AFC0038
Written evidence submitted by Mrs Samantha Atherton.
Summary
This literature review, drawn from my ongoing professional doctoral thesis. My research is exploring the barriers faced by military spouse teachers. However, within this I have examined the Armed Forces Covenant and its implications for military spouses, particularly those in professional roles like teaching. The Covenant, introduced in 2000 by the UK Ministry of Defence, outlines a moral commitment to ensuring that serving personnel, veterans, and their families face no disadvantage due to their association with the Armed Forces. While its intentions are noble, its implementation has fallen short, particularly in addressing the unique challenges faced by military spouses.
Military spouses are integral to family stability yet encounter significant barriers, including frequent relocations, employment disruptions, and societal marginalisation. These challenges are compounded by traditional military perceptions that view spouses as dependents, limiting their career opportunities. The Forces in Mind Trust’s 2022 review highlighted gaps in the Covenant’s delivery, citing poor communication and systemic complexity as key issues. Despite initiatives like the 2019 Selous Review, which provided 110 recommendations (17 of which targeted spousal careers), practical support remains insufficient.
The review underscores the need for tailored policies to support military spouses, emphasising their critical role in family and military cohesion. For professions like teaching, where spouses often find employment, additional measures – such as employer engagement, childcare support, and relocation assistance – are vital. Addressing these barriers is essential to fulfilling the Covenant’s promise and recognising the professional and personal contributions of military spouses, thereby bridging the gap between military commitments and family well-being.
Chapter 2 - Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
Our military provides a constant presence upon which we depend as a nation. Soldiers protect against tyranny, take part in peacekeeping missions and provide humanitarian aid around the world (Williams, 2024). They safeguard other’s freedom, yet they lack true freedom. They live under the authority of an institution that controls every aspect of their lives. They must accept a range of values which include a commitment to serve one’s country and put the Service before self; which, in turn, affects the function of their family (Gleiman & Swearengen, 2012).
More than 87% of military spouses state that they have personal career goals (Agbisit, 2019). However, due to the unique nature of military life and the military’s traditional view of the spouse as a dependent, it is often difficult for the military spouse to fulfil these goals (Macer & Chadderton, 2021). Researchers largely attribute this to their geographical instability, causing increased levels of unemployment and lower earnings (Cooney et al., 2011; Hisnanick & Little, 2015; Meadows et al., 2016; Jiang et al., 2022). However, through recognition and understanding of the potential difficulties faced by military spouse teachers, and military spouses more widely, we will able to serve this population, in the same way their military members serve us.
This chapter focuses on providing the background to this study, which is aimed to learn about the challenges military spouse teachers, and military spouses more generally, face both in the past and currently. A noticeable gap in the literature is highlighted and supports this study to better understand the professional identity experience of military spouses.
2.2 Area of interest
Research has identified the military spouse as the cornerstone and foundation of the military family (Blakely et al., 2014; DeGraff et al., 2016; Kees et al., 2015; Green et al., 2013), yet research on the military spouse’s experience and professional identity as a teacher has yet to be investigated in the UK. Professional identity has been connected with positive mental outcomes (Beard, 2017; Conroy & O’Leary-Kelly, 2014; Cook et al., 2021; Crayne, 2020; Danciullescu & Mergeani, 2015) and military spouses have been identified as a population that consistently experiences negative mental health (Burke & Miller, 2017’ Blakely et al., 2014; Dekel et al., 2017; Gewirtz et al., 2014). Additionally, this research has implications for the fulfilment of the UK’s Armed Forces Covenant, which pledges that those who serve or have served and their families ‘...should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens…’ (Ministry of Defence, 2011).
This thesis is particularly pertinent because I have been a military wife for six years. I have gone from being a secondary school middle leader with wider academy responsibility to a military dependent, mother and student. I have progressed through many trials this transition has brought, including the marginalisation by military and civilian societies. This thesis intends to bring attention to the military spouse teacher’s struggles to progress in a career in education, thus increasing awareness and, ultimately, recognition for a group that is the silent backbone of our nation’s defence.
2.3 Historical trends
Although England had possessed a naval force for many centuries, it was not until 1546 that King Henry VIII developed a permanent, professional military to protect the English coastline (Roper, 1998). Subsequently, the Army was established in 1660, after the Restoration, and the Royal Air Force in 1918, following World War One (Roper, 1998).
Military spouses would have supported their members, often accompanying them on deployments and working as laundresses, seamstresses and caregivers. It was not until 1885 that they received any attention or consideration (Roper, 1998). Major Gildea was the first to recognise the necessity of supporting families during military deployments (Martin et al., 2000; Soldiers’, Sailors’ & Airmen’s Families Association (SSAFA), 2024). In February 1885, he wrote to The Times, appealing for money and volunteers. Consequently, a fund was established to provide allowances, and Queen Alexandra took over as president and began the Alexandra Nurses (SSAFA, 2024). However, the support dwindled in the 19th century, and it was not until the end of World War One that support restarted with the implementation of the war widows’ pension (SSAFA, 2024).
Alongside these changes, the formation of the family in wider society was also experiencing change. Fewer males possessed more economic power, due to the decrease in male heirs, following their loss in the war (Laslett, 1965). As a result, familial authority resulted in control, by the head of the household, over the economic practices and behaviours of other family members (Regan de Bere, 1999). Therefore, families were characterised by hierarchies based on gender; the patriarchy continued to dominate society and therefore the institutions within it.
Nowadays, there are several charities and foundations that support military families, including the SSAFA, Army Families Federation and Royal British Legion. However, their focus is often on the whole family unit or the children, rather than the spouse. The Military Wives Choir is the only charity which exclusively supports military spouses. But their focus is on developing a social network, rather than supporting a spouse with their career advancement.
2.4 Recent developments
More recently, wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Ukraine have put the military back in the forefront of government talks, realising ‘the family part of the equation is the backbone of support for serving members and that sometimes spouses and partners have gone unrecognised in this context’ (Caddick et al., 2018, p. 5). This is particularly pertinent as today more than half of military members are married (Durand, 2000).
One example of a government publication which intends to support the military spouse is the Armed Forces Covenant. Originally published by the Ministry of Defence in 2000, the document is a statement of the moral obligation existing between the nation, the government and the Armed Forces: ‘Those who serve in the Armed Forces, whether Regular or Reserve, those who have served in the past, and their families, should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens’ (Armed Forces Covenant, 2024; Ministry of Defence, 2024). It recognises that the whole nation has a moral obligation to serving members and their families and establishes how they should expect to be treated (Ministry of Defence, 2024). However, the extent to which this publication has positively impacted military spouse careers has been minimal (Forces in Mind Trust, 2022).
In 2022, the Forces in Mind Trust published a report reviewing the delivery and impact of ten years of the Armed Forces Covenant. It claims there needs to be clearer communication from the government, its agencies and institutions to strengthen the Covenant’s delivery. Specifically, it states, ‘The challenge for spouses is endemic in an Armed Forces context. The problems are more complex…’ (Forces in Mind Trust, 2022, p. 32).
Additionally, in January 2019, the then Defence Secretary, Gavin Williamson, commissioned Andrew Selous to conduct an independent review to consider the diverse needs of military families, assess whether the current support offer is meeting these needs, and make recommendations accordingly (Walker et al., 2020). The report was titled ‘Living in our shoes: Understanding the needs of UK armed forces families’. The findings from the review led to 110 recommendations to address the challenges faced by military families. Seventeen recommendations focused on spouses’ careers, referring to increasing employer awareness, training, childcare and postings/relocations (Walker et al., 2020). Of these, only Recommendation 46 refers to military spouses not being ‘disadvantaged’ (Walker et al., 2020, p. 63):
(Walker et al., 2020, p. 63)
Even though the government has published several documents, there are still limited discussions around support for the military family and less for the military spouses in the wider literature. Research has primarily focused on the impact of invisible injuries, most notably Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which the military members have returned home with. One-third of serving members who served in Iraq and Afghanistan have PTSD, depression, or substance use disorders, and spouses have reported significant difficulties living with their serving member or veteran; which has resulted in the breakdown of some military families (Yambo et al., 2016). However, it is not just deployments that have a destabilising effect on the household. Military spouses report that the most significant strain is relocation. For most military families, deployment orders are issued every two to three years, leading to a move away from existing support systems and into the unknown. Whilst there has been significant research into this impact on children (e.g. Weber & Weber, 2005; Palmer, 2008; Alfano et al., 2016), there is little consideration of the military spouse.
2.5 Current conditions
Military life provides many positive experiences, such as exciting social lives, camaraderie with other military families, opportunities for travel, and overseas postings. Consequently, military families face unique challenges which disrupt everyday life: repeated relocation; detachment from ordinary civilian life; frequent separations; and ‘the job’ always coming first. While many civilian families face similar demands, few are likely to be exposed to all of them simultaneously. Military families are unique in that they live with the constant threat of a family member being sent to a conflict zone, where they may face the possibility of severe injury or death. Perhaps because of this, military spouses often adopt a correspondingly dutiful ‘let us get on with it’ attitude when they encounter the non-life threatening, and therefore comparatively unimportant, changes that are a perpetual feature of their lives (Jervis, 2008).
As they are positioned paradoxically in that they are neither members of the military nor entirely apart from it, they must negotiate a contradictory tension between identifying with or resisting the military institution. However, at both extremes, spouses risk alienation – identification may alienate them from aspects of their former personalities and civilian life, whereas resistance may alienate them from the military community altogether (Jervis, 2008). These experiences can fragment military spouses’ identities, as they look to reconstruct their identity with each relocation.
In 2019, the Armed Forces Continuous Action Survey estimated that 54% of regular British serving members were married or in a civil partnership (Ministry of Defence, 2019). Although they comprise a significant part of the military, they are significantly under-researched, unnoticed by scholars and unappreciated by the military (Hosek & Wadsworth, 2013; McBridge & Cleymans, 2014; Bastian, 2016). This contradicts the US military, which has given its military spouses a much greater voice in policy and increased focus on research. Nevertheless, the vast majority of military spouses experience dissatisfaction with their military life, particularly regarding their employment (Scott-Clarke, 1990), which can significantly impact their identities.
Identity theories
Erikson defines identity as a fundamental organising principle which develops constantly throughout an individual’s life (Erikson, 1959). It involves the experiences, relationships, beliefs, values, and memories that make up a person’s sense of self. However, researchers of military spouses, such as Berry (2015), argue that it is their lifestyle that places them at a distinct disadvantage, especially in the process of identity formation. Moreover, she concludes that military spouse identity formation is significantly harder than for civilian spouses. She attributes these difficulties to barriers as a result of their association with the military; including dependence, marginalisation and psychological challenges, such as depression and anxiety, which often manifest during periods of separation with the serving member (Berry, 2015). Many researchers make use of identity theories to explore the influence that the military has on the spouse. However, much of this research has been undertaken by those looking outsiders and therefore these researchers cannot fully appreciate the impact of the institution on its members and their families.
Before the development of identity theories, role theory existed. Although similar to identity theory, role theory was said to be less dynamic and multifaceted than other theories that looked at identity (Simpson & Carroll, 2008). The topic of the role is used when discussing experiences and expectations. However, it is thought about more frequently when discussing organisational or societal positions rather than internal behaviours and expectations of oneself (Simpson & Carroll, 2008). Ultimately, the limited scope and application of role theory meant that different identity theories took shape; for example, social identity theory.
Social identity theory explains ways individuals are tied to social structures and how this influences their identity. It states that individuals have two identities - their identity and their social identity - which influence group relationships (Rodriguez, 2019). Personal and social identity allows individuals to make sense of the culture around them and how culture is constructed. Individuals’ physical, social, and mental characteristics influence the social construction of groups. Individuals may associate their social identity with group membership, particularly with those with whom they share race, gender, sexual orientation, and religion. The relationship between social structures and their influence on identity has prompted significant research in many areas. For example, social identity constructions are influenced by internal and external characteristics of social processes linked to culturally vulnerable groups (Vincent et al., 2020). However, due to the influences of many social factors affecting how social identities are formed, it can be problematic when an individual’s identities do not align and can lead to identity dissonance.
Identity dissonance is when individuals struggle to integrate their identities (Joseph et al., 2017). The identities of an individual can be internal or external, and social identities are developed based on an individual’s social experiences. The experiences related to an individual’s role may cause conflict when something does not align with an individual’s identity or values (Yip et al., 2020). Additionally, identity formation is an ongoing process that can change over time and create internal struggles if an individual’s internal and social identities do not align (Joseph et al., 2017). These elements are specifically relevant when discussing the topic of military life because individuals who form and influence military culture come from many diverse backgrounds. Many individuals, especially spouses, may enter the military community with a strongly developed set of cultural norms that may not align with the social identity norms required of military community members (Bullock, 2004; May & McDermott, 2020). As result, they may try to disassociate themselves from the military community. However, according to McKain (1973), military spouses who do this are likely to feel more alienated, especially following relocation. Additionally, they are more likely to experience personal and family problems. According to McCubbin (1979), the process of internalising and conforming to military expectations enhances the spouse’s capacity to cope with its demands. Similarly, Finch (1983) suggested that most spouses cooperate with the needs of the military lifestyle to ensure their social status within its community. Consequently, their compliance is not experienced as alienating but, instead, provides spouses with the opportunity to participate in a publicly recognised joint venture and experience the benefits of the military member’s career indirectly. This may be more significant for some spouses than having their own alternative identity outside of the military (Jervis, 2008). However, the experiences of military spouses can be better understood through the idea of social constructionism.
Social constructionism is the idea that individuals are controlled by social or cultural factors rather than environmental factors (Berger & Luckmann, 1979; Mallon, 2019). It provides a lens for observing how individuals interact with society and their environment. Through the lens of social constructionism, previous research has highlighted the effects of multiple cultures’ involvement in identities, which can result in psychological distress from self-contradicting demands of the dominant culture. For example, Jervis (2008) reports on the psychological distress that fragmented identities cause military spouses and Smith and True (2014) state that there can be significant psychological stress caused by identity conflict. Moreover, what these researchers conclude is that it can have wider implications such as adversely affecting serving member retention, readiness and well-being (Jervis, 2008; True, 2014).
Furthermore, this theory is relevant when discussing the topic of identity formation for specific groups, such as military spouses, because they are immersed in a socially constructed culture grounded in strict standards, routines, and disciplines. Spouses are crucial to the functioning of serving members, yet are simultaneously subordinate to them. The paradoxical figure of the military wife is supposed to be on the one hand, supportive of her husband and the mission, independent, and self-sufficient when he is gone (Bowen & Orthner, 1983; Harrell, 2001; Taber, 2009), but on the other hand, completely dependent on him when he is home (Burland & Lundquist, 2013; Enloe, 2000).
It has been shown that military spouse identities, and in some cases lack of identity, can have significant consequences. The lack of recognition for the military spouse as a viable self contributes to their lack of identity; essentially, they are treated much the same as the military member, in that, they are just a number (Harrell et al., 2005).
Military spouse identities
Military spouses are known for their resilient nature and adaptability in role shifting, often taking on new and constantly changing responsibilities (Eubanks, 2013). A military spouse, like any other individual, may come from various different cultural and societal backgrounds. However, upon marrying a military member they become not just spouse, but a member of the military community, which brings its own unique set of challenges (Schnaidt, 2021). Military spouses live a frequently changing life filled with unpredictability that requires a great deal of sacrifice and support for the serving member. Many individuals who become military spouses have no prior knowledge of military culture or traditions and, in turn, find it difficult to integrate their outside personal identities with those of their spousal roles and expectations (Schnaidt 2021). Instead, they have an identity bestowed upon them by the institution.
Masculine vs. feminine
The military is a highly gendered institution that thrives on the traditional patriarchal structures and heterosexual relationships (Acker, 1992; Karney & Crown, 2007; Weber, 2012; Macer & Chadderton, 2021). Despite changing demographics, women make up 90% of the military spouse population (Ministry of Defence, 2018). To this end, and while this research will consider all spouses, it is important to specifically consider the role of masculine and feminine identities because patriarchy and the relationship between men and women forms part of the military institution. Much has been written on how gender is harnessed in the preservation of the military, its ideals, and its operations. Cynthia Enloe has written extensively on the role that women play in processes of militarisation (e.g. Enloe, 1983; 1990; 2000), arguing that ‘all spheres of a woman’s life can and have been militarised’ (1983, 264). Moreover, as many military spouses have pointed out, the military model is based on the notion of a working father and a stay-at-home mother, looking after her husband and her children, willing to go anywhere the military requires, whenever they require it. However, this model is no longer realistic.
Debates about the relationship between women and the military have become common within Western societies (Kennedy-Pipe, 2000). Historically, war and combat in war have represented the highest aspirations of the male members of political, social and cultural elites across time and culture. War was, and many would still argue still is, in the Western World associated with masculine values such as physical strength, honour and courage. The word hero’, although Hero was a woman, is usually heard as masculine and associated with male adventures and struggle. Certainly, in Hebrew the words ‘gibor’ (hero) and ‘gever’ (man), have the same root. Additionally, in ancient Athens, some form of military training was regarded as a prerequisite to manhood.
This masculine dominance continues today, extending through all corners of the institution; and begins in basic training. This initial training plays a large role in the overflow of norms and behaviours from work life into personal life (Arkin & Dobrofsky 1978; May & MacDermott, 2019). Military spouses are viewed as equally involved in military culture as their serving member (Eubanks, 2013). They have been regarded as the carers and the nurturers of the young, inhabiting the private sphere and tasked with the defence of the home. Additionally, the role of a military spouse is one that requires a great deal of support and flexibility, and requires an individual to possess strength and resilience due to the constantly changing nature of military life (Eubanks, 2013). Military spouses are known for being individuals that provide a great deal of emotional support and relational stability to their serving member (May & McDermitt, 2019).
Types of spouses
Military spouses occupy complicated roles. On one hand they are undisputedly crucial to the function of their serving member, yet they are simultaneously considered subordinate to them by the military institution. Military spouses, and more specifically the wives, are heavily stereotyped as lazy, opportunistic, irresponsible, overly rank-conscious and entitled (Ziff & Jackson-Garlan, 2020). Research into this area focuses on the female spouse (the wife) and concludes that there are three types of military wife - the ‘Penelope’, the ‘Strohwitwe’ and the ‘silent’ wife. This section will echo the literature and focus solely on the military wife.
The term ‘Penelope’ encapsulates the traditional role of a military wife. The term was first used in Homer’s Ancient Greek epic ‘Odyssey’ (Homer, 1614). Within it, he tells the story of Odysseus’ waiting wife, Penelope, who is renowned for her patience and fidelity. Although it comes from a millennia-old tale set in a mythical past, her story echoes some of the experiences of military spouses today, especially the idealised image of the ‘model military wife’. Nowadays, The Military Wives Choir provides perhaps the most poignant contemporary example of the ‘Penelope’ military wife (Baker, 2018). Characterised by their patriotic sacrifice and feminine stoicism, they demonstrate the deeply embedded gendered cultures within the military institution. The military wives of the choir are, in the national imagination, embodiments of nationhood and patriotic sacrifice, projecting militaristic heroic narratives that ‘physically fighting (and dying) for a national interest is perceived as masculine, whereas it is the proper sphere of women to sacrifice within the home to defend those interests’ (Horn, 2010). Cree (2020) explores the idea of the ‘Constant Penelope’, and through interviews with the Plymouth branch of the choir, she sheds light on the role the military institution plays in influencing the national imagination of these women. She concludes that the choir is a form of nuanced violence towards the military wife, controlling their audience, wardrobes and songs (Cree, 2020). Thus, demonstrating the military’s impact even on military spouse’s social sphere.
Another example of the identity labels ascribed to the military wife is ‘Strohwitwe’, a German term for ‘straw widow’. It describes a woman whose partner is away for an undefined but temporary period (Ender, 2023; Samuels, 2024). The term is not unique to Germany and has been applied to military wives in other cultures; for example, ‘graesenke’ in Denmark, ‘repurri’ in Finland, and ‘Tanshinfunin’ in Japan. Whilst different, these terms are all used to describe women married to husbands with jobs requiring them to be away from home for multiple nights for their work. Symbolically, the term suggests ‘wives sleep on straw or grass while their husbands are away’ (Ender, 2023, p. 3). Ender (2023) and Samuels (2024) have both used ‘straw widow’ in their research of military wives, concluding that this is the norm for the contemporary military spouse, exacerbating the military’s focus on the traditional family structure of stay-at-home wife and breadwinner husband (Jans, 1989; De Angelis, K., & Segal, 2015; Ziff & Garland-Jackson, 2020).
Throughout history, feminist literature has referred to women as the ‘silent’ gender (Chodorow, 1978, 1986; Gilligan, 1982; Goldberger et al., 1996). Whilst society has moved forward in its development of equality, this label remains fitting for military wives. They experience limited control and power over their and their family’s lives (Belenky et al., 1986). Military wives constantly struggle with integrating multiple personal and social experiences; they are caught between the social norms of the military, the social norms established for the wives and those of the wider community, and marital social norms. As a result, many adopt a silent’ position (Robbins, 2002). Furthermore, Barnett (2012) echoes these findings and argues that the act of remaining silent is to back our boys, wherever they are, and whatever they do. This theme also emerged from focus groups conducted by Thumin and Parry (2023): ‘We’re supposed to be seen as being strong for our partners being away’ (p. 691). However, Harrell (2001) goes further and, in her research of three junior enlisted military spouses, refers to them as ‘invisible’.
This section has shown that the military possesses significant control over the military spouse, including over their identity. Much like their serving member, on entry, their identity is removed and they are expected to contribute themselves to the functioning of the military institution.
Greedy institutions
Initially coined by Coser (1974), ‘greedy institutions’ is a term applied to two demanding institutions that cause conflict due to the demands each puts on their members. Institutions have historically placed high demands on their members, and the importance of ‘getting the job done’ has placed substantial demands on group members, creating the potential for positive and negative spillover and, consequently, conflict. This has earned them the label ‘greedy institutions’.
In her 1977 article, ‘Men and Women of the Corporation’, Kanter refers to the ‘greedy institution’ and challenges the notion that family and corporate life could exist separately (Kanter, 1977a). She argued that the interplay between work and family responsibilities is fundamental to contemporary Western society. Kanter described the role of the wife, who, although not formally part of the corporation, is an essential part of the organisation, performing various duties. She termed these women the ‘corporation’s wife’, highlighting how they often prioritise their husbands’ work obligations over theirs and the family’s needs (Kanter, 1977a). Consequently, the corporation’s requirements overshadow her interests and the family’s. Kanter pointed out these women are ‘unpaid workers’ within the corporate structure (Kanter, 1977a). While her observations primarily focused on corporations, she argued that they are relevant to other areas, such as the military.
Segal (1986) and De Angelis and Segal (2015) have applied taken the work of Coser (1974) and Kanter (1977) and have ‘greedy institutions’ to the military and the family, claiming ‘...there is greater conflict now than in the past between these two greedy institutions’ (Segal, 1986, p.9).
Military families live at the intersection of two social institutions - the military and the family (De Angelis & Segal, 2015). Each institution has a complex set of roles and rules, and both significantly demand the individual’s time, loyalty, and energy. Although people in other occupations experience some of these characteristics, the military is unique in that serving members and their families will likely experience all of these throughout their careers (Wadsworth & Southwell, 2011; De Angelis & Segal, 2015), in addition to other demands unique to the military life. For example, risk of injury or death, geographic mobility, separations resulting from deployments, training, and temporary duties, residence in foreign countries, and a masculine environment that can affect family socialisation and organisation norms (Segal, 1986; De Angelis & Segal, 2015).
In competition is the demands of the family. In many Western countries, the family structure has been subject to rapid change in the last few decades. Families have always been connected to the military, yet the military has had varying definitions of, and approaches to, the families of its serving members. It has only been recently that the family has been recognised as a crucial part of the wider military community (De Angelis & Segal, 2015). Unfortunately, at times, the military has viewed the family as an obstacle competing for the serving member’s time and interest and has ignored familial contributions (Albano, 1994). Regardless of the change in marital status, the military institution retains a career structure based on the single male: ‘If the army had wanted you to have a wife it would have issued you one’ (Kohen, 1984). Consequently, military policy has focused on adapting families to fit the institution, rather than developing explicit family policies that reflect current family dynamics. However, this assumption becomes more problematic as military families change expectations, structures, and norms, leading to increased difficulty with or outright rejection by serving members and their families of organisational demands and prescribed roles (Segal, 1986; De Angelis & Segal, 2015). More recently, it has been recognised that women’s roles in society (mainly in labour force participation) and an increase in the number of serving members being married, sole parents, active-duty mothers, and dual-serving couples all have the potential to increase this military-family conflict (Segal, 1986; De Angelis & Segal, 2015). The military increasingly acknowledges a moral responsibility to military families while also noting that recognising and fulfilling family needs may endanger outstanding institutional commitments (Bourg & Segal, 1999; De Angelis & Segal, 2015). As both military lives and family dynamics have evolved, the potential for conflicts has increased, primarily due to the demanding nature of these institutions. However, the government has recently begun to investigate and support these institutions in an effort to reduce conflicts (e.g., Walker et al., 2020).
Goffman (1961) takes the concept further, asserting that these institutions are not merely ‘greedy’ but rather ‘totalistic’ in their expectations: ‘No part of the day or night, nor the service person’s life itself, is exempt from the legitimate demands of the military’ (Kohen, 1984, p. 4.4) He defines a totalistic institution as one that is closed off from the general population for a significant period (Goffman, 1961). These institutions are enclosed and formally administer controls that monitor and dehumanize their members, aiming to dismantle personal identity and create a new identity tailored to institutional needs (Goffman, 1961; Perez, 2019). However, Goffman (1961) and other researchers (e.g., Clegg, 2009; Perez, 2019; Wilson, 2024) have overlooked the role of the family and its influence on the serving member’s relationship with the ‘total’ institution.
In a subsequent study, Kanter (1977b) refers to the military as a ‘total institution’ (Kanter, 1977b). However, she argues that while certain aspects of military life, such as basic training, exemplify a total institution, in most situations, serving members and their families are not completely isolated from the outside world—a key characteristic of total institutions. Therefore, it is more appropriate to describe the military as a ‘greedy institution,’ as it does not demand exclusive and undivided loyalty from its members and their families.
Furthermore, Vuga and Juvan (2013) categorize both the family and the military as ‘greedy institutions’ but point out instances when one may be greedier than the other. For instance, during deployment, the military’s demands may surpass those of the family. Thus, the contemporary military requires not only the loyalty of serving members but also the support of their entire families.
Family formation continues to pose a significant barrier to recruitment, retention, and integration within the military. Strader and Smith (2022) report that serving members with families are more likely to leave the service than their childless counterparts, often citing work-family conflict as the reason for their departure. This reflects a narrow understanding of work-family conflict, which reinforces gender-role stereotypes that the military tends to rely upon.
The military spouse employee
Two-thirds of military spouses today pursue careers, contradicting the previous generation who only ‘worked’ in a volunteer capacity to support their serving member (DMDC, 2019). Although common practices have shifted regarding military spouse employment, they still face several difficulties in obtaining suitable employment, particularly due to the military’s longstanding traditional view of the spouse as a dependant (Lyonette et al., 2018).
In 2019, the FamCAS survey showed that 77% of military spouses were in employment, an increase of 9% since 2014 (GOV.UK, 2019). The employment rate for military spouses aged 16-64 was 76% for women and 91% for men; these figures are just a little higher than in the UK population as a whole (72% women and 80% men) (GOV.UK, 2019). However, the survey showed a lower proportion of Army spouses in employment compared to Royal Navy, Royal Marine and Royal Air Force spouses (GOV.UK, 2019). This difference can be attributed to the fact that Army spouses are more likely to move location more frequently than those in the other services.
Although these statistics are positive, of note is that, in 2019, 39% of spouses had looked for a new job and 25% of spouses had experienced difficulties locating suitable employment (GOV.UK, 2019). Additionally, Lyonette et al. (2018) found that 63% of spouses surveyed said that they had changed career path because of the military lifestyle, but only 7% said they wanted to. Moreover, Castaneda and Harrell (2008) reported that almost two-thirds of spouses stated that being a military spouse had negatively affected their work opportunities. FamCAS echoes these findings, and reported that 57% of respondents cited the effect of mobility on their career as the most negative aspect of the military lifestyle (GOV.UK, 2019). This is a concerning finding given that research in the US has shown that spousal employment is an important contributor to the wellbeing of military spouses and partners, and to the financial health of many military families (Blaisure et. al., 2016). Moreover, the pursuit of a career is said to be a major component of military spouses’ own assessment of their quality of life (Castaneda & Harrell, 2008). It is only by understanding the challenges and addressing them that we can safeguard the wellbeing of military spouses and ensure military retention.
Barriers to employment
Research by the AFF (2017) reported that military spouses continue to face barriers to employment and access to affordable training to upskill. This is similarly reported in the US Military Lifestyle Survey (Blue Star Families, 2017) where 43% of military spouses reported that military spouse employment is a concern. Military spouses can face obstacles and challenges to gaining meaningful employment. Although they have relevant job experience and ample education, they are often overlooked during the hiring process due to certain aspects of their application; such as frequent long-distance relocations and gaps in employment history (LynRoman & Minei, 2024). Lyonette et al. (2018) conducted an in-depth study of military spousal employment and identified fourteen barriers to their employment; including lack of, and cost of, suitable childcare, lack of available jobs or jobs in chosen field and difficulties obtaining a work permit (Lyonette et al., 2018). Castaneda & Harrell (2008), Blakely et al. (2012) and Blaisure et al. (2016) echo these findings; with the most common barriers identified as childcare and stigmatisation of the military lifestyle by employers.
Research has highlighted that the traditionally ascribed gender roles have changed and it is increasingly expected and financially necessary that both partners will be in paid employment (Regan de Bere, 1999; De Angelis & Segal, 2015). Yet it is often not possible for this to be a reality. Instead, the woman manages the home and takes the main responsibility for looking after the children. Although this is the expectation for women in all walks of life – facing barriers to employment when they have children – this challenge is exacerbated in the military. The military actively supports of the role of wife and mother, shown through the lack of career advice and support (Regan de Bere 1999; Butler, 2008; Macer & Chadderton, 2021). Additionally, frequent relocations mean that the military spouse has to find alternative childcare, a challenge which is becoming more difficult, due to the increased funded hours offered by the government, meaning that spaces at nurseries and pre-schools are fewer and waiting lists are longer. Additionally, unlike at school, the military infant does not bring any funding with it to nursery and so there is no incentive to take them over a civilian infant. Moreover, the military spouse does not have access to alternative childcare, such as grandparents, as it is unlikely that they will live nearby to support.
Another key barrier for military spouses pursuing employment is the stigma attached to the military lifestyle and its perceived relationship to employability (Maury & Stone, 2014). Military spouses face substantial stressors related to employment discrimination as well as pressures related to identity management in the civilian workplace. Link and Phelan (2001) define stigma as ‘labelling, stereotyping, separation, status loss, and discrimination’ (p. 363). Many spouses believe that it is better not to disclose their partner’s military background when applying and some interviewees decided to consciously withhold their military connections in order to avoid negative responses (Lyonette et al., 2018). Unfortunately, the identity of military spouses becomes readily apparent to adept recruiters. A job history with multiple geographic locations or the appearance of ‘job-hopping’ (i.e., the practice of making frequent voluntary job changes) is off-putting to most hiring managers (Lake et al., 2018). Even though most organisations have demographic questions during the application process about military and veteran status, there is nothing for military spouse status. Candidates who communicate their current or former military affiliation are granted legal protections, but spouses are not afforded similar protections, thus removing the ‘diversity’ incentive to hire such candidates and perpetuating the stigma (LynRoman & Minei, 2024).
Despite several efforts to introduce supportive changes and initiatives for military spouses, there is no evidence demonstrating their long-term efficacy. Instead, the research indicates that there are still deep-rooted problems still to be investigated (Spikol et al., 2024).
Employment and Sense of self
Nevertheless, the most pressing issue is not just the barriers faced by military spouses, but there are additional concerns about the military spouses’ sense of self. As the spouse relocates, they often leave behind meaningful roles that contribute to this, including jobs which are important to their identity and self-esteem. They find themselves facing an identity crisis and asking questions such as: Who am I now? Who am I supposed to be? (Jervis, 2008; Spikol et al., 2024). This aligns with the research conducted by Goffman (1961), which revealed that stable identities depend upon having some sense of belonging, whether that involves embracing or opposing a particular identity. Alternatively, some military spouses choose to reject the identity altogether. Instead of being linked to the military and their husband’s rank, they avoid all military social functions (Jones, 1996) and challenge the potentially humiliating dependent status imposed on them by constructing alternative personal identities. For instance, they may continue working in portable professions – such as teaching; nursing; and hairdressing – that easily transfer to new locations (Jervis, 2008).
Military spouse unemployment has been an issue affecting military families for many years (Kukowski, 2022). They experience unique stressors which can cause psychological distress; including, frequent relocation, repeated loss of social support, and deployments of their serving members (Blakely et al., 2014; Gewirtz et al., 2014; Kees et al., 2015; Gribble et al., 2019). However, research shows that employment and career development has a significant direct impact on general well-being (Kosen et al., 1990; Trougakos et al., 2007; Gribble et al., 2019; Ohlsson et al., 2023). Employment contributes to an independent identity, enables social connectedness and provides a sense of self-confidence (Gribble et al., 2019). Moreover, it provides military spouses with a degree of agency over career decisions, something which is missing in their spousal role.
Employment performed several roles for the spouses of UK military personnel during accompanied postings that aligned with the psychological needs described by Self-Determination Theory (SDT): contributing to an identity independent of their roles as military wives and mothers; enabling social connections; and providing a sense of purpose and value (Gribble et al., 2019). Spouses with a strong desire to work or those associating employment with social status may be at a higher risk of low self-esteem and psychological distress (Gribble et al., 2019). While attempts have been made to address this issue, policy should consider additional ways of supporting spouse employment and improving well-being outcomes, such as by providing practical support for childcare or additional guidance for spouses in finding employment and training opportunities (Gribble et al., 2019).
Like most professionals, the military spouse desires employment related to their education, skills, or past work experience. Having an understanding of the difficulties they face means that they can be better supported to contribute to today’s workforce. Though civilian families can also face difficulties, the military spouse’s unique lifestyle, with relocations and deployments, places them at a distinct disadvantage (Cooke & Spiers, 2005; Lim & Golinelli, 2006; Castaneda & Harrell, 2008; Berry, 2015). Military spouses are a diverse talent pool often overlooked by hiring managers (Bradbard et al., 2016). Yet, Lyonette et al. (2018) found that 30% of employers said that military spouses show resilience and determination and 22% said that they are willing to go the extra mile in their work. Nevertheless, within the UK, there is limited research on the employment experiences of military spouses. Previous studies have focused on overseas postings (e.g. Blakely et al., 2014a, 2014b; Jervis, 2011) where employment opportunities are often unavailable to spouses because of restrictions in employment law or language difficulties. It is unclear how the experiences of spouses may differ when families relocate within the UK where such restrictions would not apply or how specifically this affects spouses with children, for example. This lack of research means that any policies or support systems are not tailored effectively to support the military spouse. Moreover, lack of research into their chosen careers (teaching, nursing, and hairdressing) means that policies remain generic, but one size doesn’t fit all! Greater equity of opportunity for military spouses requires the cooperation of the Ministry of Defence, third sector support organisations and employers, and spouses themselves.
Military spouse teachers
Most research focuses on military spouse employment broadly, whereas just a few studies specifically focus on investigating particular vocations. According to Harrell et al. (2003), teaching is the most common occupation for military spouses. Consequently, it would seem only commonplace that there is a vast body of research investigating military spouse teachers. However, examining the existing literature has revealed only four research studies – three doctoral theses and one master’s dissertation. The emphasis of this research has been on the US military rather than the British. Although all insider researchers have diverse demographics – two white American female spouses (Baines, 1994; Goodrich, 2020), one white American male spouse (Johnson, 2021) and a Filipino-American female spouse (Agbisit, 2019). Despite racial and gender differences, it has been widely observed that the military has had a predominantly adverse effect on military spouse teachers.
For example, in her autoethnographic research, Baines (1994) found that her dual identity as a teacher and mother had challenges in effectively fulfilling both jobs. Her role as a special educational needs teacher, who strongly advocated for inclusion, reflected her challenges as a military spouse and parent (Baines, 1994).
This conflict arising from the dual role of a military spouse and a teacher was also observed in Agbisit’s (2019) phenomenological study. Agbisit (2019) found that military life presents barriers for teachers and their professional advancement. The study also revealed that there is no single dominant factor but rather a combination of reasons why military spouses face difficulties obtaining and maintaining employment as teachers. Furthermore, Agbisit (2019) found that military life negatively impacted career progression.
Johnson’s (2021) phenomenological case study aligns with the conclusions made by Agbisit (2019). Nevertheless, he discovered that numerous relocations proved to be the most disruptive factor for military spouse teachers. This disparity could be attributed to the differences in demographics since Johnson (2021) is an American white male military spouse, and Agbisit (2019) is a Filipino-American female military spouse. The variations in identity could have influenced the gender and race of their participants. However, Agbisit (2019) is the only one that provides the demographic information of its participants. The participants include one individual from Africa, one from Puerto Rico, one Native American, one Filipino-American, and seven White Americans (Agbisit, 2019, p. 60). However, the lack of demographic information from both researchers would make it unjustified to infer that this is the underlying cause of the differences in conclusions.
Finally, Goodrich (2020), who also employed a phenomenological approach, concluded that participants who relocated more frequently experienced the highest levels of loss and uncertainty regarding their careers in education. Thus, she concurs with Johnson’s (2021) findings and the negative impact of relocation on the military spouse teacher.
Military spouse teachers in education policy
English schools, while predominantly White, are becoming more ethnically diverse (Lander & Zaheerali, 2016). In 2018, the Department of Education (DfE) stated that they were going to increase the diversity of the teaching workforce. However, apart from monitoring the situation, there has been little progress in tackling this issue of underrepresentation (DfE, 2018; National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), 2024).
Additionally, a limited number of education policies explicitly address including minority group teachers. Instead, they are dominated by Eurocentric discourses (Exley & Ball, 2014). An example is the new National Professional Qualifications (NPQs) implemented in 2021 (Ofsted, 2021; DfE, 2022). For instance, the NPQ for Senior Leadership (NPQSL) framework was developed by a group of fourteen white educational influencers. Although the reasons for the exclusion of minority groups have not been investigated, it is probable to be the result of the corporate leader model and Eurocentric discourses.
Furthermore, education policies do not mention military spouses. Instead, they focus on veterans, for example, the Veteran’s Strategy Action Plan (Office for Veterans’ Affairs, 2022) and Troops to Teachers (DfE et al., 2018). However, some of these strategies have since been abolished, and acknowledgement of those linked to the military seems to be dwindling.
In order to have a democratic and inclusive education system, teachers must accurately reflect the demographics of the communities they serve (Osler, 2011; NFER, 2024). Although many educational community organisations promote equality, diversity, and inclusion in education, military spouse teachers are still overlooked (All-in Education et al., 2023).
To date, much of the research has been conducted with US military spouses, and therefore, it is possible that the findings may not directly apply to British military spouses. While an ongoing study is being carried out at Bath Spa University, the findings have yet to be published. Therefore, we must begin investigating the impact of military life on military spouse teachers to draw conclusions and implement appropriate support measures.
2.6 Conclusion
This literature review has shown that the military spouse has been identified as the cornerstone of the military family (Blakely et al., 2014; DeGraff et al., 2016; Kees et al., 2015; Green et al., 2013 in Kinsella), yet there has been limited research on the military spouse professional and how to better support them while facing various military life stressors (Blakely et al., 2014; Clark et al., 2013; Kees & Rosenblum, 2015; Green et al., 2013; Larsen et al., 2015). Additionally, the review has shown that there is a distinct lack of research into this research area.
Current literature on military spouses focuses largely on the disparities between them and their civilian counterparts (e.g. Harrell et al., 2005; Runge et al., 2014; Trewick & Muller, 2014; Hisnanick & Little, 2015; Meadows et al., 2016). It is also focused on the US military but it is likely that the findings may not directly apply to British military spouses. Whilst some research has been conducted into UK military spouses at Bath Spa University, the lead researcher has now retired, and the research has halted.
Nevertheless, research into military spouse teachers must continue, especially as 16% of spouses work in this sector (Lyonette et al., 2014). By excluding their lived experiences, it means that both institutions – the military and education – do not understand this group’s challenges and, as a result, many military spouse teachers, including myself, are forced to take on the traditional role of homemaker at the expense of a career we have worked hard for. Therefore, the results of this phenomenological study aim to provide empirical, theoretical, and practical significance not just for military spouse teachers, but also to those in the support service for military spouses. Empirically, it is hoped that the findings aid policymakers in better understanding the military spouse teacher and will contribute to the next development of Ministry of Defence policies, such as the ‘Armed Forces Covenant’, ‘UK Armed Forces Families Strategy’ and ‘Armed Forces Families Plan’ (Ministry of Defence, 2023). This will ensure the dissemination of the research findings with the intention of better supporting this research group in exploring points of reconciliation between a spouse’s career and their military identity. Additionally, the findings from this research will also provide theoretical significance that adds to the conceptualisation of social identity theory and the way in which military spouses process their identities.
23rd January 2025