Overview

This snapshot draws on the 2021 Australian Census to examine the relationship and family circumstances of current and ex-serving Australian Defence Force (ADF) members and how they differ from the circumstances of those who have never served. A veteran identifier was included in the Census for the first time in 2021, making it possible to obtain representative data about this cohort and compare them to civilians.

We have used the Census data to determine whether current and ex-serving members (as well as reserves) are more or less likely to be in a relationship than those who have never served. For those living in family households, we also examine any differences in family composition and childcare arrangements.¹ The analysis includes all current and ex-serving members aged between 18 and 60 years.² The corresponding civilians, those who have never served in the ADF, are restricted to persons of a similar age group.³

Introduction

Previous research has demonstrated that military service offers unique rewards and challenges for service personnel that can affect relationships and parenting arrangements in distinctive ways. Research from other OECD countries suggests military personnel marry younger and are more likely to separate or divorce than their civilian counterparts (Kelley, 2005; Selous et al., 2020). Additionally, a study of the Canadian Armed Forces found that the demands of military service make it difficult for service members to take on primary or sole responsibility for the care of their children (Pahl, 2019). While studies show that ADF members experience similar rewards and challenges to military personnel in other OECD countries (Hughes et al., 2023), there have been few studies of military and veteran families in Australia to determine whether they differ from civilian families in any marked way at the population level.

In Australia, the military’s demographics have changed over the past decade, with an increasing number of female service members (Defence, 2023), members with employed partners and dual-serving couples (Defence, 2020). Like many careers, the demands of military service can compete with family responsibilities, making it difficult to balance work and family life. Despite these demands, the ADF offers a range of benefits and entitlements for its members and their families that aim to support family wellbeing. International research suggests that this support for serving members and their families can aid service personnel to form and maintain marital or partner relationships (Hogan & Steifert, 2010). Conversely, the loss of this support when members exit service can heighten the risk of relationship separation (Hogan & Steifert, 2010).

In 2021, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Census asked for the first time about current and former service in the ADF. This snapshot uses these data to examine differences in the family circumstances of current and ex-serving ADF personnel and the civilian population. These comparisons are presented using graphs and figures and are matched by age and sex (where data permits). In additional analysis, we restrict the sample to those in employment to explore whether population-level differences remain when we compare current serving members to the subset of ex-serving members and civilians in other forms of employment. While the census data enables us to provide a picture of what current and ex-serving families in Australia looked like in 2021, and similarities or differences that may exist with civilian families, we are not able to draw conclusions as to what may or may not cause these similarities or differences.

Employment and age profile of current and ex-serving ADF men and women

The ADF is a volunteer military service comprising regular and reserve personnel.⁴ There were 82,317 current serving Defence members aged 18–60 across Australia in 2021 (ABS, 2021).⁵ This includes 59,505 regular and 22,812 reserve members.

While males make up the majority of the Defence Force, the share of female members is rising (Defence, 2020). In 2021, 80% of current-serving members aged 18–60 were male (including 46,893 regular and 18,374 reserve members). The remaining 20% were female (including 12,612 regular and 4,438 reserve members).

Of the current serving members aged 18–60, 85% of regular and 67% of reserve members worked full-time hours (i.e. 35+ hours) in the week before census night (ABS, 2021).⁶ Female members (regular and reservists) were more likely to work part time than their male counterparts.

Regular members are generally younger than reserves, ex-serving members and civilians, with many regular members transitioning to the civilian workforce after separating from the ADF (AIHW, 2022), the reserves, or a combination of civilian employment and reserve service.

According to the Census (ABS, 2021), there were 197,307 ex-serving members in the age group 18–60 in 2021, and 60% were employed full time. However, this percentage varied by sex. Ex-serving male members were more likely (63.7%) to be employed full time than their female counterparts (45.0%).

Relationship and family circumstances of current and ex-serving ADF members and civilians

Figure 1 shows the proportion of current and ex-serving members who are single, de facto and married and how this compares to the civilian population.⁷ Male current (regular and reserve) and ex-serving members are more likely to be in a relationship (de facto and legally married) than civilian males, but female regular service members are less likely to be in a relationship than other women (55.0% versus 62.1% of female reserve members, 62.9% of female ex-serving members and 61.1% of women who have never served).

Figure 1: Proportion of Defence and civilian populations who are single, de facto and married by sex

Notes: The figure excludes around 20% of current ADF members in non-private dwellings or non-classified households. The corresponding values for ex-serving members and civilians are 7% and 6%, respectively.
Source: ABS 2021 Census microdata (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Figure 2 shows the association between relationship status and serving status by age and by sex. Current (regular and reserve) and ex-serving men are more likely to be in a relationship and legally married than civilian men in every age group. For women, the association between relationship status and serving status varies by age. In the under-30 age group, current (regular and reserve) and ex-serving women are more likely to be in a relationship than civilian women. But in every age group above 30, current serving women are more likely to be single than those who have never served. When we replicate this figure for women in full-time employment, the pattern remains – it shows full-time current serving (regular and reserve) and ex-serving women under 30 are more likely to be in a relationship than women in full-time civilian employment, whereas, in all age groups above 30, they are more likely to be single.

The fact that current and ex-serving men are more likely to be in a relationship than civilian men might initially be explained by some broad workforce-related differences between the civilian population and the military population. The figures for civilian men include working-age men who are unemployed (a factor that is not applicable in the military population), and men who are unemployed are less likely to be partnered than other men (Boorah, 2002). When we undertook additional analysis of the association between relationship and serving status for those in employment, the pattern remains but the difference is smaller (e.g. 69.7% of regular serving men are in a relationship versus 63.9% of employed civilian men).

The greater tendency of ADF men to be in a relationship may also reflect incentives to partner for those in the military. As noted, research from other OECD countries has found that military men marry younger than civilian men with matched characteristics (Karney et al., 2012), and this has been attributed to military compensation policies that incentivise marriage (Hogan & Seifert, 2010). When we look at the association between relationship and serving status for those in employment, current and ex-serving men under 30 were much more likely to be in a relationship than comparable men in civilian employment (51.1% versus 27.6%), providing some evidence that military men partner younger.

The fact that serving women are less likely to be in a relationship than serving men (and civilian women, at least in age groups above 30) may reflect that they are more likely than men to reduce their work hours to accommodate family responsibilities (Baxter, 2023) – and those in relationships are more likely to have caring responsibilities. While part-time work is an option available to regular service members, research shows it is rarely utilised, and the stigma of working less than full-time remains strong in some units (Defence, 2023). Some regular service members transfer to the reserves when they have children, which generally provides more flexible employment conditions.⁸ Defence (2023) research shows that serving women are currently transferring to the reserves at a similar rate to men but there are gender differences in the type of flexible and reserve work undertaken. Research also shows that women’s ADF careers are generally shorter than men’s (Defence, 2019b), and they are retained at a lower rate following parental leave (Defence, 2019a).

Figure 2: Proportion of Defence and civilian populations who are single, de facto and married, male and female, by age

Source: ABS, 2021 Census microdata (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Family composition

We classify the sample population living in family households into 4 family types: couple-only families, couple-parent families, single-parent families and other families.⁹ Figure 3 illustrates the differences in these family types across current regular and reserve members, ex-serving members and civilians. It shows that couples with children make up the highest proportion of all families and a higher share of reserves and civilian families than regular and ex-serving members’ families (60.9% of reserves and 60.8% of civilians versus 56.9% of regular and 57.9% of ex-serving). Regular members are most likely (36.5%) to be in couple-only families and much more likely than reserves (29.9%) and ex-serving members (30.8%) or those in the civilian population (23.9%). This likely reflects their age profile and life stage.

As highlighted in the next section, the other noteworthy pattern in Figure 3 is that single-parent families are less common among the military than the civilian population.

Figure 3: Proportion of couples and other families in Defence and civilian populations

Note: The values for other families are suppressed due to small numbers.
Source: ABS, 2021 Census TableBuilder (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Figure 4 shows that regular service members under 30 are less likely to be in families with children than reserves, ex-serving members and civilians, with a larger share in couple-only families in this age group (more than 65%). We know (from Figure 2 above) that serving men and women under 30 are more likely to be partnered than their civilian counterparts, which partly explains this pattern. Supplementary analysis shows that a smaller share of regular and reserve women under 30 are parents than civilian women in this age group¹⁰ but if we restrict the sample to those in full-time employment, the differences are negligible; and there is little difference in the share of regular, reserve and civilian men under 30 who are parents.¹¹ For both men and women under 30, a higher share of ex-serving members are parents – suggesting a link between becoming a parent and transitioning from military to other forms of employment.

Figure 4: Proportion of couples and other families in Defence and civilian populations by age

Note: The values for other families are suppressed due to small numbers.
Source: ABS, 2021 Census TableBuilder (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Families with children: Couple versus single-parent families

For the subpopulation of families with children, Figure 5 further shows differences in the share of couple-parent and single-parent families across current regular and reserve members, ex-serving members, and civilians aged 18–60. Single-parent families are less common among the current serving population than among the civilian population (9.6% of regular service members are in single-parent families with children, compared with 12.1% of reserves and 18.5% of civilians) – a pattern also shown in previous Australian and US research (AIHW, 2023; Kelley, 2005). This holds when controlling for both age and sex – that is, current (regular and reserve) serving members are less likely than civilians to be in single-parent families in every age group.¹²

While managing work and family life can be challenging for all parents, the challenge of balancing care and work responsibilities can be greater for single parents because they often have sole responsibility for the day-to-day care of their children. US research has shown that childcare can be a considerable expense for single military parents and being able to find high-quality and affordable childcare may affect the parent’s decision to remain in service (Kelley, 2005). The challenge of balancing childcare and military requirements may be further compounded for single parents if they do not reside in the same area as an ex-partner and/or other family members (Kelley, 2005).

Figure 5: Proportion of single- and couple-parent families in Defence and civilian populations

Source: ABS, 2021 Census microdata (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Step- and blended families

It is useful to understand the share of intact versus step- and blended families in Defence populations as they may have different support needs.¹³ As with single parents, step- and blended families may require more complex strategies for managing work and family commitments. If their children spend time living with another parent, for example, this needs to be considered in decisions about service relocations.

Figure 6 shows the proportion of intact versus step- and blended families in Defence and civilian populations.¹⁴ The results show that the share of intact families is higher among civilian populations than in Defence populations, but the difference is small. The share of step- and blended families is highest among ex-serving members.

Figure 6: Proportion of intact, step- and blended families in Defence and civilian populations

Source: ABS 2021 Census microdata (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Figure 7 shows that these results generally also hold when broken down by age. The share of intact families is higher in the civilian population than the Defence population in most age groups (all except those aged under 30). The share of step- and blended families is higher among ex-serving members than it is among current serving (regular and reserves) members and civilians in almost every age group. Supplementary analysis indicates this pattern applies to Defence members and civilians in full-time employment, categorised by similar age groups.

Figure 7: Proportion of intact, step- and blended families in Defence and civilian populations by age

Source: ABS 2021 Census microdata (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

Children in military families are more likely to be absent from the family home

Given the nature of service roles, having substantial childcare responsibilities may be difficult for current serving members compared to ex-serving members and civilians. Defence personnel who are single parents may face more challenges than Defence personnel with partners willing and able to care for their children at home (Hughes et al., 2023). To further explore what this might mean for military families, Figure 8 shows how many current (regular and reserves), ex-serving and civilian parents in single-parent households reported one or more dependent children temporarily absent from their household on census night.¹⁵ The proportion is more than twice as high for current serving single-parent families than civilian single-parent families in every age bracket.¹⁶ This corroborates the notion that current serving single parents are less likely to provide direct parental care due to military service commitments.

Figure 8: Proportion of single-parent families reporting one or more children away from home on census night in Defence and civilian populations by parent age

Source: ABS, 2021 Census microdata (excludes parents between ages 18 and 29 as their numbers are very small).

The patterns in Figure 8 generally hold for male and female single parents.¹⁷ However, male single parents are more likely than female single parents to report a child absent on census night in every age bracket described in Figure 8, regardless of serving status. This likely reflects gender differences in responsibilities taken for work versus caregiving in Australian families generally.

Regular service members are less likely to spend time caring for children

To further explore how military service commitments might affect parenting arrangements, Figure 9 shows the proportion of current and ex-serving parents who spent time caring for children in the 2 weeks prior to census night, without pay, by the age of their youngest child.

Female regular service members with children under 15 were less likely to report spending time caring for children than comparably aged reserve, ex-serving and civilian women.¹⁸ This pattern also applied to male members with the youngest child under 10 (though the difference was smaller).

Ex-serving and reserve men were more likely to spend time caring for children than civilian and regular serving males, regardless of the age of the youngest child. This pattern also applies to ex-serving women and reserve women whose youngest child was aged between 10 and 14. Again, this may be because some ADF members transition out of regular full-time service to manage their caring responsibilities, including into reserve service, as many of the reserve service categories provide more flexible employment conditions.

Figure 9: Proportion of Defence and civilian parents providing unpaid childcare in the 2 weeks prior to census night, male and female, by age of the youngest child

Notes: ‘Provide childcare’ does not include formal care and combines 3 categories of informal or unpaid care: cared for own children, cared for other children, and cared for own children and other children. See also footnote 1 for details.
Source: ABS, 2021 Census microdata (includes adults aged 18–60 years)

In additional analysis, we examined the proportion of current and ex-serving parents who spent time caring for their own children in the 2 weeks prior to census night (without pay) by parent age, restricting the sample to those in full-time employment. The above patterns remain for younger age groups.

For example, 86% of mothers under 40 in civilian full-time employment reported providing unpaid care to their own children in the two weeks prior to census night, compared to 82% of women in full-time regular service, and 90% of ex-serving and reserve women in full-time employment. (As the numbers in these groups are quite small, the patterns should be interpreted with caution). Similarly, 87% of full-time employed civilian fathers under 30 reported providing care to their own children in the two weeks prior to census night, compared to 81% of men in full-time regular service, 89% of full-time employed male reserves and 87% of ex-serving males in full-time employment.

Conclusion

Due to the unique nature of military service, the family circumstances of current and ex-serving members might be expected to differ from the general Australian population. The inclusion of a veteran identifier in the 2021 Australian Census has enabled us to examine this, for the first time, at the whole of population level. It shows:

• Current and ex-serving men are more likely to be in a relationship and be legally married than civilian men, while the reverse largely holds true for women.
• Single-parent families are less common in the military, whereas step- and blended families are more common.
• Children are more likely to be absent from the family home on census night for those in the military, compared to civilian families.
• Parents in full-time regular service are less likely than other parents to report providing care for their children in the 2 weeks prior to census night.

These census data confirm that the relationship and family circumstances of serving men and women differ from their counterparts in the general population. This is partly due to the distinctive age and gender profile of serving members. However, some differences remain when current and ex-serving members are matched with civilians in terms of age, gender and employment status.

It is not possible to draw conclusions about what may or may not explain these patterns. However, the findings suggest that the demands of military service affect relationships and patterns of childcare within families. And that maintaining a regular service job may be difficult for those who are primary carers. Defence has undertaken substantial efforts to retain those with caring responsibilities through the provision of flexible service options (including part time regular service and a range of reserve service options in the Total Workforce System) in addition to other family supports. The patterns in these data suggest that some serving men and women are using these flexible work options, while others are transitioning out of the ADF.

References

Australian War Memorial. (2023). Conscription. Canberra. www.awm.gov.au/articles/encyclopedia/conscription, accessed September 2024.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2021). Population: Census. Canberra: ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/population-census/latest-release.

Australian Defence Force [ADF]. (2024). ADF Total Workforce System. Canberra: ADF. pay-conditions.defence.gov.au/adf-total-workforce-system.

Australian Institute of Health Welfare [AIHW]. (2022). Understanding the wellbeing characteristics of ex-serving ADF members. Canberra: AIHW. www.aihw.gov.au/reports/veterans/wellbeing-characteristics-of-ex-serving-adf

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2023). Veteran loneliness and social isolation. Canberra: AIHW.

Baxter, J. (2023). Employment of men and women across the life course. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Borooah, V. K. (2002). Does unemployment make men less ‘marriageable’? Applied Economics, 34(12), 1571–1582. doi.org/10.1080/00036840110108044

Department of Defence. (2019a). Defence annual report 2018–2019. Canberra: Department of Defence.

Department of Defence. (2019b). Women in the ADF Report 2018–19: A supplement to the Defence Annual Report 2018–19. Canberra: Department of Defence.

Department of Defence. (2020). Defence Census Workforce Compositional Change: 1991–2019. Canberra: Department of Defence.

Department of Defence. (2023). Women in the Australian Defence Force (ADF) 2021–2022: Ten years in review (DPIR-TR-031/2023). Canberra: Department of Defence.

Hogan, P. F., & Seifert, F. R. (2010). Marriage and the military: Evidence that those who serve marry earlier and divorce earlier. Armed Forces & Society, 36(3), 420–438. doi.org/10.1177/0095327x09351228

Hughes, J., Gahan, L., & Smart, J. (2023). Strengthening defence and veteran couple relationships through relationship education. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies. aifs.gov.au/research/research-reports/strengthening-defence-veteran-couple-relationships

Karney, B. R., Loughran, D. S., & Pollard, M. S. (2012). Comparing marital status and divorce status in civilian and military populations. Journal of Family Issues, 33(12), 1572–1594. doi.org/10.1177/0192513x12439690

Kelley, M.L. (2005). Single military parents in the new millennium. In T.W. Britt, C.A. Castro, & A.B. Adler. (Eds.), Military life: The psychology of serving in peace and combat. Vol. 3, (pp. 93–114). Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Pahl, P. S. (2019). Women and job satisfaction in today’s Canadian Armed Forces’ climate. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 11(1), 4–8.

Selous, A., Walker, J., & Misca, G. (2020). Living in our shoes: Understanding the needs of the UK Armed Forces. www.gov.uk/government/publications/living-in-our-shoes-understanding-the-needs-of-uk-armed-forces-families

¹The census offers limited information on childcare arrangements. It includes the provision of unpaid care for one’s own or other children in the 2 weeks before census night and excludes paid care for a child given through an organisation. Additionally, the census does not specify the type of care provided or the amount of time spent on direct childcare.

 ²While a person can join the ADF when they are under 18 years of age, the number of service members under 18 is low and these young recruits are generally not in a relationship (married or de facto). Similarly, the retirement age for regular service members is 60 and 65 for reserves and only a small fraction continues their service beyond age 60 (0.9% of regular members and 6.58% of reserves). A separate analysis of census data for ex-serving ADF members aged 60+ years (which includes many who served in Operation Desert Shield and all of those who served in Vietnam) could be conducted. 

³The derived sample results in a population of 13.2 million. The civilian group may include partners/spouses of serving and ex-serving ADF members and those who are employed, unemployed or marginally attached to the labour force.

 ⁴Compulsory military training (the National Service Scheme) existed between 1951 and 1959, and again between 1964 and 1972 including 15,381 service men who serviced in the Vietnam War (Australian War Memorial, 2023).

 ⁵These >numbers do not include Defence personnel posted or deployed overseas on census night.

 ⁶The hours worked are the total hours worked by the employed person in all jobs the week before census night. These figures do not distinguish the share of a reserve’s hours spent in reserve versus civilian work the week before census night.

⁷Singles (those not in a relationship) are defined to include those living alone or with other family members and those in shared accommodation.

 ⁸Under the Total Workforce System, implemented in 2016, ADF members are allocated to one of six service categories. Categories 6 and 7 are regular members of the permanent forces. The majority are in Service Category 7, defined as permanent full-time service. A small share is Service Category 6, defined as permanent part-time. Categories 5 to 2 are reserve members who may have an ongoing work pattern, a periodic work pattern, or be only called on occasionally as needed. The different categories of reserve service, therefore, have differing levels of commitment to work and respond at short notice, accompanied by differences in remuneration and employment conditions. The introduction of the system was intended to provide individuals with a range of service options, to help them balance service responsibilities and personal commitments (Defence, 2023).

 ⁹The definition of a couple is based on 2 persons usually residing in the same household who share a social, economic and emotional bond identified by a registered marriage or de facto relationship. A single-parent family consists of a parent with at least one child (regardless of age) who is usually resident in the household and has no identified partner or child of their own. A single-parent family may also include any number of other related individuals. Couple- and single-parent families include dependent children under 15 and students aged 15–24. In addition to couples and single-parent families, siblings and other relatives aged 15 and above can live together, forming other families. 

¹⁰For example, among those aged 25–29, 26% of veteran women and 24% of civilian women have children, compared to 14% and 13% of regular and reserve women, respectively.

¹¹Derived from relationships in the resident household. Defined as parent if counted in the same family on census night (includes personnel recorded as ‘temporarily absent’) and inclusive of dependent children under 15 years, dependent students aged 15–24 years and non-dependent children present in the family (www.abs.gov.au/census/guide-census-data/census-dictionary/2021/variables-topic/household-and-families/parent-indicator-fpip).

 ¹²We have not shown the breakdown by sex due to the small number of observations of male members in single-parent families.

 ¹³Intact families include only child/ren who are the natural or adopted child of both partners in the couple (no step-children). A step-family contains one or more children, at least one of whom is the step-child of one of the partners in the couple, and none of whom is the natural and adopted child of both members of the couple. A blended family contains 2 or more children, of whom at least one is the natural or adopted child of both members of the couple, and at least one is the step-child of either partner in the couple. All 3 family types may also include foster children.

 ¹⁴Due to small counts, we combined step- and blended families and did not break down results by sex.

 ¹⁵‘Dependent children’ includes those under 15 and students aged 15–24.

 ¹⁶We also looked at this for couple-parent families and found the same pattern but the results are not shown due to small numbers in the ‘one or more absent’ category.

¹⁷We have not shown any graph by sex due to the small number of female single parents in the ‘one or more absent’ category.

¹⁸This analysis is based on a variable (CHCAREP) that records people who, in the 2 weeks prior to census night, spent time caring for a child or children aged under 15 without pay. It includes people caring for their own children (whether or not they usually live with them), looking after other children in the family (such as grandchildren or children of relatives) and looking after children of friends and neighbours (ABS, 2021).