Families of Origin: The Experience of Parents of Single Military Members
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enlisting in the military is a career choice that impacts the entire family unit. Many research studies have examined the effect of military life on spouses and children of military members; however little research to date has examined the experience of parents of adult children, especially for those of single Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members. Given that many military members are often younger and not yet in stable romantic relationships, parents are often a primary source of emotional and instrumental support. Building on military family research, the current study was conducted to gain a greater understanding of parents’ experiences upon the enlistment of their adult children and adjustment to their military career. Parents of single CAF members’ experiences were examined through a series of semi-structured interviews and focus groups in seven major Canadian cities. The study group consisted of 55 participants with a mean age of 56 years. Thematic analysis was employed to identify common themes across interviews and focus groups. Results suggest that parents often experience fear and worry over their children’s wellbeing, loss of control, and uncertainty. They strive to maintain connection to their adult children and provide emotional, instrumental, and financial support. Over time, many parents are able to develop increased resilience and adjustment to their children’s careers, in part due to the development of military connections, informal and formal support, and adaptive coping methods. The findings are discussed in relation to improving parental resilience and how the CAF may best support them.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".