2010
DOI: 10.7205/milmed-d-09-00182
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

One Shot-One Kill: A Culturally Sensitive Program for the Warrior Culture

Abstract: Despite efforts to reduce the stigma of mental health services across branches of the United States military, lasting change among this warrior culture remains an uphill battle. Difficulty affecting change can be attributed in part to stigma associated with psychological services and largely, mental health providers' difficulty tailoring traditional models of treatment to military personnel. We will discuss the development of One Shot - One Kill (OSOK), a culturally sensitive mental health prevention program p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…32 The reduction in use among officers, and the perception that tobacco use is a detriment to advancement, adds salience to the new idea that tobacco use is becoming ''not military.'' A replacement myth might reinforce some recent efforts to address the contradiction between fitness and susceptibility to stress by defining stress management training and tools as ''military,'' 7,20,44,45 as, for example, in the ''One Shot-One Kill'' program. Such a change would likely meet resistance; however, the military has recently demonstrated its ability to implement widespread cultural change with the repeal of ''don't ask don't tell'' and the open acceptance of lesbian and gay members.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…32 The reduction in use among officers, and the perception that tobacco use is a detriment to advancement, adds salience to the new idea that tobacco use is becoming ''not military.'' A replacement myth might reinforce some recent efforts to address the contradiction between fitness and susceptibility to stress by defining stress management training and tools as ''military,'' 7,20,44,45 as, for example, in the ''One Shot-One Kill'' program. Such a change would likely meet resistance; however, the military has recently demonstrated its ability to implement widespread cultural change with the repeal of ''don't ask don't tell'' and the open acceptance of lesbian and gay members.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the ''One Shot-One Kill'' program frames stress management techniques as ways to increase a warrior's effectiveness. 7 However, none of these techniques has been integrated into military training or made routine. Few have been thoroughly evaluated and none has been positioned as an alternative to or replacement for tobacco use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, strict adherence to the military's warrior code has been associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing negative life outcomes. Research by Lunasco, Goodwin, Ozanian, and Loflin (2010), for instance, indicates that military members' perceptions of mental health services are largely influenced by the degree to which they identify with the warrior code. Specifically, service men and women who adopt the warrior identity appear significantly less likely to seek help for mental health problems due to the stigma and vulnerability that is associated with getting treatment.…”
Section: Social Learning and Military Violencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…That overarching milieu is understandable in view of the activities and circumstances in which military personnel engage. Nevertheless, "Warrior Culture" ultimately lends itself to injured soldiers initially downplaying the extent or long-term natures of their disabilities [9]. Indeed, anecdotal evidence that one of the authors has learned through the National Organization on Disability's Wounded Warriors program indicates that veterans heavily resist the label of "disabled" and instead, often in the face of contrary and graphic evidence, classify themselves as "injured" or "wounded."…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%