2019
DOI: 10.1002/jcop.22294
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Family Readiness Groups: Helping deployed Army National Guard soldiers and their families

Abstract: Many have espoused the benefits of Family Readiness Groups (FRGs) for families of deployed soldiers. These include fostering family well‐being (main effect) and buffering the family against the negative effects of stressful life events (moderating effect). Yet, few published studies have tested these hypothesized relationships. Survey responses gathered from returning deployed Army National Guard soldiers (N = 4,568 soldiers in 50 company‐sized units) gave the opportunity to test hypothesized benefits of FRGs,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, given the definition of support as “verbal and nonverbal behavior produced with the intention of providing assistance to others perceived as needing that aid” (MacGeorge et al, 2011 , p. 317), our study adds a unique element, pointing to the partners' acceptance of absence of physical and sexual closeness as one such manifestation of support during these times. Although studies on couples who live remotely or serve in the military have addressed the challenges of support in military families (Griffith, 2020 ), the current situation created a unique challenge of providing support via the absence of behavior. In a study conducted on physical touch for 585 partnered adults during the pandemic, more physical distancing was associated directly with lower psychological distress and better relationship quality; indeed, for those who were cohabiting in satisfying romantic relationships, the physical distancing appeared to facilitate relationship‐positive behaviors (Burleson et al, 2021 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, given the definition of support as “verbal and nonverbal behavior produced with the intention of providing assistance to others perceived as needing that aid” (MacGeorge et al, 2011 , p. 317), our study adds a unique element, pointing to the partners' acceptance of absence of physical and sexual closeness as one such manifestation of support during these times. Although studies on couples who live remotely or serve in the military have addressed the challenges of support in military families (Griffith, 2020 ), the current situation created a unique challenge of providing support via the absence of behavior. In a study conducted on physical touch for 585 partnered adults during the pandemic, more physical distancing was associated directly with lower psychological distress and better relationship quality; indeed, for those who were cohabiting in satisfying romantic relationships, the physical distancing appeared to facilitate relationship‐positive behaviors (Burleson et al, 2021 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Department of Defense has invested in promoting spouse readiness and resilience to enhance mission readiness and the health of the military force [55]. Several resources and programs have been developed focusing on children and the family unit, many of which are designed to support families during or after stressful exposures such as deployment to prevent negative family outcomes (e.g., [56][57][58]). These programs have proven essential in extending support networks for families and improving family functioning during particularly challenging periods (e.g., overseas assignment, deployment).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Supporting Army families has been both an informal and a formal Army endeavor. As introduced in Chapter 1, FSGs were first recognized in the 1980s and were formal groups that convened and provided support for military families while soldiers were deployed (Griffith, 2020;Schumm et al, 2000). These groups evolved along with Army missions and life.…”
Section: Program Intent and Goalsmentioning
confidence: 99%