careful there. With talk like that you're into a sociologist's Romulan Neutral Zone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2011, 12:39   #12
Brush Okie
Area Commander
 
Brush Okie's Avatar
 
Brush Okie is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington
Posts: 4,446
IMHO its a politotically motovated bullshit study.
__________________
What doesn't kill me better start running.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-05-2011, 11:00   #13
Sparty On
Asset
 
Sparty On is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigaba View Post
IMO, Mr. Strobbe and his editor[s] at AP took a sensationalistic approach to the study. Only after grabbing the readers' attention does he point out that Reed herself thinks that a lot more research needs to be done.
I agree, although had he not grabbed readers' attentions, it's possible that fewer people would have continued to read the entire article (including Ms. Reed's caveats). Those caveats are likely the result of Ms. Reed presenting her work to her peers and absorbing their criticisms. Academics can be a hyper-critical bunch.

As an aside, I am always suspicious when the authors of any study (especially when the study's design is a survey) do not include some sort of self-criticism or caveats in their summation/conclusion/discussion. One of the signs of a competent researcher is knowing when further studies are warranted and in my opinion, Ms. Reed is absolutely correct that further studies are warranted.
__________________
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.

-- Theodore Roosevelt
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2011, 12:52   #14
GratefulCitizen
Area Commander
 
GratefulCitizen's Avatar
 
GratefulCitizen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Page/Lake Powell, Arizona
Posts: 2,867
Just glanced at this before.
Digging a little deeper raises more skepticism.

The claimed inference is that children of deployed military personnel are more likely to engage in certain behaviors.
(p1 > p2) where (p1 = population proportion of military kids engaging in said behaviors) and (p2 = population proportion of non-military kids engaing in said behaviors)

The survey was not designed to test this hypothesis.
Some of the data was just rammed into a chi-square test (chi-square should be viewed with skepticism).

The null hypothesis of the claimed inference would be (p1 <= p2).
In order to have confidence in the inference, the null hypothesis would have to be rejected.

Not sure how they reached that conclusion.
__________________
__________________
Waiting for the perfect moment is a fruitless endeavor.
Make a decision, and then make it the right one through your actions.
"Whoever watches the wind will not plant; whoever looks at the clouds will not reap." -Ecclesiastes 11:4 (NIV)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2011, 12:56   #15
BOfH
Guerrilla Chief
 
BOfH is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NYC Area
Posts: 828
All that new fuzzy math they've been teaching. It's a whole lot easier to spend money like water and push agenda with bull&*@# statistics when 1 + 1 != 2.
__________________
"Crime is an extension of business through illegal means, politics is an extension of crime through *legal* means."
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:25.



Copyright 2004-2017 by Professional Soldiers
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies