Health and Wellbeing Needs Assessment of Families
and Children of Army Personnel based on Thorney
Island, West Sussex in 2012
This report is a summary of the health and wellbeing needs of the families of soldiers
from 47 Regiment Royal Artillery and 12 Regiment Royal Artillery who are stationed on
the Army base on Thorney Island, West Sussex. It has been produced in response to
increasing recognition nationally of the health and wellbeing needs of the families of
serving personnel. The Military Covenant includes specific commitments relating to
the health and wellbeing, in line with the principle that families of serving personnel
should not be disadvantaged as a result of serving in Her Majesty's Armed Forces.
1
Acknowledgements
With thanks to:
Andy Stubbs, Sussex Armed Forces Mental Health Lead
Anna Jones, Southbourne Children and Family Centre Co-ordinator
Anna Schwertz, Community Development Worker, Army Welfare Service
Arun and Chichester Citizens Advice Bureau
Benefits, Chichester District Council
Berry Bonner-le-Fur, Area Lead – Targeted Intervention and Support, West Sussex County Council
(WSCC)
Bob Williams, Employed Barrister, Coffin Mew LLP
Dean Clegg, Headteacher, Thorney Island Community Primary School
Dr Philip Tibbs, Senior Partner, Emsworth Surgery
Education Welfare Service, WSCC
Emma Gardiner, Thorney Island Nursery Manager
Emsworth and District Bus Services
Fran Ward, Community Nursery Nurse, Southern Health Foundation Trust
Helen Read, Teaching Development Leader, West Sussex Adult and Learning Service
Highways and Transport, WSCC
Housing, Chichester District Council
Jan Hancock, Health Visitor, Southern Health Foundation Trust
Janet Murray-Brown, Assistant Head Teacher – Student Support, Bourne Community College
Joint Commissioning Unit, WSCC
Julie Curteis, Flexible Support Fund and Get Britain Working Manager, JobCentre Plus (JCP)
Mark Dunn, West Sussex County Councillor, Bourne Division
Mary Toomey, Health Visitor, Southern Health Foundation Trust
Pupil Admissions Team, WSCC
Resources and Performance, WSCC
Robert Hayes, Benefits Advisor, WSCC
Rosie Brenton, Senior Psychological Therapist, Sussex Community NHS Trust
Sara Wiggins, Family Outreach Worker, Early Childhood Service, WSCC
Sarah Wagstaff, HIVE Information Support Officer, Ministry of Defence (MOD)
Steve Turner, Unit Welfare Officer, 12 Regt, British Army
Sue Payne, School Nurse Team Leader (West Area)
Sylvia May, Wellbeing Advisor, Chichester District Council
Waste and Recycling Services, Chichester District Council
2
Author:
Louisa Hall, West Sussex Public Health
Contributors:
Catherine Scott, West Sussex Public Health
David Bishop, West Sussex Public Health
Di Hughes
Graeme Potter, West Sussex Public Health
Jacqueline Clay, West Sussex Public Health
Jasmin Sidhu, West Sussex Public Health
Ross Maconachie, West Sussex Public Health
Vila Vasoodaven, West Sussex Public Health
3
Contents
Page No.
Executive Summary and Recommendations………………………………………....…………… 5
Section 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….…….. 13
Section 2: About Thorney Island……………………………………………………………….………. 14
Section 3: Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………. 20
Section 4: Literature Review……………………………………………………………….…………….. 22
Section 5: The Armed Forces Covenant……………………………………………………..……… 26
Section 6: Profile of Questionnaire Respondents…………………………….………………… 28
Section 7: Main Findings………………………………………………………………………….…………29
Section 8: Conclusions……………………………………………………………………….……………… 59
Appendix A: NHS Sussex Community Covenant…………………………………….…………… 63
Appendix B: West Sussex County Council Community Covenant……….………………. 69
Appendix C: Postal Questionnaire……………………………………………………….…………….. 75
Appendix D: Questions to Key Stakeholders…………………………….……………………….. 84
Glossary…………………………………………………………………………….………………………………. 85
References…………………………………………………………………….………………………………….. 86
4
Executive Summary and Recommendations
Background
There are about 140,000 Armed Forces based in England, with about 350,000 dependants. In
addition, there are about 5 million military veterans. Families and children of service personnel may
have specific health needs or experience circumstances which require services to adapt to meet their
needs.
This needs assessment will answer the following key questions about the health and well being of
families and children of military personnel who are based on Thorney Island, which is the only military
base in West Sussex:









What is the current health of the families and children of Thorney Island personnel?
Is their health better or worse than the local community?
Are services able to meet the needs and promote the health and wellbeing of the families and
children?
What are the local assets and services?
Do service families and children face particular barriers in gaining access to services?
How do local organisations and agencies work together to support the health and wellbeing
needs of the service families and children?
What services are working well and which are less effective?
Are there any specific gaps in services?
How well are wider needs met, such as education, leisure, housing, transport and support
services?
Health services for Armed Forces dependents and veterans are usually the responsibility of the NHS
when based in the UK; additionally, the NHS is responsible for secondary, but not primary, care of
serving personnel. Other services, such as social care, public transport and education are accessed in
the same way as non-military families. Housing for families is usually provided by the Ministry of
Defence (MOD).
Methods
A number of qualitative and quantitative methodologies were used to gather information and data on
the health and wellbeing of families living on Thorney Island. These included:





A postal questionnaire to military families with partners based on Thorney Island;
Follow-up interviews with some of these military families;
Interviews with key stakeholders;
Desk research;
Data analysis.
5
Findings and Recommendations
Location
An overarching issue identified by the questionnaires and interviews with families and stakeholders is
the location of Thorney Island – being in a fairly remote location on a peninsula and away from a
majority of services, it has specific accessibility needs.
As Thorney Island is on the border of West Sussex and Hampshire, there is some confusion, both from
residents and professionals, about which county’s services to access although there is not an issue
with regard to quality of services provided in each area. This is compounded by the fact that primary
health care, on the whole, is provided to families by the GP surgery in Emsworth, Hampshire.
Recommendation 1: On-site services
1)
There is space available in the HIVE Community Centre for external services to book through
the HIVE Information Support Officer. If this space is not available, services can contact the
Station Staff Officer to book rooms in other buildings on the base. Services external to
Thorney Island do not always have knowledge of this process. It is recommended that the
Welfare Office and HIVE Information Centre check how booking information is communicated
to external services to see if there can be any improvements to aid external services wishing to
book rooms on the base.
Recommendation 2: Border issues
2)
NHS Sussex to develop a clear pathway of care for families living on the base in Thorney Island,
which includes information about where families should be referred for secondary care. This
information should be shared with other health and social care professionals in the area,
including Sussex Ambulance Service, so all are aware of from where families should be
accessing these services.
Frequent Relocation
There is a strong indication that a key issue which affects families’ health and wellbeing (as well as
access to services) is the fact that some families have to move often, and sometimes at short notice.
This was identified by desk research as well as survey and interview information from families
themselves and professionals. There are a number of implications of such moves:

Families stated that they often do not know how to, or are unable to, access a range of
services. The HIVE (the Armed Forces Information Centre) and the Welfare Office are
providing an excellent signposting service, but it is suggested that external agencies can be
doing more work in promoting services and helping and encouraging families to access all
services.
6

The literature suggests that it can take longer for families to get an initial diagnosis of health,
learning difficulties and other problems when having to regularly start anew in different places
and this is supported by comments from families. This can be alleviated by professionals who
understand the experience and culture of being in a military family and the health and social
care needs that may develop as a result.

Continuity of care can be an issue when moving frequently. Problems can include different
eligibility criteria, differences in waiting lists and poor communication between services.

Moving schools was often seen to be disruptive and stressful to pupils – often affecting their
learning - and there was some feeling that this needed to be more commonly considered by
schools and education services. In addition, there were some comments on lack of availability
of school places when having to move during a school year. There have been many national
developments with regard to education of military children and it is felt, at present, that these
should address the main concerns.
Recommendations 3 – 5: Information Provision
3)
WSCC, in partnership with the Thorney Island Welfare Office and the HIVE, to develop a set of
information and support webpages for serving Armed Forces personnel, their families and
veterans. Hampshire County Council’s ‘Armed Forces Community Welfare Pathway’ site can
be used as an example of good practice and the possibility of developing an online service in
partnership with them could be explored. A link to these pages should be provided from the
Thorney Island blog.
4)
HIVE to further develop its information pack as an updatable resource for residents and
services, to list and explain all relevant statutory and voluntary services.
5)

To include telephone number and job titles of key officers;

To be disseminated via the blog, the Facebook site, the new website (see
Recommendation 3) and the HIVE office;

To include a means for services to input into its development and help to keep it up-todate.
The HIVE information centre hosts a monthly information day for serving personnel and their
families. However, it is recommended that this is developed to include a bi-annual welcome
day for new families, to include wider information about what services and facilities are
available that will be specific to families new to the area. This could include a general
welcome from key staff based on Thorney Island as well as information about primary and
secondary care, educational establishments and amenities in the area.
7
Recommendations 6 – 8: Access to and Continuity of Care
6) Thorney Island HIVE to check the pack of information given to families when they arrive and
ensure there is clear information about individuals’ options and responsibilities when they are on
waiting lists for secondary care.
 This information could suggest that individuals ask a relevant professional (e.g. GP) to write
letter for family to take with them, explaining health and care needs prior to any further
relocation.
7) Coastal Clinical Commissioning Group to develop a health transfer form to contain key
information that military families can complete with their GP and take with them to any new
posting, especially those families with long-term health needs. If agreed, it should be promoted
through information given to families by the HIVE.
8) Consideration of extending the use of the Common Assessment Framework to key professionals,
including the Army Welfare Service, to provide comprehensive and continuous details of
children’s health and social care needs.
Recommendations 9 & 10: Professional Training and Development
9)
Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust (SPFT) are leading on the development of a network of
Armed Forces champions for each service area, to be a source of knowledge and expertise, as
well as the ability to signpost to the right area in other services. This initiative should be
supported by the key public services, including West Sussex County Council and NHS Sussex, as
well as the MOD.

10)
This network to help to develop training of a wider range of professionals to recognise the
effects of particularly relocation and deployment on military partners and their children;
to include all services identified by this report.
To ensure that educational establishments are aware of the timing of parental deployment
and returns and the impact that may have on children, Thorney Island Welfare Office to
continue to invite and encourage school staff to pre-tour briefings, as well as providing a
means for greater engagement of pre- and post-tour support. In addition, it is suggested that
a basic briefing can be provided to schools to enable them to raise awareness amongst their
own staff (such as in a staff meeting) of deployment and return.
Preventative Services
Professionals identified that preventative services provided by agencies external to the Army, such as
health promotion, weight loss clinics and stop smoking clinics, seem to be underdeveloped to some
extent, possibly due to the transient nature of the community and the lack of time to promote and
maintain the services with families.
8
Recommendation 11: Preventative Services
11)
Chichester District Wellbeing Service (Chichester District Council), in partnership with the
Welfare Office, to agree how best to promote and monitor take up of preventative services
and their effectiveness in achieving their goals such as smoking cessation, healthy weight loss
and alcohol reduction. As take up of initiatives has often been low from families in the past, a
range of approaches to achieve this need to be considered.

One suggestion has been to have these services attend the monthly HIVE information day.

Another is that health weight loss and promotion of physical activity initiatives can link
with the Army Physical Training Corps based on Thorney Island.
Mental Health and Stress
Stress, depression, anxiety and social isolation were common themes in both responses to the
questionnaire and in the interviews. Factors that amplified these conditions were partner
deployment and frequent relocation, for both adults and children and could lead to other family
problems. Although there is ongoing support for returning service personnel, coupled with a briefing
session prior to return for civilian partners, there was still a feeling that these problems were often
overlooked or considered part and parcel of being a military family.
Recommendations 12 – 14: Mental Health Services
12)
SPFT to include mental health issues for military families in any professional training, as per
Recommendation 9.
13)
Southbourne Children and Family Centre to provide, in partnership with the Welfare Office,
parental education classes including support for behaviour and speech and language; to
consider how to advertise them without creating stigma.
14)
Access to specialist counselling for children in schools, with knowledge and experience of the
issues faced by the families of Armed Forces, to be provided by West Sussex County Council to
enhance the military covenant. This should be available to students of Thorney Island Primary
School, Bourne Community College and other schools with children of military families with
partners based on Thorney Island.
Partnership Working
Although partnership working between services seems to work well, on the whole, there may be a
need to strengthen and formalise existing networks with clear protocols and clarity of roles.
9
Recommendations 15 & 16: Development of Partnership Working
15)
WSCC to lead on the development of a quarterly networking meeting of all key stakeholders,
to include both military and non-military services, to explore joint working opportunities,
share information, avoid duplication and discuss best practice. The Southbourne CFC Centre
Planning Group could be expanded to accommodate this.

16)
This group to also explore how best to resolve security and access issues to the island
for professionals, to ensure all are able to access the island quickly, but safely, as
required.
Local elected Members/Councillors at all levels (County, District and Parish) to explore the
best way to champion the needs of and relationship with Thorney Island residents.
Employment and Finance
Partners of serving personnel often found it difficult to maintain a career due to frequent relocation.
Some stated that they faced discrimination from potential employers, who were reluctant to employ
someone who may leave at short notice, or had been unable to sustain and progress in a career due
to having to start over each time they moved. Affordable childcare was also raised as an issue.
Families also identified some issues with knowledge of and access to benefits that families of serving
personnel are entitled.
Recommendations 17 – 21: Employment, Finance and Career Development
17)
There is a need to promote to local employers the value and potential of Service families as
employees; this could be achieved in tandem with a policy on members of the Territorial Army
as employees. As a starting point, WSCC to lead on the development of such a policy as part
of the military covenant which, if successful, can be promoted to other employers.
18)
Any information website developed (see Recommendation 3) to include information about
benefits to which military personnel, their families and veterans are entitled and how they can
apply. This can be supported by WSCC Welfare Advisers.
19)
Job Centre Plus to provide guidance for military families on how to maintain and/or claim
benefits and how to access employment; this information to be included in the welcome pack
and any information website (see Recommendations 2 and 3).
20)
HIVE to ensure that information about the Armed Forces Childcare Voucher scheme and how
to apply is included in the welcome pack; this information to also be available on any
information website (see Recommendations 2 and 3).
21)
Aspire Sussex Ltd (previously West Sussex Adult and Community Learning Service) to liaise
with the Army Learning Centre, to discuss the possibility of offering on-site provision of Adult
Education classes.
10
Social Networks and Maintaining Friendships
Families and professionals stated that there were sometimes problems in developing and maintaining
friendships, aggravated by frequent moves although this often depended on the nature of the
individual. Although there are social and fitness groups and activities on-base, some respondents did
not seem to be aware of them. There were some issues with people living off-base feeling that there
was nothing for them to attend.
Recommendations 22 – 25: Social and Community Networks
22)
As uptake of some social and community events is often low, Thorney Island HIVE to consult
with partners of serving personnel as to what activities they want and develop those where
possible and the best way to advertise activities.

This information can be used to consider how best to advertise activities for people
both with and without children to ensure that families are aware.

This information can also help to determine whether activities can be provided at
housing sites off-base as well as on-base or if transport to and from the island for
activities is a possibility.
23)
HIVE to consider targeting social activities for children and adolescents at schools.
24)
Thorney Island Welfare Teams to explore the development of a social and emotional support
network amongst military families, using Home-Start as an example of good practice and
support.
25)
The Welfare Office to continue to explore options for funding to renovate the play area with
Chichester District Council; if this is not possible, to explore other opportunities such as
community grant funding through the Community Covenant or sponsorship.
Transport
Although a majority of respondents had access to their own car, many stated that they did sometimes
rely on public transport to leave the island and that they felt the bus service was not sufficient; this
bus service has since been cancelled.
Recommendation 26: Transport
26)
Thorney Island representative in partnership with WSCC and serving personnel and families of
Thorney Island, to utilise the WSCC Transport Toolkit to develop community solutions to
lessen the impact on those affected by the cancellation of bus service 11. Suggestions have
included minibus hire, car sharing, a cycle path on Thorney Road and driving lessons.
Housing
The standard of housing seemed to vary, but there were many comments about the poor quality of
respondents’ own housing and the time it took for repairs. There was also concern about what would
happen when partners left the Army and a lack of understanding of options.
11
Recommendations 27 & 28: Housing
27)
Information and national guidance about housing options and rights is available for serving
personnel and their families through the Joint Service Housing Advice Office website and their
magazine ‘Housing Matters’, available at the Welfare Office. This includes information about
the Armed Forces Home Ownership Pilot and options when leaving Army. HIVE to ensure that
this information is included in the welcome pack and on website (see Recommendations 3 and
4).
28)
MOD in partnership with Chichester District Council to provide an on-site composting facility
for green waste.
12
Section 1 Introduction
There are about 179,800 Regular Armed Forces personnel based in England, with about 350,000
dependants.1 In addition, there are about 5 million military veterans.2 Health services for Armed
Forces dependents and veterans are usually the responsibility of the NHS when based in the UK;
additionally, the NHS is responsible for secondary (not primary) care of serving personnel. NHS
Primary Care Trusts (PCTs), therefore, have a responsibility to ensure that NHS services are
commissioned to meet their needs.
The health needs of military veterans have received increasing attention in recent years against the
backdrop of large-scale on-going deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan. A health needs assessment3 of
military veterans has been recently completed for Sussex (including East and West Sussex and
Brighton and Hove) but it is recognised that families and children of service personnel may have
specific health needs or experience circumstances which require services to adapt to meet their
needs.
This health needs assessment of families and children of Armed Forces in West Sussex will answer the
following key questions about the needs of families and children of military personnel who are based
on Thorney Island, which is the only military base in West Sussex:









What is the current health of the families and children of Thorney Island personnel?
Is their health better or worse than the local community?
Are services able to meet the needs and promote the health and wellbeing of the families and
children?
What are the local assets and services?
Do service families and children face particular barriers in gaining access to services?
How do local organisations and agencies work together to support the health and wellbeing
needs of the service families and children?
What services are working well and which are less effective?
Are there any specific gaps in services?
How well are wider needs met, such as education, leisure, housing, transport and support
services?
1
UK Armed Forces: Annual Personnel Report, May 2012.
Estimated data from the MOD available from: http://www.mod.uk/defenceinternet/defencefor/veterans/ (Accessed
6/9/12.)
3
Available from: http://jsna.westsussex.gov.uk/
2
13
Section 2 About Thorney Island
2.1
Location
Thorney Island is a peninsula in Chichester Harbour in the south west of West Sussex on which the
only military base in the county is found. The nearest villages are Southbourne, West Sussex and
Emsworth, Hampshire which are just over a mile away and it is three miles from the town of Havant,
Hampshire. The cities of Chichester and Portsmouth are both relatively close, being nine miles away
in opposite directions. It is within the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
and has various sites of special interest (SSI). The harbour itself is a bird sanctuary.
The following map shows the location of Thorney Island in relation to the whole of West Sussex and
surrounding areas. As can be seen on the map, it is very close to the border with Hampshire. The
second map shows the area in clearer detail.
Map 1: The location of Thorney Island in West Sussex
West Sussex and
district/borough
borders
14
Map 2: Thorney Island
2.2
Military History
Thorney Island was first used by the Royal Air Force in 1935 and was a fighter station and base for
Coastal Command during the Second World War. It was taken over by the Army in 1984, who still use
it today.
2.3
Current Population
The population of the Island is made up entirely of soldiers from 47 Regiment Royal Artillery (RA) & 12
Regiment RA, and their families. Approximately 250 families are housed on Thorney Island, with
further quarters in Emsworth, Gosport and Chichester, where approximately 60 families are housed.
Soldiers can come from anywhere, but many of them come from the north east of England, and there
are also many soldiers from Commonwealth countries.
Serving personnel on the island may be subject to relocation after a period of time. Officers and
Warrant Officers usually move every two years but can cross to another appointment within a
Regiment so, in theory, someone could remain on Thorney Island for some years if the career stream
was there for them. Private Soldiers to Corporal, depending on what Corp (unit), they have joined,
will either remain with their parent Regiment or, if attached Arm (type of troop) to a Regiment
Battalion, then sometimes they too will move every two to three years.
15
2.4
Health Services
For serving personnel, there are medical and dental facilities on the island provided by the MOD. For
their families and children, these services are available off-base through the NHS and private services.
There are GP surgeries in both Southbourne and Emsworth which register patients from Thorney
Island. A West Sussex Health Visitor visits the Community Centre once a month to hold a baby clinic,
has a one hour 'drop in clinic' once a week during term time in the primary school and a clinic once a
month in the nursery. A midwife visits the Medical centre to run an antenatal clinic once a week. In
addition, a school nurse service is available at the primary school, accessed through referral. There
are various dental practices in and around Southbourne and Emsworth. Secondary health care
services are available through referral.
There is a Children and Family Centre (CFC) in Southbourne which families can visit. However, this is
poorly attended by Thorney Island families (it is about a 25 minute walk), so the CFC also holds
sessions on the island.
2.5
Transport
Until recently, bus service 11 ran to Chichester and was managed by Emsworth and District Bus
Company, running about every 2 hours from about 10.00am to 2.00pm. There was also an additional
bus at about 7.30am which could take residents of the island to Emsworth on weekdays. This bus
returned from Chichester at approximately 11.00am and 1.00pm. On non-school days and Saturdays,
there was also a bus returning to the island from Chichester at about 3.00pm. The number 11 bus
service was subsidised by West Sussex County Council until 2nd September 2012, when the subsidy
stopped and the bus service cancelled.
School bus number 44B leaves the island at about 7.30am to Emsworth and Westbourne and returns
about 3.15pm. This will still run and is available for members of the public to use, as well as school
children.
There are various bus services available from Emsworth and Southbourne, as well as train stations
enabling connections to Chichester, Brighton, Portsmouth, London and beyond.
2.6
Education
There are three main educational establishments for children relating to Thorney Island, although not
all military families choose to send their children to them:



Thorney Island Nursery.
Thorney Island Community Primary School.
Bourne Community College.
All three schools are rated well by Ofsted.
16
2.6.1 Thorney Island Nursery
The nursery is based in two buildings in the centre of the island, within walking distance for families
living on the island. There is high demand for the service and currently, is at full capacity for free
entitlement hours4. Its hours are 0730 – 1730, Monday – Friday during term-time and it takes
children from three months old. It was inspected by Ofsted in February 2011 and the report5
describes it as a “child-friendly and welcoming… a fully inclusive setting where all children are
acknowledged as unique.” Children’s needs are met through positive relationships with staff who
know them well. Partnerships are strong, both with parents and other carers of the children as well
as other professionals. This is especially important for families who have had no prior contact with
professionals.
2.6.2 Thorney Island Community Primary School
The primary school which takes pupils from age 4-11, was inspected by Ofsted in January 20126 who
gave it an overall grade 2 ‘good’ rating. It is estimated that it takes about 95% of children based on
Thorney Island (currently about 150 pupils with a capacity for 210). Demand for school places is
growing and the school has recently expanded accordingly. It is based on the island, which is
appreciated by many parents. There is high mobility of pupils; the Ofsted report acknowledges the
‘considerable number of pupils who join in different year groups’ with varied attainment and some
gaps in skills and knowledge of some children. However, staff check this when children join the
school and target those who may need additional support to catch up such as catch-up intervention
programmes. The report states that pupils achieve well in relation to their starting points, no matter
when they enter the school and those children who join throughout the year are helped to develop
relationships quickly.
The proportion of children with statements of special educational needs is above average (mainly
emotional and behavioural, speech and language and physical difficulties). These are often later
entrants into the school. In addition, the proportion of children with learning difficulties and/or
disabilities is above average.
The inspection report states that more capable pupils may not be getting challenging enough work.
The school has good links with agencies, including Army Welfare Unit which helps to provide
additional support for more vulnerable pupils. The school is looking to strengthen these further.
Governors are mainly Army personnel and can be subject to postings at short notice, but the Chair (a
retired Major) and Vice Chair bring continuity.
4
All three and four year olds are entitled to 15 hours of free nursery education for 38 weeks of the year.
Thorney Island nursery Ofsted report published 12th March 2011, available from: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspectionreports/find-inspection-report/provider/CARE/113670
6
Thorney Island Community Primary School Ofsted report published 20 th March 2012, available from:
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/125868
5
17
2.6.3 Bourne Community College
Most pupils aged 11-16 from Thorney Island attend Bourne Community College. When it was
inspected by Ofsted in December 20127, it was given an overall grade 2 ‘good’ rating. It is a Trust
school8 which works well in partnership with various agencies including the Thorney Island Welfare
Office, the Station Staff Officer (SSO) and youth workers. The Commanding Officer is one of its
Trustees and it is felt the base is very supportive of the school.
The proportion of pupils with special needs and/or disabilities is more than twice the national
average.
The Ofsted report acknowledges proportion of children joining school part-way through the school
year is high but does not really say how the school deals with this. However, teaching staff take
trouble to understand about pupils’ individual needs and to ensure responses are sensitive and
timely. Pupils’ attainment on entry is generally low but by the end of KS4 it is about average which
reflects good progress.
2.6.4 Adult Learning
For adults, there is an Army Learning Centre on the island. It is open Monday – Wednesday, 8.30am –
4.30pm, Thursdays from 8.30am – 9.00pm and Fridays from 8.30am – 12.00pm. This offers courses to
serving personnel and their families through learndirect9. A mobile library visits the island once a
week also. Services are also available from Aspire Sussex Ltd (previously West Sussex Adult and
Community Learning Service), who have an office at Bourne Community College.
2.7
Advice and Information
The two regiments each have their own Welfare Office and Welfare Officer, who are the first point of
contact for help and advice for families. The offices are usually open Monday – Fridays, 8.00am –
4.00pm and there is a 24-hour emergency mobile number to call. The offices average around four or
five queries a day and the nature of these vary enormously – from queries about bins and requests for
lifts to calls when an Army wife goes into labour. They also have a major role to play when partners
are deployed, being a source of emotional support as well as the first point of call for the Joint
Casualty and Compassionate Centre (JCCC) when a partner is killed whilst on active service. It is the
JCCC’s responsibility to manage the process of notifying the next of kin.
The Community Centre is home to the HIVE information centre, for serving personnel and their
families. This can be accessed in person, from 9.00am – 1.00pm, by telephone or by email. The HIVE
provides an information pack to all households when they arrive, containing details including health
and social care services, housing, activities and facilities. This is delivered by hand, providing the
7
Bourne Community College Ofsted report published 6th January 2012, available from:
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/126069
8
Trust schools are state-funded foundation schools which receive extra support (usually non-monetary) from a charitable
trust made up of partners working together for the benefit of the school.
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/a0059734/trust-schools
9
See http://www.learndirect.co.uk
18
opportunity for new families to chat in person to those who run the HIVE and have any questions
answered. Information is also posted on noticeboards outside key areas, such as the Welfare Office
and the shop, as well as being available online. The Thorney Island blog10 is also managed by the HIVE
and this provides the latest information about events and offers for Thorney Island service personnel
and their families. The HIVE also provides key information for families upon deployment, including
how to keep in contact, deployment books for children and JCCC contact details. Once a month, the
HIVE hosts an information day at the Community Centre, which agencies and organisations such as
law firms, housing and the Citizens Advice Bureau can attend to help and provide information.
Both services also act as gatekeeper to other help, advice and information including local councils,
schools and health services, voluntary organisations such as SSAFA (Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and
Families Association) and the Royal British Legion.
2.8
Other facilities
Hot drinks and snacks are available in a cafeteria based in the Community Centre, which also provides
an opportunity to socialise. Thorney Island also has a Stables and Saddle Club, Saint Nicholas Church,
JNCO (Junior Non-Commissioned Officer) Bar, Beauty Salon, Youth Cadets, RA Yacht Club and water
sports centre and a gymnasium with various facilities. There is a small convenience store on the island
which also has a cash machine. The nearest banks are in Emsworth and there is a Post Office in
Southbourne. There is a disused airfield with an intact runway, that is sometimes used by Microlight
aircraft and private jets.
10
Available at: http://thorneyislandhive.blogspot.co.uk/
19
Section 3 Methodology
A number of different qualitative and quantitative methodologies were used to gather information
and data on the health and wellbeing of families living on Thorney Island.





3.1
A postal questionnaire to military families with partners based on Thorney Island;
Follow-up interviews with some of these military families;
Interviews with key stakeholders;
Desk research;
Data analysis.
Postal Questionnaire
A postal questionnaire was distributed to all families in March and April 2012 who had serving military
personnel based on Thorney Island. A copy of the questionnaire is attached as Appendix C. This
included families living on the island as well as off base, in Chichester, Havant and Emsworth. In total,
this amounted to 295 households. Questionnaires were individually coded and the Welfare Team
based on the island allocated a household to each number; they then distributed the questionnaires
by hand. This ensured confidentiality of residents. Researchers were able to note the code of each
questionnaire returned to ascertain who had responded, and a reminder letter was distributed by the
Welfare Team to those families who had not responded within three weeks. Respondents were
offered an incentive to be entered into a draw for a £50 gift voucher if they returned the
questionnaire.
62 questionnaires were returned, giving a 21.0% response rate. However, it should be noted that
researchers were made aware by the Welfare Team that a number of homes are currently unoccupied
due to families visiting relatives and friends whilst partners are away on tour and, therefore, they
would have been unable to complete the questionnaire in time. They were unable to estimate the
number of families this may have been.
3.2
Follow-up interviews with families
Follow up interviews in person, by email or over the telephone were conducted in April 2012 with
individuals who indicated on the questionnaire that they were willing to do so. This enabled
researchers to explore in more detail issues raised by the original questionnaire as well as uncover
new issues that had been previously forgotten or excluded from the original questionnaire.
3.3
Interviews with key stakeholders
Interviews were also undertaken with key individuals and organisations who work with the families of
serving personnel based on Thorney Island and the questions asked of them are attached as Appendix
D. They included representatives from primary and secondary health services, social care, the Army,
voluntary services, education and community safety as well as staff and other workers located on the
20
base itself. In addition, stakeholders were asked to identify other professionals who worked with
families whose serving partners were based on Thorney Island, to ensure the widest range of views
were captured.
3.4
Desk research
In additional to the literature review, several pieces of desk research were completed to give a wider
picture of the issues facing not only those families with military partners or parents based on Thorney
Island but also those that may apply to military families nationally. This included:



3.5
Ofsted reports of Thorney Island Nursery, Thorney Island Primary School and Bourne
Community College (the secondary school closest to the base).
Reports from other local authorities.
Other agencies’ needs assessments of military families.
Data analysis
Limited data were available to examine the needs of military families whose partners were based on
Thorney Island, due in part to the relatively small population as well as the fact not all families live on
Thorney Island (or in West Sussex) and, therefore, postcodes cannot be used for analysis for these
people. Thus, data presented should be viewed with the caveat that they are purely indicative of
those individuals and families who are living on the island, bearing in mind the high mobility of this
population.
Findings from the research undertaken have been combined by topic and are discussed in Sections 6
and 7.
21
Section 4 Literature Review
4.1
Literature Search
A literature search was completed to find key literature relating to the health and wellbeing needs of
military families. Most of the literature related to military families from the USA but, where relevant,
the findings have been generalised to serving military personnel and their families in the UK due to
similar issues identified such as deployment, leaving the armed forces and frequent relocation. There
were very few articles specifically relating to military families from the UK.
Men comprise about 90.3% of the British Armed Forces (and 91.8% of the Army)11, therefore, most of
the literature available focuses on military wives and children.
4.1.1 Health and Welfare Services
As military families are often posted away from their close family members, it is possible that (in
particular) health services may be requested by them more than non-military families. Giles (2005)
suggests that this may be because family members, most notably the grandmother of a child, can
often be the source of advice and guidance on the health of a child. This is referred to by Anson et al.
[1993:36] as “an effective lay referral system” and its absence results in health services becoming the
primary source for health information and advice. Without this family support, the parent may be
less confident in his/her own abilities and more likely to call a doctor for reassurance and help.
Professionals need to be aware of this and explain things carefully. (Giles, 2005)
In addition, services need to be “proactive, easily accessible and well advertised… looking at
innovative and alternative ways of serving this population.” (Giles, 2005:216) Flake et al. (2009)
suggest that primary care providers need to take military families’ concerns seriously, especially when
there is increased risk of psychosocial problems in children. Giles (2005) suggests the development of
the role of the health visitor and/or nurse practitioner in primary care settings such as a minor illness
service as well as improved preventative work by all services working together.
The Army itself is seen as a source of support and is especially good in a crisis. However, Giles (2005)
makes the point that those family issues which may be seen as less critical (such as pregnancy
termination), may not be supported so readily. In addition, family or welfare officers are usually
exclusively male and can been seen to not always understand the issues. (Giles, 2005) An overall
point, made by Anson et al. (1993:34) is that the Army is an institution where “military needs take
precedence over personal or familial needs.” Giles (2005) supports this, stating that Army wives are
expected to cope and to not worry their husbands with issues that may affect morale. This is despite
the fact that a solid family unit is seen as “critical to [the military’s] success” (Park, 2011:65),
enhancing morale and capability for serving personnel. Therefore, it has been suggested (Anson et
11
UK Armed Forces: Annual Personnel Report, May 2012.
22
al., 1993:43-44) that Army wives learn to cope “in a way that largely avoids symptoms of distress and
negative health perception, because they just cannot afford to be sick.”
4.1.2 Mental and Emotional Health and Wellbeing
There is a presumed higher prevalence of mental distress in military families which has been referred
in the literature to a ‘military family syndrome,’ where the father is authoritarian, the mother is
depressed and the children are unruly. This theory is challenged by Jensen et al. (1991) who suggest
that the evidence of this is anecdotal or based on poor samples. However, there can clearly be issues
of anxiety and stress, for both adults and children, and it is clear that services must be aware of the
mental health problems that frequent relocation, deployment and homecoming can cause. (Giles,
2005)
Adult partners are faced with increased responsibilities when their spouse is deployed, such as
childcare, finances and limited support (which is discussed further in the following section) which can
cause stress and anxiety. One study suggested that partners who remained at home suffered more
stress than partners who were posted. (Barker and Berry, 2009) It is suggested that these issues can
build up, the longer a partner is deployed. (Lester et al., 2009) In addition, there may be problems
when the partner returns, described by Flake et al. (2009:272) as “emotional conflict as the service
member reintegrates back into the family.”
Studies of the effects of deployment on children and adolescents were particularly prevalent in the
literature search, and it is clear that their mental health is of key interest in this respect. Parental
deployment can lead to feelings of fearfulness, worry and concern about a parent’s location and
safety coupled with extended separation and the problems that can cause. Roles within the
remaining family can change also, such as older siblings having to care for younger ones more or
taking on more household chores, which can affect wellbeing and ability to participate in social
activities. The remaining parent’s physical and emotional availability is of key importance during
separation and can affect the emotional and mental state of the children. (Maguire, 2009) Flake et al.
(2009) found that more than one third of school-age children were high risk for psychosocial
difficulties when one parent was deployed. Barker and Berry (2009) found that when a parent was
deployed, children showed increased behaviour problems compared to those whose parent was not
deployed; this was especially true where children had existing anxiety issues and/or when there were
parental stresses. They also found that the parent returning could cause problems, where children
could be distressed and confused by the sudden reappearance of that parent. Even when the serving
parent is home, children can be worried or uncertain about the future and anxiety can be triggered by
certain actions, such as coming home late from work. (Lester et al., 2009) Some literature suggests
that mental health problems, such as anxiety, can manifest themselves physically, such as problems
with independent sleeping, school attendance issues or poor school performance. (Lester et al., 2009;
Maguire, 2009)
Health services need to be aware of all of these issues, for both adults and children and adapt to
address them. Services may need to consider how to build emotional resilience throughout the
deployment period and beyond. (Lester et al., 2009) Flake et al. (2009) suggest that health services
are ideally placed to understand and respond to problems in children caused by deployment, such as
identifying children with medical or behavioural symptoms caused by the stress. They also suggest
23
that a positive school environment can have a beneficial effect on children. Maguire (2009) suggests
that development of strong social networks and support systems will also help and that these areas
should be developed in easily accessible settings such as schools.
4.1.3 Social and Community Life
Community and social support is a key influence in minimising the effect of deployment and
relocation. Frequent relocation has an effect on the social and community life of military families. In
addition, military families differ from non-military families as they tend to marry and have children at
a younger age and often come from lower socio-economic groups. (Giles, 2005) As discussed in
Section 3.1.1, the nature of Army life means that these young families may be posted away from
extended family, thus be without their support. Support is available from the Army and other services
but established support systems can be removed suddenly resulting in disconnection with new
communities. (Flake et al., 2009) Giles (2005) acknowledges the fact that, as military families are
often posted away from extended family and friends, they can feel unsupported and socially isolated.
This isolation can have a large impact on their happiness. In addition, children’s activities, hobbies
and friendships can be disrupted which can lead to a feeling of rootlessness and problems with
maintaining friendships. (Park, 2011; Maguire, 2009) If there is a lack of transport, this can increase
the feelings of social isolation. (Giles, 2005)
Whilst social support and understanding can be given by friends on the base who are in similar
situations, Giles (2005) suggests the community may not always be a source of support due to gossip
and occasions where issues and problems may not be as private as hoped. Maguire (2009) suggests
that relevant agencies (in particular, social care organisations) have a role to play in developing and
promoting supportive social environments.
4.1.4 Other needs of military partners
There are clearly specific needs relating to both children and partners of serving personnel, as
discussed above. There are also some issues which are specific to the adult partner. Unemployment
and/or lack of career development can be a problem for military partners as a result of postings, as
partners are forced to enter and leave the labour market each time. (Giles, 2005; Anson et al., 1993)
Another issue is that British Force Post Office (BFPO) addresses have not always been recognised as
having an official UK postcode meaning they were not compatible with many credit agencies’
databases and other commercial and banking products and services. This disadvantaged serving
personnel and their families, as they were often unable to access products and services, as well as not
having a credit history. This has been resolved somewhat; the MOD and Royal Mail worked together
to introduce UK-style postcodes for those with BFPO addresses and this was implemented in April
2012.
Giles (2005) makes the point that the Army can be seen as paternalistic, providing services and
making decisions for serving personnel and their families in which they may have little or no choice.
Examples of this are housing allocation or being relocated at short notice. Giles suggests that this
may encourage dependency.
24
4.1.5 Other needs of military children
In addition to the needs of children, as discussed above, frequent relocation can cause a problem with
the continuity of children’s education (Giles, 2005) and there has been some suggestion it can impact
on their school performance. (Jensen et al., 1989 cited in Park, 2011) However, other evidence
suggests that service children who move actually perform better academically than non-service
children who move, at levels equal to or higher than the national average. (ERIC, 2003 cited in DfE,
2010) However, should they move during their GCSE years, in years 10 or 11, there may be a fall in
overall GCSE performance and there is also a suggestion that high mobility throughout school may
affect performance. (DfE, 2010)
Park (2011) stated that military children are, on the whole, healthy, have good friendships and
engagement with school and the community and are overall, satisfied with their life. They have
respect for authority, as well as being “tolerant, resourceful, adaptable, responsible and welcoming of
challenges… [with] a greater likelihood of knowing and befriending someone who is ‘different.’” (Park,
2011:67) She suggests that overall, a positive family attitude towards Army life will affect how well
children, in particular, deal with it. They are also less likely to be deprived and less likely to be
identified as having a special educational need than non-service pupils. (DfE, 2010)
4.1.6 Partnership working
Giles (2005) suggests that improved communication and joint working between services and the Army
can be developed to support families better. In the UK, an Armed Forces Covenant has been
introduced nationally and local community covenants have been developed and this is discussed in
more detail in the following section.
25
Section 5 The Armed Forces Covenant
The Armed Forces Covenant was published in May 201112 and sets out the relationship between the
Nation, the State and the Armed Forces. This states that the whole nation has a moral obligation to
members of the Armed Forces and their families, and it sets out how they should be treated.
The covenant recognises that the Armed Forces community faces disadvantages when compared to
non-military individuals and families and it seeks to eliminate these. The key elements to note with
regard to military families are:








“The Armed Forces Community should enjoy the same standard of, and access to, healthcare
as that received by any other UK citizen in the area they live.” (pp.10)
“Children of members of the Armed Forces should have the same standard of, and access to,
education (including early years services) as any other UK citizen in the area they live.” (pp.21)
“The MOD seeks to promote choice, recognising the benefits of stability and home ownership
amongst members of the Armed Forces where this is practicable and compatible with Service
requirements.” (pp.28)
“Members of the Armed Forces Community should have the same access to benefits as any UK
citizen, except where tailored alternative systems are in place.” (pp.32)
In terms of responsibility of care, “Special account must be taken of the needs of those under
18 years of age.” (pp.35)
“The special impact of operational deployment on both personal and family life should be
recognised.” (pp.38)
“Family members should have the same access to childcare, training and employment
opportunities as any other citizen. Support should be available to minimise the impact of
mobility caused by Service.” (pp.42)
“The Government should work with the commercial sector towards a situation where [the
Armed Forces Community] have as good access to commercial products and services, including
financial services, as any other citizen.” (pp.46)
A number of policies have already been implemented at national level as a result and more are
planned and include education, housing, finance and benefit schemes; an interim report detailing
progress was published in December 2011.13 Developments are discussed in more detail in relevant
sections.
Local ‘community covenants’ have been, or are being, signed nationwide. The Ministry of Defence
(MOD) provides a Community Covenant Scheme supported by a £30m Community Covenant Grant
12
Available from: http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/0117C914-174C-4DAE-B7550A010F2427D5/0/Armed_Forces_Covenent_Today_and_Tomorrow.pdf
13
Available from: http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4FED8087-3E33-4B77-A8167F0D2382706B/0/afcs_interim_report2011.pdf
26
Scheme. Over 50 councils have signed a Covenant with the Armed Forces community in their areas,
with 47 more planned in the coming months. More than £2million has already been released to
support local projects, including those for military families such as improving play areas, subsidies for
school holiday activities and community link projects.
NHS Sussex agreed a community covenant in March 2012 and West Sussex County Council agreed one
in July 2012. Its aim is to enable these organisations to see the Armed Forces and their families, and
military veterans, in a ‘special light’, with greater focus on health and social isolation. The two local
community covenants are attached as Appendices A and B.
27
Section 6 Profile of Questionnaire Respondents
The questionnaire and follow up interviews’ focus was the non-military, civilian individuals living in
the responding household. 100% of civilian partners of serving military personnel who responded to
the questionnaire were female and, therefore, all the interviewees were female. 12% of respondents’
husbands were officers, the rest were not.
Some questionnaires were completed by households where both adults were serving military
personnel; some had children, some did not. Those without children (i.e. a purely serving military
household) have not been included in the overall statistics throughout this report but any issues
raised are incorporated where appropriate. For those who do have children, only the issues relating
to the children have been included in the statistics but again, any issues raised have been
incorporated where appropriate.
98% of those who responded to the questionnaire were married. They were aged between 19 and
56, with an average (mean) age of just over 33. Most individuals were born in the UK, although a
significant minority were born abroad. Figure 6.1 shows where people were born. 83% spoke English
as a first language. Most (79%) were White British and others were White other, Black African/
Caribbean/British or another ethnic group.
Figure 6.1: Where adult respondents were born
n=61
Most respondents (82%) had children living with them aged between a few weeks old and 18 years
old.
28
Section 7 Main Findings
The questionnaire data were analysed and the following sections show the results.
As the total population is small and the response rate low, it cannot be said that these percentages
are statistically significant or that they can be generalised to all respondents nor Army families.
Therefore, percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole number. However, they do provide
a good indication of responding families’ experiences and have also been used to understand focus
areas for the follow-up interviews with both families and stakeholders.
For the more qualitative comments, the results of the questionnaire and interviews with families have
been combined, as most of the issues overlap. Finally, where an issue identified by respondents
overlaps with service provider comments, data analysis or desk research, this has also been included.
29
7.1
Health Services
As families of serving personnel cannot access military health care on the island, they are given details
of local health services in the initial information pack provided by the HIVE. It is then their
responsibility to register with local practices (usually in Southbourne or Emsworth), as needed.
7.1.1 Registration with a GP
91% of adult respondents and 95% of children were registered with a local GP. 75% of adults and 68%
of children had used a GP in the past six months. This is broadly in line with GP access in West Sussex
(70% of West Sussex respondents stating in the GP Patient Survey that they have seen or spoken to a
GP in the previous six months14).
The following figure shows where patients living on Thorney Island are registered; as serving
personnel receive primary care from the MOD, this will consist of non-serving spouses and their
children. It is clear that a majority attend Emsworth Surgery in Hampshire which is in line with
comments provided by both families and professionals about where families seek primary care
services; this surgery is advertised in the HIVE information pack as being closest.
Another reason for the high registration rates of the Emsworth Surgery could be that historically, it
used to have a clinic on the island several times a week; this was established in 1984. This was
particularly useful when families living on the island were less mobile, however, over the years fewer
families used it. The reasons for this could be that families were more mobile, needed more privacy,
lack of choice about doctor or that the opening hours were insufficient. Additionally, as national
policies and practices changed, the clinic could no longer dispense medicine. As such, the clinic
became unsustainable and stopped about five years ago.
Emsworth Surgery’s figures show that last year, families from Thorney Island had an average of 7.8
consultations per registered patient. This is higher than the national average of 6.7 for both genders
and all age groups and 6.0 for females aged 20-44. The national average for children under 14 is 4.2
(children under 5 is 7.6)15. This supports the theory identified in the literature review, that military
families are more likely to seek medical help than non-military families. However, Emsworth Surgery
feels that higher consultation rates are more likely to occur with any family with young children and
that there is “no noticeably high demand” from Thorney Island families.
14
Department of Health. The GP Patient Survey: Overall Primary Care Trust Report January – September 2012.
http://www.gp-patient.co.uk/results/latest_weighted/pct/ Accessed 07/01/13.
15
QResearch and The Health and Social Care Information Centre. Trends in Consultation Rates in
General Practice 2008/09.
30
Figure 7.1: GP surgeries to which Thorney Island residents are registered
n=566
Source: Exeter March 2012
7.1.2 Registration with a Dentist
70% of adult respondents and 71% of children were registered with a local dentist. 53% of adults and
60% of children had used a dentist in the past six months. In West Sussex, 37% of adults have tried to
access an NHS dentist in the last six months (93% were successful); however, this figure excludes
those accessing private dentists16. There are also no figures showing dentist registration in England.
Therefore, it is difficult to compare registration rates. However, there was an issue with accessing
dentistry and this is discussed in more detail in Section 7.1.4.
7.1.3 Emergency Admissions
The questionnaire did not specifically ask about accessing Accident and Emergency services.
However, as the literature review suggested that military families are more likely to seek a doctor's
advice for health matters relating to their children, figures relating to emergency admission were
examined.
In 2011, 0.3% of emergency admissions aged 16 or under in West Sussex were children living on
Thorney Island17. However, as a proportion of total population, emergency admissions from residents
living on the island are higher, as Figure 7.2 shows, again supporting the theory that military families
living away from their extended family may seek professional help more than civilian families.
16
17
Department of Health. GP Patient Survey Dental Statistics; January to March 2012, England.
Source: Sussex Database, SUS data (2011)
31
Figure 7.2: Emergency Admissions of under-16s in West Sussex as a proportion of the population of
Thorney Island and West Sussex (2011)
Source: Sussex Database, SUS data (2011); ONS mid-year
population estimates (West Sussex, 2011)
7.1.4 Problems accessing health services
26 people had had problems in accessing health services, either for themselves or for their children.
The most common problem was with access to dentists – 23.0% of total respondents to the
questionnaire (and over half who said that they had had problems) stated that they had had
difficulties with this. This is at odds with the overall picture for West Sussex; the GP patient survey
dental results for January-March 2012 shows that, of those people who had recently tried to access
an NHS dentist, only 6.2% had been unsuccessful.18 The main issue for families was that people were
unable to register, or that there were waiting lists, but there were also difficulties in getting an
appointment as well as not knowing how to find it. Access to dentistry is a known problem for
military families, especially as many bases are in rural locations, and the Department of Health (DH) is
working with the MOD to monitor and address these and other specific difficulties faced.19
There was also concern that GP surgeries may have a prior expectation that all military families will
have ‘issues’ (such those identified by the literature review) and react accordingly, however,
Emsworth Surgery does not see that this is the case. Not only do they have years of experience of
treating patients from military families, but all staff are trained on the needs of military families and it
is hoped that they provide an opening and welcome environment where patients are treated as
individuals. They also recognise that families can be isolated and separated from not only their
serving partners but their wider families.
18
Department of Health. GP Patient Survey Dental Statistics; January to March 2012, England.
http://transparency.dh.gov.uk/2012/06/14/dental_gp-patient/ Accessed 18/7/12.
19
NHS Primary Care Commissioning. Looking after dependents of armed forces personnel. http://www.pcc.nhs.uk/278
Accessed 28/10/11.
32
Another concern was that the majority of the local surgeries’ registered patients are elderly and,
therefore, they are not geared up to cater for young families so well. Again, this was countered by
Emsworth Surgery. Not only do their staff receive appropriate training, but they try to provide a
service that these families need. For example, it was recognised that parents will sometimes call for
an urgent appointment for a sick child and they will always try to find an appointment that day.
In addition, there was also concern from professionals that some externally provided health
promotion initiatives, such as smoking cessation, have decreased on the island, due to lack of time
and appropriate settings for this work. However, there are exercise and fitness classes on the island
and healthy eating organisations (such as Weight Watchers and Slimming World) sometimes hold
sessions.
There were also difficulties, to a lesser extent, with access to GPs and hospital outpatient services. A
few people had problems with access to maternity services, hospital as an in-patient, chemists,
Accident and Emergency and the school nurse. However, the reasons for the problems were similar:
could not register and/or waiting lists, difficulties in getting an appointment or difficulties in getting to
the service. Parking was also raised as an issue by a few people, but there was no one particular
service where this was a problem.
There were some comments about the fact that families cannot access the medical services on the
island. Having a medical centre on the island for military families, to include GP and dentistry
services, was suggested, although this has already been done for GP services (see 7.1.1).
Alternatively, a regular space or a base for health services to use (such as health visitors, midwives
and CFC workers) was suggested as an option. This would enable services to be more visible, have a
higher profile and offer regular sessions for families. Space for these services is available, most
notably at the HIVE. Other rooms in buildings on the base are available to book through the SSO.
7.1.5 Respondents’ health and quality of life
Respondents were asked to rate their own health and quality of life. Overall, this was a fairly positive
response with 81% stating their health was good or very good and 76% stating that their quality of life
was good or very good. This compares with 2008 Place Survey results20 in West Sussex of 80% of
respondents who stated that their health was good or very good. However, no-one stated that their
health was very bad or that their quality of life was very poor whereas in the Place survey, 0.7% in
West Sussex answered that it was. Figure 7.5 compares Thorney Island respondents’ self assessed
health with that of respondents to the Place Survey in West Sussex.
There was some concern from some professionals that smoking, drinking, overweight and a lack of
exercise were fairly prevalent in the community, but this was not raised by respondents themselves.
20
Results available from: http://jsna.westsussex.gov.uk/
33
Figure 7.3: Respondents’ self-assessed health
n=62
Figure 7.4: Respondents’ self assessed quality of life
n=62
34
Figure 7.5: Thorney Island results compared to West Sussex Place Survey results - Health
7.1.6 Impact of being in a military family on health
Respondents were asked what impact, if any, being in a military family had on their health and the
health of their children. This was also explored in more detail during the interviews. Key comments
were around:
a) Continuity of Care
There seems to be a lack of continuity of health care when moving a lot and problems with
access, including different criteria for services in different areas and poor communication
between services. There were some comments that individuals had lost their place on waiting
lists despite the Armed Forces Covenant stating that this should not be the case: “Family
members… should retain their relevant position on any NHS waiting list, if moved around the
UK due to the Service person being posted.” (pp.10) Individuals have the right to remain on
the original waiting list or arrange to transfer their care to a hospital in the new area; either
way, patients are treated in order of clinical priority. It is up to the individual to ensure that
both their old and new GPs are aware of this, that all their own contact details are correct and,
if care is transferred, that the new hospital takes into account time already spent on a waiting
list. However, waiting list times vary in different areas and the waiting time for a service is
relative to that in the new area. It is possible that individuals’ responsibility to identify
themselves as Service family in a new area and the difference in waiting times is not
understood by all families and, therefore, there may be a need to make this clearer.
Linked to this was an issue around assisted conception services (in vitro fertility [IVF]
treatment) whereby a family had been moved during treatment; criteria for IVF was different
in the new area and there were problems accessing it. The MOD has issued guidance in this
matter: families on a waiting list for IVF or who are receiving it should consult their chain of
command and, where possible, should not be moved. However, where there is an overriding
Service need, there may be a need to move regardless. It is acknowledged in the Armed
35
Forces Covenant Interim Report that there may be different provision in different areas and
therefore, if there is a problem, families are encouraged to seek support from the Armed
Forces Network.21 Again, it is possible that families are not aware of this.
Some professionals echoed that view, in that it was often difficult to develop and maintain
relationships and trust, as well as provide ongoing and comprehensive support, when an
individual or family is moved so frequently. A few respondents stated that they had not
moved that often and acknowledged that it is easier for them.
b) Other comments
There were a few comments that serving personnel get healthcare through the military but
the Army cannot help their families with health needs; there was some perception that the
needs of families and children are a lower priority to the Army than serving personnel. There
was some feeling of being treated like a single parent when the serving partner is away and
one person referred to this as ‘discrimination’. A few stated that they felt the Army should
help where services are not available or too expensive.
However, there were a few positive comments and many people stating ‘none’ or ‘no impact’.
7.1.7 Other health issues
Issues were identified around being on the border with Hampshire and that there is some confusion
about where to go to access health services. Although Thorney Island is in West Sussex, residents
look to Hampshire to provide most services, especially primary and hospital care. This is exemplified
by the fact that a majority of families are registered with the GP surgery in Emsworth, which is in
Hampshire as well as a number of military families who live there and that any referrals from this
surgery will be to Hampshire (unless it is to a hospital, when it is the patient’s choice). The border
matter is not an issue with regard to the quality of services provided, whether they be in Hampshire
or West Sussex, but it does cause confusion.
This was supported by comments from some professionals, for example, once when an ambulance
was called, one arrived from Hampshire and another from West Sussex. Another professional from
West Sussex stated that demand for her service from Thorney Island residents is low, however, she
was unsure if this was because they were not accessing it or they were approaching similar Hampshire
services instead.
21
In West Sussex, this is the Sussex Armed Forces Health Network. More information is available from:
http://www.sussexnetworks.nhs.uk/armed-forces/
36
7.2
Mental Health Services
7.2.1 Use of mental health services
The questionnaire categorised mental health services as a social care service, but it is recognised that
this may not necessarily be the case. Very few respondents had used the social care services
identified on the questionnaire, but of those, half had accessed mental health services.
7.2.2 Mental health services available to military families
Mental health services such as Time to Talk are available for military families, in line with non-serving
families, usually through GP or Health Visitor referrals (although there are avenues for self-referral).
There is usually a waiting list. Once individuals are referred, mental health staff are able, as
necessary, to liaise with a specialist armed forces mental health lead in Sussex Partnership NHS
Foundation Trust (SPFT). A key part of this role is to promote good practice when working with
military personnel and their families and they plan to develop a network of Armed Forces Champions
for each service area. Individuals in this network will be a source of knowledge and expertise on the
needs of military personnel and their families, as well as being able to signpost to the right area in
other services.
In addition, the Big White Wall is available for free for serving personnel, veterans and their families
(and in West Sussex, it is free for all residents). The Big White Wall is an online resource which can be
accessed anonymously for support and advice on mental health issues. It is promoted by the HIVE
information centre on Thorney Island and there were comments about its successful use.
Serving personnel have access to Trauma Risk Management (TRiM) which is where those who have
experienced traumatic events take part in weekly sessions after their return with a troop commander
to discuss issues, including the opportunity to talk about family problems. There were positive
comments about TRiM, including how it has helped to destigmatise mental health issues in the
military. However, there was still some feeling that the mental health of families is neglected, that to
experience mental health difficulties is ‘shameful’ and there is a ‘get on with it’ mentality. This may
account for low use of secondary care NHS mental health services. However, the literature also
suggests that it may be due to primary care personnel not understanding fully those issues
experienced by military families.
7.2.3 The nature and cause of mental health issues
There were a few further comments about the nature and cause of mental health problems which
mirror issues uncovered by the literature review. This included stress, anxiety, depression and panic
attacks. Some individuals stated that these are brought on by frequent moves and/or a partner being
away on tour. However, the prevalence of access to mental health services was low overall, despite it
being the most common reason for contacting social care services. There was some evidence of the
successful use of the Big White Wall. It is clear from both the literature and interviews that, in
37
particular, primary care staff are ideally placed to recognise mental health problems in military
families and act accordingly, although there may be a need for training in order to do so. SPFT hope
to develop a network of Armed Forces Champions: one for each key service area, who could provide
the necessary expertise and knowledge, as well as signpost to the right areas in other services.
A final issue affecting families’ mental health, mentioned as a possibility by some professionals, is that
of bereavement: if a partner is killed whilst on active duty. There appear to be good support systems
developed to manage this. The Welfare Office is informed and it is their responsibility to inform the
partner in the most appropriate way. Long term support is provided by a Visiting Officer. Families are
able to stay in Service accommodation for up to two years, following bereavement and resettlement
entitlement is transferred to the bereaved spouse or civil partner.
38
7.3
Social Care Services
7.3.1 Use of Social Care services
Very few questionnaire respondents had used other social care services; services identified were selfdirected support and learning difficulties services. In addition, a few had used services such as the
Citizen’s Advice Bureau and charities for mental health issues.
One issue raised by some professionals was that of domestic violence and child protection. However,
there is no evidence of this through the referral systems currently although available counselling
services have been accessed in the past.
7.3.2 Problems accessing Social Care services
Over half of the questionnaire’s respondents had had problems accessing a service. The problems
included:




Problems with waiting lists and/or eligibility.
A few issues with specific cases whereby the service does not understand the specific need of
military families, such as stress caused by moving, lack of partner’s support when he is away
and a service provider’s assumption the military will provide.
Again, as with health services, there were issues with continuity of care.
As with health services (see section 6.1.6), there is also a border issue with social care and
some confusion about which council is responsible. For example, one person was informed
she was not entitled to Hampshire social care but was told it was to do with eligibility criteria
rather than geography.
7.3.3 Help and support to family members or friends
Respondents were asked if they gave any help and support to their family members, friends or
neighbours due to a long-term physical disability, mental ill-health or disability and/or problems
relating to old age. 91% of respondents did not. This could be due to the fact that most families are
living away from extended family and other relatives. Figure 7.6 shows the responses.
39
Figure 7.6: Help and support to family members – number of hours per week
n=58
40
7.4
Education
7.4.1 Use of education services
Most (77%) respondents, or their children, used education services. The following figure shows the
services that are used by these respondents. It is clear from the figure that the most common use of
these services is for children of military families: Thorney Island nursery and primary school and
Bourne Community College.
Figure 7.7: Use of education services
Data is available showing the numbers of service children attending local schools. As expected, the
majority of service children attend Thorney Island Primary School or Bourne Community College.
Service children also make up a significant proportion of Thorney Island Primary School’s total pupil
population (91%) but less of a proportion of other schools’ total pupil population. Figure 7.8
demonstrates this.
41
Figure 7.8: Proportion of service children attending local schools as a proportion of the school’s
total pupil population
Source: Public Health Research Team, January 2011
7.4.2 Use of a computer and the internet
98% of adult respondents regularly use a computer and the internet. The figure is lower for children
(66% use a computer and 56% use the internet), but this tends to depend upon the age of the
respondent’s child(ren); younger children are less likely to use it.
7.4.3 The impact of being part of a military family on children’s education
Bourne Community College, Thorney Island nursery and primary school aim to support parents and
children as well as minimise educational problems that may be caused by being in a military family.
There is good communication between the nursery and primary schools as well as with health visitors
and WSCC. The schools are also a source of health information for parents, such as advertising the
speech and language drop-in centre at Chichester. There are also good relationships between Bourne
Community College, Thorney Island and other key agencies. There are regular meetings specifically
related to students from the base and their needs and the school is able to contact the SSO or
Welfare Office if parents do not respond to them.
There was a feeling that being in a military family and having to move affects the children’s learning
and social and emotional development, as it is disruptive and stressful. Comments were made about
children repeating work that they have already done; this is due to the fact that individual schools
have differing approaches to the curriculum organisation, subjects taught and topics and courses
offered. To overcome this, it is necessary for the receiving school to have good information about the
progress and attainment of each pupil and the Department for Education has recommended that
schools do more to collaborate with other schools to improve this. Deployment was also mentioned
as a stressful factor by schools, including the different roles and responsibilities that (especially
adolescent) children may have to assume when a parent is gone and relinquish when that parent
42
returns and the need to make new friends each time. Moves between bases can be stressful and
happen at short notice, and it was suggested that this can cause children to shut down and not bother
making friends because they may be moved on at short notice.
It was suggested that more work could be done with the schools to help them understand the stress
children are under when a parent is on tour such as including school staff on pre-tour briefings
although it was acknowledged that a system is in place in secondary schools. It was also noted that
there is no counsellor available for children in school and this may be a positive step to help children
with emotional or mental difficulties caused by being part of a military family such as parental
deployment, postings or needing to make new friends.
There may not be spaces at local schools, although Thorney Island Primary has spaces at present.
There was one issue with child with special needs not being given an appropriate school place. A few
individuals suggested that school admissions need to be more flexible with military families; this has
been addressed both nationally through the Military Covenant and locally, with West Sussex County
Council being responsive to the needs of military families. National developments are outlined below.
One issue identified was that parents, especially those from overseas, may not realise that they are
entitled to free early years education, and work is needed to raise awareness.
There was also reference to the fact that children may not be diagnosed soon enough with problems
and difficulties such as dyslexia due to moving schools so often. In some cases, if a child has moved to
the UK after they turn one (and so may not have received health visiting services), the nursery may be
their first contact with services. There is also mention of some bullying.
A number of families have chosen boarding school as a means to overcome the issues above.
There were some positive comments about Thorney Island schools though and how well their
child(ren) is/are doing. Another individual believes that the primary school is not challenging enough,
which is reflected in the Ofsted report. It was suggested that this is possibly due to general feeling
that army children are not very able. However, in line with national evidence, pupils in West Sussex
perform above the average in comparison with non-Service children22.
The only issue with attendance identified was that, when a serving partner has allocated leave,
families may wish to take a holiday. If this is not during school holidays, families will ask for
authorised absence which, because of government regulations, cannot always be given. Therefore,
any absence is marked as unauthorised. There was a feeling that this was unfair for both the school
and the families. Any pupils with a low attendance rate are discussed with the Education Welfare
Service and no referrals have been made within the last academic year.
Poor transport to schools off the island was also mentioned, resulting in a lack of choice in schools.
This is discussed in more detail in Section 7.7.2 (Transport).
22
Resources and Performance, WSCC, 2012.
43
7.4.4 National developments
Various schemes have been implemented, partly as a result of the Armed Forces Covenant. The
following relate to children of serving personnel’s’ education:





Schools receive Pupil Premium funding of £250 for the children of those currently serving. In
West Sussex, primary schools receive just over £58,000 and secondary schools receive
£32,000.23
MOD has made available £3m per year for state schools with Service children (including those
of reservists). This funding is available to help schools give additional support to children of
military families where needed and could help provide services to address respondents’
concerns of stress, disruption and feelings of displacement.
A scheme to provide scholarships to bereaved Service children.
The School Admissions Code 2012 which came into force in February 2012 specifically refers to
military families. As before, admissions authorities must allocate a place in advance of a
family arriving in the area, providing any application is accompanied by a letter containing
date of relocation and Unit postal address. A military child cannot be refused a place in
advance because they do not currently live in the area. In West Sussex, in-year school places
for military children are held for longer than the normal two-week period. In addition, the
Code now allows for schools to exceed the 30-pupil limit for infant classes in order to
accommodate Service children, where necessary; the Code now considers military children
‘excepted pupils’ for this purpose. This should address problems with access to a local school,
as mentioned by some respondents.
A Service child indicator is now part of the Annual School Census in England and DFE is now
able to identify separately the children of parents in the Armed Forces. This will provide data
specifically relating to children of military families including evidence of educational
attainment and should help to inform policy and allocate resources in this area, where
needed.24,25
7.4.5 Adults’ education and training is discussed in more detail in Section 7.5.3.
23
Resources and Performance, WSCC, 2012/13 data.
Source:
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/WhatWeDo/Personnel/Welfare/ArmedForcesCovenant/CovenantAc
hievementsCommitmentsDelivered.htm Accessed 4/7/12.
25
WSCC Pupil Admissions Team.
24
44
7.5
Employment and Finances
7.5.1 Current employment situation
Most respondents are working as an employee (40%) or looking after the home and family (33%). The
following figure shows respondents’ current employment situation.
Figure 7.9: Respondents’ employment situation
Of those who worked, most (52%) work part-time, between 16 and 30 hours per week. 12% of
respondents are currently looking for a job. From this information, it appears the economic activity
rate is low amongst respondents and is concentrated in part time work.
7.5.2 Benefits
Veterans, people serving in the Armed Forces and their dependants should have the same access to
benefits as and UK citizen and may be able to claim a range of benefits in the UK. These include:






Child Benefit;
Statutory Sick Pay;
Disability Living Allowance;
Sure Start Maternity Grant;
Jobseekers Allowance;
Tax credits.
45
75% respondents with children stated that they received Child Benefit, which is currently a universal,
non-means tested benefit for anyone with children. It is unclear why the remainder did not state why
they did not receive this benefit but it is possible that this was not recognised as a benefit because it
is currently universal.
Of those who received other benefits, the most common was Child Tax Credit (29%). Only a few
people claimed any other benefit such as income support or Disability Living Allowance.
A few people stated that there are issues with claiming some benefits due to leaving jobs when
having to move and not qualifying straight away once moved. This particularly applied for Job
Seekers’ Allowance (JSA). JSA may not be paid to partners who give up their job to follow their
spouse if it is recorded that they ‘left their previous job voluntarily’. However, if this is the case, the
claimant should also be asked to provide further information about leaving that job. This information
will then be sent to a decision maker who will look to see if the claimant may have 'just cause' for
leaving their job, provided they did not leave earlier than was reasonably necessary in order to
arrange the move. The decision maker should consider the circumstances in which the individual left
employment; following a Service spouse may be seen as a satisfactory reason for leaving a job. This
means partners of serving personnel should not automatically be precluded from receiving JSA on the
grounds of voluntary unemployment. Each case should be considered on an individual basis using the
relevant legislation and the information provided by the person claiming JSA. The individuals who
raised this issue in their questionnaires clearly were not aware of this and, therefore, it is suggested
this information could be included in the information pack that families received when their partners
are assigned to Thorney Island.
There are Armed Forces champions in each Jobcentre Plus (JCP) district who should be able to advise
on these matters; for Thorney Island, this is Surrey and Sussex. The local JCP to Thorney Island is
Chichester, although Havant is closer but in Hampshire.
7.5.3 Impact of being in a military family on employment and training
There was a strong feeling that career opportunities are limited due to:



Moving so often – employers are worried about reliability – and this also limits promotion
opportunities;
Cost of childcare and lack of childminders on the island (exacerbated by any deployments and
that family is usually not in the area). Thorney Island is able to provide an element of this but
it is not open in the school holidays;
Poor transport off the island.
Some respondents have had to give up good careers and some stated that they have had to just
accept any job that was offered – not necessarily one they would choose if they stayed in one place.
A few other respondents have had successful careers but it seems to depend upon career choice
and/or employer. However, even some of these individuals state that it is difficult having to find
something new every few years.
46
The opening hours of the learndirect centre on site are not always seen as suitable. Services available
from West Sussex Adult and Community Learning Service were not mentioned by any families and this
was supported by professionals from the service, who stated that the demand for the service from
residents of Thorney Island is low. It was suggested that an on-site facility may improve this. There
was a suggestion that JCP could work with the military for special advice on employment; at present,
the local JCP in Chichester stated that has very little contact with the families on Thorney Island
despite the fact spouses of serving personnel should have access to the full range of JCP services such
as the Jobseeker Direct service to help find a job. Many of the JCP’s services are available online so it
is unclear whether partners of serving personnel are not approaching the local JCP because they are
using online services, due to accessibility issues, because they are not aware of what is offered, or for
some other reason.
With regard to childcare, Serving personnel are able to take advantage of the Armed Forces Childcare
voucher scheme which provides over £900 of tax savings per year, per working parent, should the
maximum amount of £243 in vouchers be taken each month from a salary.
7.5.4 Impact of being in a military family on financial situation
There was strong concern about families’ financial situation, including:






Poor army wages;
Only one wage coming in due to employment situation and career opportunities for nonmilitary partners;
Cost of transport off the island for work and college – both public transport and petrol;
Cost of living in the south east compared to other parts of the country, including cost of
housing;
Debt – especially accessing short-term, payday loans;
Benefit problems (see section 4.4.2).
There was some acknowledgement of the fact that they have cheaper rent which helps; rent is
assessed based on quality of housing and access to facilities. In addition, serving personnel who pay
council tax on a property (including Service Families Accommodation) in the UK are eligible for Council
Tax Relief (CTR) when serving on an operational deployment overseas. This is provided in a lump sum
payment following the end of deployment and now stands at nearly £600 per Service person for a sixmonth deployment. No respondent specifically mentioned this.
A key development arising from the covenant is that the Government has been working with banks
and building societies on how they lend to members of the Armed Forces to ensure access to
mainstream financial products. This has included a new system for handling credit rating assessments
for those with a British Forces Post Office (BFPO) address which will enable individuals to access
appropriate financial products more easily. There is also an agreement with the main lending
organisations that those who serve with the Armed Forces should not be disadvantaged because of
their occupation, not be automatically rejected due to a BFPO address. There also exists in West
Sussex the West Sussex Credit Union26 which aims to support 'financial inclusion' and ensure that
26
More information available from: http://www.westsussexcreditunion.co.uk
47
everyone can get financial services at an affordable cost. This includes no-fee loans with lower
interest rates than those that can be obtained by commercial short-term payday loans and does not
disqualify people due to a poor credit rating or lack of borrowing history.
There were also a few comments stating that being in a military family has had a positive impact such
as a regular salary and a home.
48
7.6
Housing
7.6.1 General
Service personnel who have over six months to serve and are aged over 18, married or in a civil
partnership or have permanent custody of children are entitled to Service Family Accommodation
(SFA). Property is allocated based on entitlement and eligibility including rank and number of
children. Repairs and maintenance are carried out when reported by Modern Housing Solutions
within a specific timescale, depending on the urgency of the problem. Rents are subsidised below
market rates and depend on the size, location and condition of the properties as well as access to
amenities. Service accommodation has been allocated funding for improvements in recent years and,
on Thorney Island, this has included cavity wall insulation.
There is also a pilot scheme being undertaken nationally at present: the Armed Forces Home
Ownership Scheme. This helps serving personnel, with more than four years and less than six years of
continuous service who cannot otherwise afford to buy their own home, to do so.
At Thorney Island, 82% of respondents lived on the base. Respondents living on-base had been there
for a month to 12 years, with a median figure of 2.25 years. It appears there was some confusion
completing how many rooms respondents’ homes had, but the number of rooms seems to vary from
two rooms and two bedrooms to 11 rooms, five of which are bedrooms. On the whole houses are 2-3
bedrooms, unless there are 4 or more children, in line with MOD accommodation regulations.
Most people rated their housing as moderately healthy. Figure 7.10 shows responses to this
question.
Figure 7.10: Self-rated housing standard
n=61
49
7.6.2 Impact of being in a military family on housing
There was acknowledgement that housing is sometimes not as modern as it could be despite recent
efforts to improve it. The most common complaints about housing included:






Dated, tired housing which needs modernising and/or fixing – and comments that there are
restrictions on decoration/fixing things as they would like. There was some concern that
repairs and adaptations are not done as quickly or as well as they could be, especially if there
are no children. Two people said they would be happy to pay more rent for better quality
housing.
There were several complaints of incidences of mould and damp as well as cold (which may be
helped by the insulation) although this should have been addressed now by the cavity wall
insulation. Another problem, although mentioned by only a couple of respondents, was
blocked drains and raw sewerage at Chichester.27 There was concern that these conditions
could lead to poor health.
The size of housing being too small for the family.
There were some comments about the fact that army rent is the same wherever the serving
partner is based in the country but that the housing standard varies enormously. This is not
completely accurate, as set out by the MOD in its accommodation regulations, as well as being
refuted by some professionals, who reiterated that rent depends on standard of housing and
access to facilities.
Chichester District Council does not provide green waste bins on the island, mainly due to lack
of demand (it is a paid-for service) and problems with regular access due to security. One
person stated that it was a problem having to pay to have green waste taken away; a
suggestion was to have an on-site composting facility for residents.
Other comments supported these complaints, citing lack of control over housing and no choice
about where to live. These views conflict with the statement in the Armed Forces Covenant,
that choice should be promoted and it is possible that families living in SFA are not aware of
their options.
There was some appreciation that the army will take care of the house, especially when the husband
is away, such as if the boiler breaks. There was a view, and also appreciation, that the base is seen as
a safe place to live.
A number of respondents commented on the fact that military housing is cheaper than the open
market which is appreciated, but additionally there was some concern about when/if their partner
leaves the Army, how they would be able to afford a deposit/mortgage or if they would qualify for
social housing. Service personnel are considered a priority group for affordable homes schemes in
England, as long as they meet the criteria, and can retain this status for 12 months after they leave
the Armed Forces. Information about conveyancing is available from solicitors and, for Thorney Island
personnel, there is a local law firm, specialising in the Armed Forces, who attends the HIVE
information day once a month and is available for serving personnel and their families to contact if
they have any legal needs. It is possible that serving personnel and their families are not aware of all
of these options and responsibilities.
27
The housing at Chichester is scheduled for demolition and, therefore, will no longer be used by the Army.
50
In addition, if social housing is being considered, current legislation allows for establishment of a local
connection in an area in which they have served or are serving, placing them on an equal footing with
civilians who live in an area in this respect, however, housing providers need to be aware of the
potential increased housing demand this may cause as people leave the Army. This will rely on the
relevant housing authority being informed at the earliest opportunity of a family to be discharged;
this is the family’s responsibility but help and advice can be obtained for the Welfare Office. This will
allow for a good chance of developing an acceptable solution whether that is an offer of private
rented sector accommodation or a social home where appropriate.
7.6.3 National developments
The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) is developing ways to ensure that
current and ex-service personnel get the accommodation that they and their families need. The
following steps (amongst others relevant to serving personnel and military veterans, some of which
have been discussed in Section 7.5.1) are being taken currently to ensure that service personnel
receive top priority for housing and these may go some way to addressing concerns raised by
respondents and interviewees:






Placing members of the Armed Forces at the top of the priority list for Government-funded home
ownership schemes, including FirstBuy, and instructing special agents to visit military bases to
promote such schemes.
Working with credit reference agencies and Royal Mail to standardise British Forces' Post Office
addresses so personnel are not disadvantaged when applying for mortgages.
A change in the law so that former personnel with urgent housing needs are always given high
priority for social housing, and personnel who move from base-to-base do not lose qualification
rights.
Statutory guidance has been issued to councils on the allocation of social housing, setting out
how their allocation schemes can give priority to current or ex-service personnel, including using
local preference criteria and local lettings policies. This states that local authorities must not
disqualify ex-members of the Armed Forces on the grounds that they do not have a ‘local
connection’, as long as the application is made within five years of discharge. This also includes
bereaved families of service personnel, following their death.
Accelerating the release of surplus public land with enough capacity to build up to 100,000 new
homes by 2015. Subject to planning, the sites may have the potential for homes that could
benefit ex-service personnel.
Encouraging custom build housing, so that more schemes are designed by, and for, ex-service
personnel.28,29
28
Source: DCLG http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/about/armedforceshousing/ Accessed 4/7/12.
Source: DCLG (June 2012) Allocation of accommodation: Guidance for local housing authorities in England. London:
DCLG.
29
51
7.7
Transport
7.7.1 Methods of transport
Nearly all respondents (93%) have access to their own car. However, it is clear that some of these
individuals do not have access to their car, all of the time. Many stated that they could not use a car
when their partners are away as they do not drive, or that their partner uses the car during the day so
they cannot. The following figure shows the methods of transport that respondents and their
children use regularly.
Figure 7.11: Methods of transport
7.7.2 Impact of living on Thorney Island on ability to get around
There were many comments about the fact that, without a car, respondents and their families would
be significantly restricted in getting to places outside of Thorney Island. Local villages are walkable for
individuals without mobility problems. However, the pavement is narrow and sometimes blocked by
parked vehicles or vegetation; comments were made that it would be difficult, and perhaps unsafe, to
take a child’s buggy along the road from the base.
There were also many comments about the lack of a regular bus service. Due to this issue, several
people have had to book taxis and this is expensive – one respondent quoted £10 for taxi ride to
Emsworth and another stated that some will not travel to the island or charge extra to do so. If the
bus service 11 is cancelled from September 2012, as currently planned, it is possible that this problem
will be exacerbated, although current figures show bus usage to and from the island is low.30
30
Highways and Transport, WSCC.
52
This leads to the frequently mentioned issue about the expense of leaving the island. Residents have
to leave the island for nearly everything including doctors, shopping, banks, dentists and leisure. In
addition to taxis, buses were also seen as expensive. The need to use the car more often, and further,
leads to increased fuel and parking costs in local villages and towns. The island shop’s opening times
were not seen as ideal and it is expensive, increasing the need to leave the island for basics although
most supermarkets will deliver to Thorney Island if orders are placed online.
Transport is also an issue for older children; the school bus can take children to and from Bourne
Community College but it is once a day each way, before and immediately after school. This not only
restricts their choice of secondary school, but also, if parents cannot collect them at other times, they
are limited in the afterschool and other activities such as Youth Clubs in which they can participate. It
was suggested that a minibus service could be provided by the MOD for children based on Thorney
Island, to allow them to join in with these extracurricular activities. Lack of transport also restricts
access to tertiary education; although Adult Education classes are available on the Island and through
Bourne Community College, the nearest higher education colleges are in Havant and Chichester.
Other comments included the fact that some people are unable to leave the island much and feel
quite isolated, as well as issues around travel when there are family emergencies if there is no access
to a car. However, there are many services and facilities on the island.
WSCC has developed a 'transport toolkit'31 which aims to gives communities information and advice
on exploring alternative transport options, identifying local needs and possible solutions that could be
put in place such as community transport and car-sharing. Once this is published, it is possible that
this could be a valuable resource for the community of Thorney Island and work can be undertaken to
develop a community solution to this issue.
31
Available from:
http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/living/big_society/unlocking_community_potential/community_led_transport_toolki.aspx
53
7.8
Social and Community Life
7.8.1 Impact of being in a military family on keeping in touch with family and friends
Most people (69%) find it easy or very easy to keep in touch with friends and family. However, this
still leaves over a quarter who do not find it easy. The following figure shows responses.
Figure 7.12: Ease of keeping in touch with friends and family
n=61
There were several comments that the internet, Skype and mobile phones make it easy to keep in
touch, although there were a few comments about poor internet on the island. This seems to be
supported in that, the average UK broadband speed is 7.84mb32 but on Thorney Island it is a lot less.
This is because the main broadband server that is nearest the island is over 1.5 miles away, so the
signal is lost the greater the distance it has to travel. This means it is worse for those living furthest
into the base. In addition, it was clear that not everyone’s relatives and friends have access to these
technologies, especially if they live in poorer countries overseas.
Several people mentioned the distance between themselves and their families and friends – many are
originally from the north east of England and many from overseas – so travel, if at all possible, can be
difficult, time consuming and expensive. Family from abroad may have to apply to the embassy to
visit. Army housing on the island is not really suitable for visitors in most cases.
There were also some comments about the transient nature of friendships and difficulty in keeping in
contact; some felt lonely, depressed, isolated and homesick due to a lack of local friends. However,
there were other comments about the need to make more of an effort and how friendships can be
maintained with people that have the military in common. There was also acknowledgement that,
with shared experiences, wives can provide one another with mutual support in times of crisis.
32
uSwitch data, July 2012
54
7.8.2 Impact of being in a military family on social life
The most common comment about the impact of being in a military family on respondents’ social
lives was that they did not have a social life. The main reasons for this were that non-serving partners
did not have much spare time and that childcare is expensive and/or hard to access. This was
especially difficult when extended family, who may normally take on a childcare role, lived far away
and also when partners are serving on operations abroad. There was also the additional problem of
respondents’ partners being sent away at short notice, sometimes causing difficulties in planning
anything – a current example cited was that of needing last-minute military personnel for security at
the London Olympics. Many families had planned, booked and paid for their summer holidays which
had to be cancelled.
Some individuals commented about a lack of opportunities to socialise, no matter whether they lived
on or off-base. This included with other military families as well as with existing, non-military friends.
One person stated that, if a couple does not have children, there are no groups to join. However, this
was contradicted by other people praising group activities, such as fitness classes and comments
about attending regimental functions. This was supported by comments from professionals, who
stated that the HIVE will organise such activities upon request. One professional noted that some
activities are targeted at families whose partners are on deployment and she felt this did not work so
well. However, this is most likely due to the fact that a Families Welfare Grant is given to
Commanders to assist in providing welfare activities whilst a partner is on deployment; this is £4.40
per person deployed, per week (it was recently doubled from £2.20 per person, per week). On
Thorney Island, this has been used for activities such as homecoming events, medal parades and food
after family briefings. Regiments also hold events, such as themed parties, to thank partners and
wives for their support and funding for some of this, such as food, the venue and entertainment, is
given by the Second in Command(s) (2IC). Activities such as boat trips, camping trips and teen groups
are also organised and the Community Development Worker works with soldiers and their families to
enable them to undertake activities by themselves.
Activities and services are advertised in a variety of ways, including via the internet, email lists and on
boards outside key areas. However, there is often little take up – one professional stated that families
are very good at asking for services but then often do not engage with them. Additionally, there have
been problems with booking rooms, these being cancelled at the last minute or inappropriate and a
lack of storage for equipment. Not only do they disrupt the availability of activities, but they affect
volunteers’ motivation as there are too many barriers. However, there is limited storage space on the
base. There were positive comments about mother and baby groups on the island arranged by the
HIVE.
There were a few comments about the difficulty of moving regularly, meaning having to find a new
circle of friends each time, for both adults and children. A few people said that it was sometimes
difficult to befriend pre-existing groups of friends and that there may be a hierarchy of Army wives
based on the husband’s rank.
As a result of many of these problems, several people commented about isolation, seclusion, lack of
roots and boredom. One person ‘feared’ being on her own when her husband is posted. One person
55
praised the use of Home-Start whilst her husband was serving in Germany and suggested that a
similar scheme could be developed for Thorney Island. There is a Home-Start scheme based in
Chichester.
There is also the issue of being a small community on a relatively small area of land: families of
soldiers who are not officers are housed close together (‘packed in’) and there can often be a lack of
privacy. This raised not only the issue of social tension, but also had implications for health and
wellbeing, whereby individuals’ concerns, problems and needs could become the source of gossip.
Other comments focused on a lack of facilities on the island:




There is not much for children aged 4-7 or teenagers to do.
There is a need for a better play area.
There was a go-kart track but it was not maintained and therefore fallen into disrepair.
There is space for a swimming pool; this would be very much appreciated.
The need for an improved play area was acknowledged by professionals and funding for this is being
explored with Chichester District Council. However, there are currently many facilities for all on the
island such as clay pigeon shooting, a BMX track, horse riding facilities and a sailing club and the state
of the go-kart track was disputed. The HIVE also organises activities. The problem seems to be that
often, these activities are run by volunteers who are not always available or that funding may not be
available. They are also considered ‘outdoorsy’ which may not be suitable for everyone.
Many organisations offer Armed Forces discounts for days out but of course, without access to
transport, this may not be possible for families. A minibus for hire was suggested as a means to
overcome this.
56
7.9
Other Comments
7.9.1 Frequent relocation
It is clear from the results of the questionnaire, interviews, literature review and desk research that
frequent relocation intensifies many of the health and wellbeing issues and problems that military
families experience. Armed Forces families can have to move often and sometimes at very short
notice, and this can cause problems with access to services as well as continuity of care. There was
some feeling that the Army does not consider families when making them move regularly and that
having advance notice of moves would help. There was also some concern about the effects of
moving and husbands being away on the children which can be often overlooked.
Within this, there was acknowledgement that army wives ‘knew’ what they were letting themselves
in for – however ‘nothing prepares you for it and it doesn’t make it any easier’.
7.9.2 Partnership Working
This was explored particularly with professionals although some respondents’ comments reflected on
times when services did not appear to talk to one another. On the whole, professionals felt that they
worked together and communicated with other organisations and agencies well, although there were
occasionally cross-border issues. However, it often appeared to be on an informal, ad-hoc basis and
would often depend upon the personal networks that an individual had developed as well as
personalities, experience and knowledge of individuals involved. This included the level of support
and engagement of senior personnel and how committed they were to the idea of community
cohesiveness. Obviously, this could cause continuity problems if someone moved on professionally or
organisations restructured so there was no longer one individual with responsibility for that area.
One stressed the importance of knowing key individuals and how a contact centre or helpdesk was
not helpful, especially for families who may need time to build up trust.
A few professionals did not realise the range and nature of all services available to families of serving
personnel based on Thorney Island or readily know how to contact the right people. It was suggested
that networks and understanding could be developed through a regular meeting of key individuals
and services, including those from within and outside of the Army. This approach seems to have
worked quite well in Catterick Garrison, which is the largest base in the country, where a number of
initiatives and studies to improve the health and wellbeing of the military community have been
developed. In addition, a contact list, for organisations and services would be extremely beneficial for
the residents and staff on the base. This would be a list of all relevant statutory and voluntary services
and would be telephone number and job titles rather than names of officers. This could then be
disseminated via the blog, the Facebook site or the HIVE office.
57
7.9.3 Availability and Uptake of Services
An issue that emerged during the interviews was that some families seem to perceive that there is no
help and support available when, in fact, there is a lot and it is a matter of knowing it is there and
accessing it. This may be due to a lack of feeling or wanting to be part of the community caused by
regular moves or possibly lethargy caused by a general view that the Army and associated staff will
provide (or ought to provide) due to its introspective and paternalistic culture. Another opinion was
that highlighting problems may affect one’s career in the Army. Several people interviewed stated
that families off-base sometimes seemed more self-reliant and integrated and wondered if there was
an expectation from those housed on-base that everything should be provided on-base and/or if
these families chose to not access services. However, this generalisation is not supported by the
research as these views were certainly not true for all of the families who responded.
Many professionals felt they were doing all they can to promote their service, including going to
families’ homes, but there was often a low take-up of the service or a feeling that they were not
accessing all of the families; one suggested that, ‘there may be a disconnect we’re not aware of.’ One
professional felt that parents can be sometimes private and reserved. This implies that services are
aware that there may be unmet needs of families based on Thorney Island and that additional
training, to help them understand the culture and problems that may be faced by these families, is
needed.
7.9.4 Other
The point was made that there is a number of families from other countries, some of whom ‘stick
together’ socially and that services, both on and off the island need to adapt for and communicate
with them. This includes cultural issues as well as different languages.
There can be a problem with services getting access to the base on a regular basis. An example
already mentioned (see 6.6.2) is green waste, but it also applies to other services. There was
confusion about to whom to speak to obtain a pass and also comments about the time it takes to
receive one at the gate. One professional who sometimes works at the base stated she had received
conflicting messages about whether she could obtain a permanent security pass.
There were several comments from families appreciating everything the Army has done for them.
However, there were a couple of comments stating that "asking for help is just not done", possibly
because Army wives are expected not to worry but to cope.
58
Section 8 Conclusions
This needs assessment has enabled all of the key questions identified in Section 1 to be answered
providing a comprehensive consideration of the needs, issues but also strengths of being a military
family with at least one serving family member based in the Army on Thorney Island.
Overall, it appears that the health of families and children who responded to the questionnaire and
interview requests is similar to that of the local community. However, as the total population is small
and the response rate low, it cannot be said that these percentages are statistically significant or that
they can be generalised to all respondents nor to all Army families. However, they do provide a good
indication of responding families’ experiences. There are certainly issues and problems, but most of
these are being managed by available health and social care services, as well as the Welfare Team on
the base. Assets and services are provided to families by both the Army and external agencies and
organisations. Key services and facilities have been described in Section 2.
However, many service families do face barriers in gaining access to services. The main barrier is to
do with continuity of service due to frequent relocation, although some services such as education
are better equipped to deal with it. Social support networks can also suffer as a result. In addition,
deployment of serving personnel can cause its own problems for the family, in particular, emotional
and mental health issues.
Location
An overarching issue identified is the location of Thorney Island – being in a remote position on a
peninsula and away from a majority of services, there are specific accessibility considerations. The
lack of facilities for health and other family services external to the MOD on the base itself can be
seen as the main gap in services. There is space available in the HIVE Community Centre for external
services to book through the HIVE Information Support Officer and joint use of this space will not only
allow access for families, but it will increase services’ visibility and could help to develop improved
understanding of services available and uptake of services. It will also bring services together to help
identify joint working opportunities and share good practice. If this space is not available, services
can contact the Station Staff Officer to book rooms in other buildings on the base. Services external
to Thorney Island do not always have knowledge of this process and therefore, there is a need for
clearer understanding and improved booking information to aid external services wishing to book
rooms on the base.
Information Provision
There are very good signposting services on Thorney Island in the form of the Welfare Offices and the
HIVE. Information is provided about a wide variety of services and activities to all families whose
partners are based there. They are also available for those who seek help. However, as some families
have to move often, and sometimes at short notice they often do not know how to or are unable to
access a range of services despite this. It is suggested that external agencies can be doing more work
59
in partnership with the Army and families promoting services and helping and encouraging families to
access all services.
Access to Services
It can take longer for families to get an initial diagnosis of health, learning difficulties and other
problems when having to regularly start anew in different places. This can be alleviated by
professionals who understand the experience and culture of being in a military family and the health
and social care needs that may develop as a result.
Continuity of Care
There were three main issues with continuity of care. Firstly, the matter of different eligibility for
services in different parts of the country was raised; a person may be receiving services in one place
but cannot access them in another. Secondly, there was the concern about waiting lists in that when
a family is moved, they need to start again at the bottom of the waiting list in a new area, even
though this should no longer be the case due to the Armed Forces Covenant. Finally, the issue of poor
communication between services in different areas was raised; services were not always aware of
previous history of the family member.
There is also the issue that even when services are available, they are not always accessed by families.
It is unclear why this may be but it is likely that it is a combination of them not having or
understanding relevant information, information not always being presented to them in the best way
and a general feeling that the Army will take care of them. It is also apparent that services do not
always know what is available and, if this is the case, it is unlikely that families will know. More effort
is needed to understand the lack of take up of some services.
There is an issue with access to NHS dentistry, but this is a known problem for both military families
and the population at large. The Department of Heath is working with the MOD to try to address this
and NHS Sussex also monitors this locally.
Preventative services provided by external agencies, such as smoking cessation and healthy weight
clinics, seem to be underdeveloped to some extent, possibly due to the transient nature of the
community and the lack of time to promote and maintain the services with families. It was also
suggested that attending such services on the island can be ‘embarrassing’. A recommendation has
been developed to monitor take up and success of these, to understand their effectiveness.
Mental Health Services
Stress, depression, anxiety and social isolation were common themes in both responses to the
questionnaire and in the interviews. Factors that amplified these conditions were partner
deployment and frequent relocation, for both adults and children, and could lead to other family
problems. Although there is ongoing support for returning service personnel, coupled with a briefing
session prior to return for civilian partners, there was still a feeling that these problems seemed to be
often overlooked or considered part and parcel of being a military family. There are various mental
health services available, including the Big White Wall which is available for free to all military
60
personnel, their families and veterans. There have been several positive comments about this and it
is hoped that this service will continue to develop and be used by all. In terms of accessing secondary
care mental health services, take up seems to be low amongst military families, despite the impact on
metal health that relocation and partner deployment can cause for both adults and children. It is
suggested that more information could be provided for families seeking emotional and mental
wellbeing support and guidance as well as a specialist in schools for children and adolescents.
Partnership Working
Services seem to be working hard to address needs of families of Thorney Island serving personnel
and seem to work well together at present, and this is largely due to the personal commitment of
professionals, most notably, those working in the Welfare Offices and the HIVE. However, there is
clearly an opportunity for services to work more effectively together, to explore joint working
opportunities and share information, and therefore, there may be a need to strengthen and formalise
existing networks.
Education
Moving schools was often seen to be disruptive and stressful to pupils – often affecting their learning
- and there was some feeling that this needed to be more commonly considered by schools and
education services. In addition, there were some comments on lack availability of school places when
having to move during a school year. As discussed in Section 6.4.4, these issues should be addressed
by implementation of national developments including increased funding for schools and the
allowance for larger class sizes to accommodate military pupils. West Sussex military pupils appear to
be performing well in comparison to the local community. Therefore, education services seem to be
doing well and look set to improve with various national guidance and developments that have been
recently implemented and there are no related recommendations.
Employment and Finance
Partners of serving personnel often found it difficult to maintain a career due to frequent relocation.
Some faced discrimination from potential employers, who were reluctant to employ someone who
may leave at short notice, or had been unable to sustain and progress in a career due to having to
start over each time they moved. Affordable childcare was also an issue. There were some issues
with knowledge of and access to the benefits to which families of serving personnel are entitled.
Social and Community
Maintaining friendships and engaging in social activities was highlighted as a problem for many
families who responded to the questionnaire, although many did state that they had a close network
of friends. Although there are social and fitness groups and activities on-base, some respondents did
not seem to be aware of them. There were some issues with people living off-base feeling that there
was nothing for them to attend. This suggests that more can be done to prevent some families
becoming socially isolated and, therefore, a recommendation has been developed to ensure the right
activities are being targeted correctly and that support systems are in place for those families who
may be more reticent to become involved.
61
Transport
Poor public transport links to and from Thorney Island can be seen as a barrier to accessing
appropriate services. Although a majority of respondents had access to their own car, many stated
that they did sometimes rely on public transport to leave the island and that they felt the bus service
was not sufficient. This problem is likely to worsen as the bus subsidy, provided in the past by WSCC,
was removed in September 2012.
Housing
The standard of housing seemed to vary, but there were many comments about the poor quality of
respondents’ own housing and the time it took for repairs. There was also concern about what would
happen when partners left the Army and a lack of understanding of options.
Border Issues
As Thorney Island is on the border of West Sussex and Hampshire, there is some confusion, both from
residents and professionals, about which county’s services to access although there is not an issue
with regard to quality of services provided in each area. This is compounded by the fact that primary
health care, on the whole, is provided to families by the GP surgery in Emsworth, Hampshire.
62
Appendix A
NHS Sussex Community Covenant
63
64
65
66
67
68
Appendix B
WSCC Community Covenant
69
70
71
72
73
74
Appendix C
Postal Questionnaire sent to families of serving personnel based at Thorney
Island
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
Appendix D
Questions to key stakeholders
1. Name
2. Your job title/role
3. Your organisation
4. Please describe your role and your involvement with families at Thorney Island.
5. What are the main issues facing families and children at Thorney Island from your perspective and
in respect of the organisation/service you work for, in relation to:
a. The availability of the service
b. Access to the service
c. The level of demand for the service
d. Communication between partner agencies
e. Any gaps in the service
f. Other issues
6. Expanding on communication, how do you think the various statutory, military and voluntary
and community services work together to support the health and well-being needs of the families
and children?
a. What works well and why do you think this is so?
b. What does not work so well and the reasons for this?
7. What do you think would improve joint working?
8. What is your perception of the impact of being a military family in respect of:
a. community cohesion – on and off the base?
b. benefits of being on the base compared to living off the base
c. the level of support of Army officers
d. the level of awareness of other services (outside the service you work in) of specific issues
for families
e. the impact on families where the partner (who is in the military) is at home, then away on
active service then back home.
9. What else do you think would improve support to families and children on Thorney Island?
a. Can you name three things you think would improve the well being of families and
children?
b. Thinking about these ideas
i. Who might deliver, or help deliver, these improvements – organisations/
individuals?
ii. What resources are available on/off the base?
10. Is there anything else you would like to raise or comment on?
84
Glossary
2IC
Second in Command
BFPO
British Forces Post Office
CFC
Children and Family Centre
CTR
Council Tax Relief
DfE
Department for Education
DH
Department of Health
GP
General Practitioner
HIVE
Armed Forces Information Centre
JCCC
Joint Casualty and Compassionate Centre
JCP
Jobcentre Plus
JNCO
Junior Non-Commissioned Officer
JSA
Job Seekers Allowance
MOD
Ministry of Defence
PCT
Primary Care Trust
RA
Royal Artillery
SFA
Service Family Accommodation
SPFT
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
SSAFA
Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association
TRiM
Trauma Risk Management
WSCC
West Sussex County Council
SSO
Station Staff Officer
SSI
Site of Special Scientific Interest
AONB
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
BFPO
British Force Post Office
85
References
Anson, O, Rosenzweig, A and Shwarzmann, P. (1993) The Health of Women Married to Men in the
Regular Army Service: Women Who Cannot Afford to Be Ill. Women and Health, 20:1:33-45.
Barker, Lisa Hains, Berry, Kathy D. (2009) Developmental Issues Impacting Military Families With
Young Children During Single and Multiple Deployments. Military Medicine, 174:1033-1040.
Department for Education (DfE). (2010) The Educational Performance of Children of Service Personnel.
DFE:RR011.
ERIC. (2003) Providing Highly Mobile Students with an Effective Education. ERIC Digest: ED482918
2003-11-00. Cited in DfE. (2010) The Educational Performance of Children of Service Personnel.
DFE:RR011.
Flake, EM, David, BE, Johnson, PL, Middleton, LS. (2009) The Psychosocial Effects of Deployment on
Military Children. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Paediatrics 30:4:271-278)
Giles, S. (2005) Army dependants: childhood illness and health provision. Community Practitioner,
78:6:213-217.
Jensen, Cdr P (MD), Xenakis, Col SN (MD), Wolf, Ltc P (DSW), Bain, Col MW (MD). (1991) The ‘Military
Family’ Syndrome Revisited. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 179:2:102-107.
Jensen, PS, Grogan, D, Xenakis, SN and Bain, MW. (1989) Father absence: Effects on child and
maternal psychopathology. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
28:171-175. Cited in Park, N. (2011) Military Children and Families: Strengths and Challenges During
Peace and War. American Psychologist, 66:1:65-72.
Maguire, J. (2009) Fighting a war of their own? The effects of parental deployment to a war zone on
adolescent psychosocial development – an exploration of the evidence. Research, Policy and Planning,
27:1:39-52.
Park, N. (2011) Military Children and Families: Strengths and Challenges During Peace and War.
American Psychologist, 66:1:65-72.
86