Understanding Special Operations Forces Spouses Challenges and Resilience: A Mixed-Method Study

Abstract

Special Operations Forces (SOF) are high readiness units that frequently deploy on short notice, leaving their families to cope at home. The objective of this study was to better understand the unique challenges of SOF spouses and the risk and protective factors that contribute to their resilience. The study employed a mixed-methods design, including an online survey (n = 159 spouses) and in-depth semi-structured interviews (n = 29 spouses). Results indicate that while the majority of surveyed SOF spouses had good mental health, they seem to have a higher prevalence of poor mental health than conventional force spouses. Combined survey and interview results indicate that SOF spouses report high levels of work-life conflict and experience challenges related to the demands of the SOF lifestyle. Living in a rural area was inversely related to good mental health, and qualitative findings suggest that this association may be due to career limitations. Social support, especially from the SOF community and their SOF partner, was identified as critical for spouses’ well-being. Participants also discussed having a military background, being independent, engaging in self-care, and using military family services and counseling as key to maintaining their well-being. Recommendations for support needs are discussed.

Keywords:

• military spouses
• special operations forces
• resilience
• mental health
• work-family conflict
• mixed-method design

Introduction

It is well documented that military stressors impact, not only military members, but also their families. A recent review of the challenges facing military families identified three key stressors: geographic relocations due to postings, separation from family due to operational requirements, and operation-related illness, injury, or death (Manser, 2020). Military personnel and their families must often relocate for postings, generally every two to three years. Posting relocations have been associated with decreased life satisfaction (Burrell et al., 2006), increased unemployment among military spouses (Cooke & Speirs, 2005), a decrease in children’s social support systems, and increased tensions at home (Bradshaw et al., 2010).

Military personnel can be separated from their families for a variety of reasons (e.g., deployments, training, imposed restrictions). The frequency and length of these separations vary, though separation of any kind has been linked to lower psychological well-being, physical well-being, life satisfaction, and marital satisfaction among military spouses (e.g., Burrell et al., 2006; Cramm et al., 2018; Dursun & Sudom, 2009; Levy & Sidel, 2009; SteelFisher et al., 2008), and decreased well-being among military children (Bullock & Skomorovsky, 2017). Further, the negative impact on children’s well-being increases with the number of deployments (Alfano et al., 2016; Paley et al., 2013).

When a member is deployed, families often report being afraid the member will be seriously injured or that the member will not return home (Wright et al., 2006). Although death is relatively uncommon in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), with estimates that 3.7% of CAF personnel experienced a combat-related death over a 24 year period (Tien et al., 2010), both physical injuries and operational stress injuries (OSIs) are more common. The prevalence of OSIs in the CAF has increased over the past 10 years (Zamorski et al., 2016), and a review by Norris et al. (2015) revealed a correlation between military members’ OSIs and higher rates of mental health issues in their spouses and children.

It is clear from the research that military challenges negatively impact military families. However, little research has examined whether the families of Special Operations Forces (SOF) members experience more stressors and challenges.

Special operations forces stressors

When compared with conventional forces, SOF personnel experience stronger and unique stressors. In particular, SOF personnel are often deployed on secret and high-risk missions. As such, departures often come with little notice, and for an indeterminate time. Members are routinely unable to fulfill commitments to their family and often miss family milestones (Richer & Frank, 2020a). In a qualitative study examining the process of resilience among Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM) personnel, participants acknowledged that the high frequency of deployments put a strain on their families (Richer & Frank, 2020a). Even when in garrison, participants reported feeling over-tasked, leaving them with little time to reconnect with their families and repair family bonds (Richer & Frank, 2020a). A survey of the morale in CANSOFCOM units revealed particularly high levels of work-family conflict (Knight & Harding, 2017). Moreover, four of the six CANSOFCOM units are located in rural, semi-rural, or suburban locations, which can limit employment and career opportunities for CANSOFCOM spouses. Though there are no data on CANSOFCOM spouses specifically, focus groups with CAF members found that moving from urban to rural areas limited employment prospects for their spouses (Dunn et al., 2005).

Physical injuries—especially musculoskeletal injuries—appear to be prevalent among SOF personnel (Stannard & Fortington, 2021). A recent study showed a high prevalence of both acute and repetitive strain injuries among CANSOFCOM personnel (Richer & Frank, 2020b). Conversely, research suggests that the prevalence of mental health disorders (e.g., depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder) is lower among SOF personnel than their counterparts in the conventional force (Cooper et al., 2020; Hanwella et al., 2014; Hanwella & de Silva, 2012; Osorio, et al., 2012). Physical and psychological injuries can strain families as members put pressure on themselves to recover and return to work as quickly as possible (Richer & Frank, 2020a). Considerable research has revealed family stress is associated with caring for an ill or injured member (e.g., Hisle-Gorman et al., 2019; Thandi et al., 2018). Another challenge associated with SOF is heightened operations security (OPSEC) concerns. Due to the nature of their work, SOF personnel are often unable to share information about their work with their families. Currently, there is no research examining the impact of OPSEC on family members, relationships, and family functioning.

Resilience of military families

Despite the myriad of stressors and challenges associated with military life, most military families cope well, and only a small portion of military spouses experience serious hardship (e.g., Gribble et al., 2019; Sullivan et al., 2021). Military family resilience can be considered both a state and a process, where personal skills and abilities and the family’s environment intersect to strengthen the family’s resilience (Cramm et al., 2018). The availability of protective factors can buffer or counterbalance the negative effects of stressors on the family, but too much exposure to risk factors may weaken the family’s resilience. Recent research emphasizes the critical importance of protective factors (e.g., social connections, social support, coping, meaning making, relationship functioning) and suggests that the highest rates of poor mental health among military spouses are among families with low protective factors (Sullivan et al., 2021).

Risk and protective factors

At the individual level, active coping techniques such as problem solving (i.e., attempting to change what is causing the stress) are associated with increased resilience (Dursun & Sudom, 2009; Wiens & Boss, 2006). Active distraction coping (i.e., avoiding thinking about the stressor; listening to music) was also found to contribute to resilience when coping with the stress of deployment (Bullock & Skomorovsky, 2017). Spouses’ perceived mastery (i.e., the degree to which they feel in control of their lives) has also been found to predict family resilience (Meadows et al., 2016).

At the social and organizational level, perceived support from one’s social network has been identified as a strong protective factor against stress (Orthner & Rose, 2006; Pittman et al., 2004; Wiens & Boss, 2006) and is related to military spouses’ well-being (Skomorovsky, 2014). In one study among military spouses, the odds of positive adjustment following deployment increased by 24% with strong social support (Orthner & Rose, 2006). Perceived support from military leadership is also predictive of post-deployment adaptation (Pittman et al., 2004). High levels of perceived community (i.e., a strong sense of community) has also been identified as a protective factor. Military families often share a common ideology and purpose with other military families and perceive themselves as part of a larger collective community (Henry et al., 2015). Lastly, access to resources provided by the military community (e.g., emergency child care) has been linked to increased resilience (Wright et al., 2013).

One potential risk factor identified in the literature is spouses’ experience of work-family conflict or, in other words, their perception that their military partner’s work interferes with family responsibilities (Sinclair et al., 2019). Research has also identified the difficulties of having young children (Wright et al., 2013). Spouses with deployed or absent partners may struggle to meet all of their children’s emotional and physical demands with young children being more dependent on their parents and requiring more support and care than older children (Trautmann et al., 2015). The perceived lack of time among parents with children may be another risk factor. Parents who are without their spouses typically perceive themselves as having less time to engage in self-care (they are left to “do it all”). One study found that the perceived lack of time acted as a barrier to physical activity, healthy eating, and social connection (Mailey et al., 2018), which can impact overall physical and mental health.

A growing interest in military family functioning means that more research has been conducted examining the resilience of military families. Yet no research has examined resilience among SOF spouses, who are exposed to numerous and significant stressors, some of which are unique to the demands of SOF units.

Current study

Given the importance of family health and functioning on the serving member and the organization (Bowles et al., 2015), and the compounding risk factors of the SOF lifestyle, this study examined risk and resilience factors among SOF spouses using quantitative and qualitative methods.

Methods

A mixed-methods design with concurrent triangulation (Creswell, 2009) was used to better understand the risk and resilience factors of SOF spouses while contextualizing their experiences and gaining more insight into their lived experience of the SOF lifestyle. This study comprised two concurrent means of data collection: quantitative data collected via an online survey and qualitative data captured with semi-structured interviews.

Online survey

Current and former CANSOFCOM spouses and partners were invited to complete an online survey. One hundred and fifty-nine CANSOFCOM spouses responded to the survey. The majority of respondents were employed (83.5%) women (94.3%) between 19 and 34 years old (56.6%). In addition, 9.5% of respondents were active military personnel. Two thirds of respondents (65.9%) reported living in an urban or suburban area (versus a rural area). Almost all participants (94.4%) reported being either legally married or in a common-law relationship with their partner. A small proportion (2.5%) were either separated or divorced from their partner. Three quarters of surveyed spouses (75.5%) reported having children and one third (38.4%) reported having at least one child under 3 years of age. See Table 1 for more details.

Table 1. Characteristics of online survey respondents.

Variable	n	%
Gender
Women	150	94.3
Men	9	5.7
Other and prefer not to disclose	–	–
Age
Less than 34	90	56.6
35-44	64	36.2
45 and more	12	6.9
Employment status
Paid, full-time	86	54.4
Paid, part-time	19	12.0
Active military personnel	15	9.5
Self-employed	12	7.6
Not paid, not looking for work	11	7.0
Not paid, looking for work	3	1.9
Other	12	7.6
Area of residence
Suburban	84	53.2
Rural	54	34.2
Urban	20	12.7
Relationship status with SOF partner
Legally married	117	74.1
Common law	32	20.3
Living together (not married or common law)	5	3.2
Separated or divorced	4	2.5
Children
Yes	120	75.5
No	39	24.5
SOF partner time away from home (past year)
None	2	1.3
Less than 1 month	16	10.1
1 to 2 months	19	11.9
3 to 5 months	67	42.1
6 to 7 months	33	20.8
8 months and more	18	11.3
I don’t know	4	2.5
SOF partner sustained injury or illness with substantive recovery
No	103	65.2
Yes	48	30.4
I don’t know	7	4.4
Mental Health
Excellent/very good/Good	115	75.7
Fair/Poor	37	24.3

Some percentages may not add-up to 100% due to rounding.

Measures

Socio-demographic characteristics and military risk factors

Participants reported their age (less than 34, 34 to 44, 45 or older), gender (man, woman, other, or prefer not to disclose), employment status (employed as a civilian, service member, not currently employed), whether they had children (none, between 0 and 3 years old, or over 3 years old), area of residence (suburban, urban, rural), how long their CANSOFCOM partner had been away in the past year, and whether their partner had sustained a serious injury (mental or physical).

Work-family conflict

Participants were asked the extent to which their SOF partner’s work created family issues or interfered with family obligations using a 5-item scale adapted from the work-family conflict scale (Netemeyer et al., 1996). Participants rated their degree of agreement on each item using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores on work-family conflict were indicative of greater work-family conflict. The average score was 3.6 (SD = 1.0), and the scale had excellent reliability (α = 0.9).

Social support

Social support was assessed using the 10-item short version of the Social Provision Scale (SPS; Cutrona & Russell, 1987). The SPS assesses the overall support perceived in one’s relationships across five domains: attachment, guidance, reliable alliance, social integration, and reassurance of worth. Participants indicated their degree of agreement with the items on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores on the SPS scale indicate greater perceived social support. The mean score was 3.9 (SD = 0.7), and the scale had excellent reliability (α = 0.9).

Self-rated mental health

Mental health was assessed with a single item: “In general, would you say your mental health is…” rated on a 5-point scale from to 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Evidence suggests that self-rated health is a good proxy for well-being (Sargent-Cox et al., 2010) and a useful assessment of general mental health (Mawani & Gilmour, 2010). As per Mawani and Gilmour’s (2010) validation study, participants’ responses were dichotomized as “poor” (fair or poor) or “good” (excellent, very good, or good).

Analysis strategy

Data analyses were conducted using SPSS version 25 (IBM Corp, 2017). A series of binary logistic regressions were used to identify the correlates of SOF spouses’ mental health, including age, gender, employment status, children, area of residence, SOF partner’s time away from home in the past year, SOF partner having sustained a serious injury (physical and/or mental), work-family conflict, and social support. The assumption of a linear relationship between the continuous independent variables and the dependent variable was tested with Box-Tidwell and the results revealed no linearity issues. As recommended for purposeful selection of model covariates, variables with a p-value of 0.25 or less were included in the multivariable model (Bursac et al., 2008).

Semi-structured interviews

The qualitative part of the study included a descriptive approach (Bradshaw et al., 2017) and incorporated principles of the phenomenological approach (Bevan, 2014). In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted to better understand SOF spouses’ lived experience and unique perspective on the SOF lifestyle, their personal and family challenges, and key contributors to resilience. SOF spouses were invited to take part in a 90-minute, face-to-face interview focusing on factors that helped them maintain their and their family’s well-being and functioning throughout their SOF partner’s career path and during the deployment cycle. During the interviews, participants were asked to draw out a timeline of their partner’s career path (e.g., deployments, postings, promotions), onto which they mapped significant life events, challenges, factors contributing to their resilience, and use of support services (see Kolar et al., 2015 for review of the methodology). All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The research material was analyzed using a thematic analysis to identify patterns and themes across spouses’ responses (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Qualitative analyses were performed by two researchers with expertise in SOF research. The researchers independently developed a codebook based on the first four interviews, followed by in-depth discussions of emerging themes. Once consensus was reached on code definitions, sub-themes, and overarching themes, the codebook was finalized, and all interviews were coded using NVIVO 12 Pro (QSR International, 1999).

Results

Online survey results

Over three quarters of participants (75.7%; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 68.9%, 82.5%) reported their mental health as good. A large proportion of spouses reported that their partner’s employment had created work-family issues (47.7% to 84.3% agreed or strongly agreed with scale items). Almost a third of the sample (30.4%) reported that their SOF partner had sustained a serious injury. Table 2 presents the results of the statistical analysis examining the correlates of good mental health. Bivariate logistic regressions indicated a significant relationship between mental health and location (i.e., living in a rural area was negatively associated with good mental health), work-family conflict (i.e., greater work-family conflict was negatively related to good mental health), and social support (i.e., greater social support was positively associated with good mental health). Additionally, having a SOF partner who had sustained a serious injury and having young children (under 3 years old) were associated with mental health (p-value ≤ 0.25) and were included in the adjusted model.

Table 2. Correlates of special operations forces spouses’ mental health (n = 142).

Variable	Crude Odds Ratio	95% CI	Adjusted Odds Ratio	95% CI
Age
Less than 34^a
35 to 44	1.05	0.48, 2.31
45 and more	0.73	0.26, 6.76
Gender
Men^a
Women	1.04	0.20, 5.38
Employment
Employed civilian^a
Service member	1.12	0.29, 4.33
Not currently employed	0.69	0.27, 1.76
SOF partner time away from home (past year)
2 months or less^a
3 to 5 months	1.60	0.63, 4.06
6 months or more	1.62	0.61, 4.32
Children
No children^a
Children over 3 years old	0.64	0.22, 1.87	1.92	0.52, 7.15
Children 0-3 years old	0.38†	0.14, 1.07	0.72	0.21, 2.45
Area of residence
Suburban or urban^a
Rural	0.32**	0.15, 0.70	0.29**	0.11, 0.77
SOF partner sustained a serious injury
No^a
Yes	0.60†	0.27, 1.33	0.69	0.26, 1.85
Social Support	4.45***	2.33, 8.52	4.22***	2.11, 8.46
Work-family conflict	0.53**	0.34, 0.83	0.58*	0.34, 0.99

^a reference category; † p ≤ 0.25 * p ≤ 0.05; ** p ≤ 0.01; ***p ≤ 0.001; Final multivariable model Nagelkerke R² = 0.36.

The multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that SOF spouses living in rural areas were less likely to report good mental health (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.29; 95% CIs: 0.11, 0.77) when compared with spouses living in suburban or urban areas. Further, the odds of good mental health increased significantly with higher scores on social support (AOR = 4.22; 95% CI: 2.11, 8.46). Results also indicated a relationship between work-family conflict and mental health. As work-family conflict increased, respondents were less likely to report good mental health (AOR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.99). Having a SOF partner who had sustained a serious injury and having young children (under 3 years old) were not statistically related to mental health in the adjusted model.

Semi-structured interview results

Twenty-nine participants (all female) participated in the interviews. Almost all SOF spouses were either currently married or in a common-law relationships with their SOF partners, with an average relationship length of 12 years. The majority (over 80%) of spouses reported having children. Almost half of the sample (48%) were employed full-time as civilians, 21% were employed part-time or self-employed, 21% were not currently working, and 10% were members of the CAF.

Theme 1. The challenges of having an SOF partner

Adapting to a relentless tempo, prolonged absences, and an ever-changing schedule

Spouses described their partner as often leaving on very short notice and expressed anxiety and frustration over having an uncertain schedule. The majority of spouses indicated that the high tempo of their partner’s SOF unit and the unpredictability of their schedule had significantly impacted their families:

I never, ever, ever plan things because I know that it is kind of pointless because it can change on a moment’s notice. So that kind of all goes under the whole challenge of planning anything, doing anything, because I could never firmly say he was going to be there, or if he did come, how long he’d be, if he’d get to see everybody. I would say that’s through this whole CANSOF career because it’s still to this day. I planned a camping trip the other day and he came back telling me he’s going to be gone.

Spouses described how frequent departures meant their partner not only missed out on milestones and family events, but also that they were not able to support their family through hard times. Some spouses also discussed how their SOF partner—even when in garrison—was so over-tasked and absorbed by their work that they were unable to be present and engage with the family. Some spouses also discussed the lack of support, communication, and recognition for family sacrifices from the SOF unit leadership, often leading to family interference and resentment:

The leadership was a huge issue when I was there. The talk is said, the message is sent; it isn’t necessarily performed. That’s a huge issue. And sometimes there’s resentment that builds from that, and that can be really, really difficult.

Many spouses mentioned the weight of the SOF lifestyle challenges depended on the time in their life. Some mentioned that the SOF lifestyle was especially difficult when their partner started their SOF career and when their family demands were greater—for instance, when their children were younger or they had less support available:

And when we finally settled into our new little town, he was gone all the time. So I pretty much raised a newborn up until the age of three by myself, multiple deployments, missing birthdays, missing anniversaries. Because my son was a baby, new town, it was really hard to get out and meet people. I’d say the first three years of him being at that unit was the hardest. And because my husband really wasn’t around to be able to help with that, it really was all on me.

The secrecy of SOF operations

Many spouses described having to navigate the delicate space of SOF operational secrecy (OPSEC), which involved having minimal awareness of their partner’s work-related activities and not knowing what information could be discussed (e.g., position, unit, departures, challenges). Spouses spoke about the negative impact of secrecy on their ability to develop relationships and relate to those outside the SOF community. Some spouses also discussed being reluctant to reach out to their social network or access military family services for fear of breaching OPSEC:

That’s been one of the things we’ve noticed is people [SOF spouses] are kind of reluctant to make friends because they’re not sure what they can share and, as women, we tend to naturally want to have conversations, socialize and share stuff.

Many spouses remarked that the secrecy of operations also negatively impacted their marital relationship because it created a distance between them and their partner and reduced their capacity to understand and accept the sacrifices the family has to make:

We can’t communicate during the day. We don’t share about his day. So there are two different worlds. He lives in one world, and I live in another, and we try and make them cross paths and work together, but he knows all about me, but I only know a part of him. That’s honestly been one of the biggest struggles.

Supporting the ill or injured SOF partner

Many spouses spoke about the hardships during times where their partner was ill or injured. Participants described their involvement during their partner’s recovery as being emotionally draining and heartbreaking, especially when their SOF partner was suffering from severe physical pain or psychological issues. Spouses described the increased workload at home and some discussed the stress of being constantly vigilant and mindful of their partner’s needs and constraints (e.g., avoiding crowded stores and social gatherings):

It was taking care of three kids. So I had the two boys, and then I had my husband home. He could get up and use the bathroom, but he was not happy. He was in pain. He was suffering.

Theme 2. The impact of the SOF lifestyle on families

Family sacrifices to enable the SOF member

The majority of spouses spoke about the sacrifices their family had made to support their partner’s career. Almost all spouses indicated that their partner’s employment with SOF had impacted their own career path and expressed mixed feelings varying from resentment to acceptance. Many spouses mentioned having to relocate to small rural communities and struggling to find and maintain a meaningful career, missing out on opportunities, and not being able to fully engage in their work. Some spouses had decided to either put a hold on their career aspirations or become a stay-at-home parent to provide a stable environment for their children.

I had to stay home and raise the kids, and I know other members that are friends of ours that have the same thing, but some of them are lawyers or doctors. But usually, they either end up leaving or they end up divorcing. So for me, because I just knew, I just wanted to support him, so the only way I could was to create my own business.

Many spouses also remarked that the SOF lifestyle involved other sacrifices, such as delaying major life events (e.g., pregnancies, travel, weddings), and a lack of time for personal development, hobbies, and a difficulty developing and maintaining social relationships.

The SOF lifestyle impact on spouses’ health

Several spouses described how the SOF lifestyle had impacted their mental health and, sometimes, their physical health. Many spouses discussed compounding fatigue from multiple years of high tempo—having to handle household chores and parenting alone with minimal personal time to recover—leading to exhaustion. Some spouses mentioned having had mental health issues (e.g., harmful drinking, panic attacks, severe anxiety, burnout, depression, sleep disorders) and attributed these issues to their partner’s occupation and family demands:

So I did have an anxiety attack because he had to rush off and go, "Okay. I don’t know when I’ll be back. I don’t know where I’m going. I don’t know anything." "Okay. Bye-bye." It was rough.

Theme 3. Factors contributing to SOF families’ resilience

Embracing the SOF lifestyle: Military background and pride

Many spouses spoke about their own military background—either as a serving member, being part of a military family, or having grown up near a military base—and how it contributed to their understanding of their partner’s occupation and being amenable to unpredictability and the sacrifices of the SOF lifestyle. Some spouses also discussed how having observed a parent navigate the military lifestyle had helped them to acquire effective coping mechanisms and useful parenting skills to support their own children.

What you should know about both of our backgrounds is that we both come from military families. So I often kind of make light of it by saying it’s a bit of a family business. We are very service-minded people, giving back, and I think sometimes understand that sacrifices have to be made. Maybe better than somebody who wouldn’t have grown up or been exposed to this. I think to generally understand and accept the lifestyle. The changes that can happen last minute.

Some spouses mentioned that their partner’s joining SOF was a family decision. Many spouses were pleased to see their partner gain new opportunities and a sense of purpose, and see them fulfilled and happy with their work. Some felt this was worth the sacrifices. Many spouses reported feeling proud of their partner’s accomplishments, dedication, and performance at work. Some spouses felt proud to have supported their partner and been an active contributor to their partner’s success.

I’m extremely proud of my husband. Extremely proud of what he does, of the type of person he is, the commitment he brings to his work. And frankly of his skills and of his level of dedication to his job. So I’m very proud of that.

Individual strengths and positive coping

Many spouses described being independent and emotionally strong, which they saw as critical to remaining functional when their partner was away. Spouses described these traits as either being part of their character or having developed over time as an SOF spouse. A few spouses mentioned appreciating the time on their own and that the distance made their relationship with their SOF partner stronger:

I think you have to be a certain kind of person to be successful as a spouse in this type of environment. If you’re not good with being on your own and doing your own thing, then you’re not going to be happy.

Many spouses mentioned using coping mechanisms to overcome the stress, such as finding time for self-care (e.g., beauty care, having a hobby), maintaining healthy eating habits and a fitness routine, good sleep hygiene, and ensuring they had proper time to recover from high tempo periods.

Building a strong social network and feeling sufficiently supported

Many spouses described the SOF community as tight knit and welcoming as well as the unique support and the connection provided by relationships with other SOF spouses. Spouses remarked that being part of the SOF community helped create unique bonds with other SOF spouses through a shared understanding of the lifestyle. Spouses expressed the feeling of being able to let their guard down, in part, because they felt OPSEC was less of an issue and because they felt a shared understanding, a lack of criticism, and found it easier to trust other SOF spouses. Spouses mentioned feeling judged and criticized by family members and civilian friends for staying in a lifestyle involving hardships, namely supporting a partner who is often away from home and from whom they have minimal information on the nature of their work and whereabouts. Spouses discussed building relationships with other SOF spouses through formal events (e.g., unit, peer, or military services events) or informally, via their partner’s social gatherings with SOF colleagues. Participants also discussed the importance of receiving support from other SOF members (e.g., help with lawn work, snow removal during deployment) and mutual support from other spouses when their partner was away (e.g., help with babysitting):

It’s one of the greatest things ever. It’s just people who understand the kind of support that you actually need, because you can’t—for example with civilians—just go to them and be like, “Oh, when your husband is away for a business trip, just sit on the shower floor and cry.” They’d be like, “What are you talking about?” But people have been through what you’ve been through and the uniqueness of CANSOFCOM and they get it, so it speaks to your soul. And it’s genuine. It makes a big difference.

Many spouses spoke about the importance of their SOF partner’s support. Spouses discussed the importance of a quality relationship—including equality, partnership, mutual emotional support, and quality communication—as key to facing the challenges of the SOF lifestyle. Spouses also mentioned that their SOF partner’s family involvement, engagement, and prioritization (e.g., attending their children’s medical appointments, being actively involved in their children’s education, maintaining contact while on deployment, taking on household chores) as being critical to maintaining their well-being:

We work really well together. I mean my husband is my partner. He does laundry, he vacuums, he washes the floors, he changes diapers. He takes on more of that when he comes home, so that partnership again as opposed to one of us doing all of it.

Participants also discussed the importance of their partner’s support for pursuing a career and achieving personal goals, and some described how their partner had taken a step back at work or had delayed their career progression to better support the family. Many spouses who faced mental health issues because of burnout, anxiety, or depression, mentioned that their SOF partner had supported them and attended to the family’s needs.

Many spouses discussed how support from their extended families was critical, especially when they had young kids. Spouses discussed the importance of their parents’ support to take some of the weight off’ (e.g., helping with lawn work, cleaning, cooking, taking care of the kids), especially during periods of high stress and during their partner’s prolonged absences:

I feel blessed. We have super supportive family members. My husband was deployed when I was first pregnant, home for the summer, and deployed again right up until basically I gave birth. But then Mum came and she stayed with me for weeks on end. I don’t think maybe I would have felt the same if she hadn’t been here. We had support and tried to make sure if we know that he is deploying or gone for a long period, we have family members that step in and help. That doesn’t necessarily mean that things aren’t stressful, but it helps us cope with it.

Organizational support – SOF approach to family support

Almost all spouses had used programs or services provided, or referred to, by the SOF unit, Canadian Forces Health Services or Military Family Services (MFS), and most described these as beneficial. Multiple programs and services were delivered by CANSOFCOM-dedicated MFS centers, such as respite childcare and couples counseling. Spouses also mentioned using external services, such as a childcare provider or nanny, a cleaning service, or lawn/snow maintenance to help alleviate stress.

And I feel like with everything that we learned at the couples retreat, we’re able to actually be happy again and manage the tempo and things like that. It’s still very frustrating at times when he can’t be present and because he’s overworked, but those things have changed how we function, but the resources were helpful.

Discussion

The goal of the current study was to better understand the challenges and risk factors related to the SOF lifestyle and the resilience factors contributing to SOF spouses’ well-being using a mixed-methods design. This novel study provides unique insights into the challenges and resilience of this overlooked population.

About three quarters of the spouses reported that they had good mental health. However, this percentage is much lower than the prevalence of good mental health among Canadian, United States, and United Kingdom conventional forces spouses (∼84% or higher; Gribble et al., 2019; Sullivan et al., 2021; Wang & Aitken, 2016), suggesting that SOF spouses are struggling more than their conventional force counterparts. High levels of work-family conflict were inversely associated with better mental health. The results of the quantitative survey showed the majority of surveyed spouses agreed or strongly agreed that their SOF partner’s employment created family issues and interfered with family responsibilities. The qualitative results reinforce this finding. Interviewed spouses spoke about how their partner’s unpredictable and busy schedule forced them to miss milestones (e.g., anniversaries) and family events, but also left them unable to commit to spending time with their family (e.g., vacations, time away to repair bonds). Some spouses reported that sudden departures with little to no information were directly linked to developing mental health issues (e.g., anxiety, burnout). In addition, spouses mentioned that even in garrison, their SOF partners were often over-tasked and unable to disengage from work. Being constantly left alone to care for their household and children put a lot of stress on these spouses, leading over time to distress and exhaustion.

Like findings among other military populations, location appears to impact the mental health of SOF spouses (e.g., Dittrich et al., 2015). The quantitative results indicated that living in a rural area was associated with worse mental health. The qualitative findings suggested that this association may be due, at least in part, to a lack of career opportunities. Many participants reported struggling to find and maintain a meaningful career and missing out on opportunities due to relocating to a rural area.

In line with the findings of previous research, social support was also positively linked to SOF spouses’ well-being. However, the qualitative results revealed that obtaining social support can be challenging outside the SOF community due to OPSEC concerns and others not understanding the challenges they face. Most participants cited the SOF community, their SOF partner, and their extended family as key sources of support. Interestingly, the different sources of social support appear to serve different support functions. Extended family and one’s partner appear to be most supportive in terms of assisting spouses at home and engaging with childcare, while other SOF spouses provide a source of emotional support by understanding and being able to appreciate what SOF spouses go through. This finding was echoed in a paper on the resilience of CANSOFCOM personnel themselves, where SOF colleagues were seen as a source of emotional support and spouses were seen as supportive by managing the household (Richer & Frank, 2020a).

Interestingly, though having young children or having an injured spouse were not linked to mental health in the quantitative results, they were mentioned in the qualitative findings as additional sources of stress. Some participants mentioned that the stressors associated with the SOF lifestyle were exacerbated when they had young children. Participants who had a partner with a physical or psychological injury indicated being very stressed during the illness or injury and during recovery. These two risk factors have also been found in previous research (Hisle-Gorman et al., 2019; Thandi et al., 2018; Wright et al., 2013). It is possible that the sample size for the quantitative survey was too small to detect these associations.

The qualitative findings also highlighted resilience factors that were not identified in the quantitative survey. For example, some interviewed spouses indicated that having a military background or serving in the military contributed to their resilience. Some participants mentioned that they were willingly supportive of their SOF partner’s career, giving them a sense of control and leading them to be more accepting of sacrifices. This is in line with other research showing that perceived control is linked to subjective well-being (de Quadros-Wander et al., 2014; Meadows et al., 2016). Spouses also reported that using programs and services helped them maintain resilience (e.g., respite child care, counseling), which has also been found in previous research (Wright et al., 2013).

In terms of personal characteristics, participants mentioned being independent. There is no current research linking independence to resilience; however, it stands to reason that in this specific group of individuals, who are often left to manage their lives and households alone, a strong sense of independence would be conducive to experiencing greater well-being. In terms of the process of resilience, spouses mentioned self-care, diet, exercise, and sleep, all of which align with previous research (Mailey et al., 2018).

Finally, OPSEC concerns appear to negatively impact spousal well-being and relationship satisfaction. Some spouses mentioned feeling disconnected from their partners because they do not know what they do day to day and do not understand their partner’s role or work, which made it more difficult to make sacrifices.

Strengths and limitations

The study has some limitations. While the quantitative and qualitative data were gathered during the same timeframe, OPSEC constraints precluded linking interviewed spouses to their survey responses. Another limitation of this study is the small sample size for the survey, which may have prevented us from detecting weaker associations (e.g., the effect of having children under the age of 3). Last, the overall population of CANSOFCOM spouses is unknown and the generalizability of the survey results is not clear. The qualitative results are only applicable to SOF spouses with similar characteristics.

Implications

SOF employment increases work-family conflict and negatively affects SOF spouses’ mental health and family functioning. Thus, increased schedule predictability and reduced operational tempo (i.e., decrease time away from home) and taskings in garrison would provide members time to connect with their families and provide needed support.

Social support, and the support of the SOF community in particular, stood out as an important factor in SOF spouses’ well-being. New families would greatly benefit from opportunities to connect with other SOF families through organized events or SOF family services. Having a military background or being a current service member was seen as a resilience factor because it provided greater knowledge of what to expect. SOF units or SOF family services could consider creating an information package for potential incoming families of what to expect, so that they have a more realistic view of what their day-to-day lives will look like. Organizing volunteer groups of experienced SOF spouses who can reach out to new SOF families or to families of personnel considering joining SOF and answer questions about the SOF lifestyle may also increase their ability to prepare and cope. Given spouses’ anxiety around OPSEC, providing more guidance to members, spouses, and children about what information can and cannot be shared within and outside the family may benefit SOF family health.

Living in a rural area was related to poor mental health. Qualitative findings suggest that this is, at least in part, due to the lack of career opportunities. Offering support for career and professional development for SOF spouses may therefore increase their well-being. Last, despite their resilience, SOF spouses are exposed to numerous risk factors, and it appears that their mental health is worse than regular force military spouses. Further research is needed to ensure we fully understand their risk and resilience factors in order to provide proper support. Military family services could provide programs tailored to SOF spouses, including prevention strategies (e.g., sessions focusing on mental health literacy and coping skills), mental health walk-in clinics, and individual and couples counseling.

Conclusion

Overall, SOF spouses appear to have a higher prevalence of poor mental health than their regular force counterparts, but the majority of SOF spouses reported having good mental health. Social support was associated with good mental health, while work-family conflict and living in a rural area were related to poor mental health. Qualitative findings suggest that high operational tempo, high workload in garrison, and unpredictable schedules create work-life conflict, which in turn negatively impact spouses’ mental health and family functioning. Living in a rural area appears to be linked to poor mental health due, in part, to the lack of career opportunities. Because families are key to members’ readiness, SOF organizations must engage in efforts to foster family well-being and resilience.

Financial disclosure

Funding for this work was provided by the Government of Canada. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Jennifer Lee to the research design, survey development, and invaluable guidance and support. The authors would also like to acknowledge and thank CANSOFCOM Military Family Support staff for their help and support, as well as all participants for sharing their opinions and experiences with openness and generosity.