The Impact of Just and Unjust War Events on Mental Health Need and Utilization within U.S. Service Members.

Background: Soldiers are resilient to just war events, such as killing enemy combatants and life-threatening experiences, but these same soldiers appear to struggle with unjust war events, such as killing a noncombatant or being unable to help civilian women and children in need. This study is the first to examine how just and unjust war experiences are associated with clinical health service outcomes. Methods: Two samples of soldiers in different stages of readjustment from deployment were drawn from a longitudinal, survey-based study of a US Army brigade. Measures included items related to combat events, mental health utilization, perceived mental health need, PTSD, depression, and functional impairment. Results: After controlling for other kinds of combat events, just war events (i.e., life-threatening events and killing enemy combatants) predicted outcomes in soldiers who are less than three months post-deployment, but only predicted 2 of 26 outcomes in soldiers one year post deployment. In contrast, unjust war events were found to be robust predictors of short-term and long-term outcomes related to mental health need and utilization, even after controlling for exposure to other combat events. Conclusions: The results extend previous longitudinal research that suggests that exposure to unjust war events carry a heavier long-term mental health burden than other types of events. Additionally, Soldiers exposed to unjust war events had an unmet need for care one year post deployment that was not directly tied to PTSD or depression. The results question the emphasis on life-threat within mental health pathogenesis models.

Distinguishing the Effects of Life Threat, Killing Enemy Combatants, and Unjust War Events in U.S. Service Members.

Although previous studies have identified behavioral health risks associated with combat exposure, it is unclear which types of combat events are associated with these risks, particularly regarding contrasts among the risks associated with life-threatening experiences, killing combatants, and exposure to unjust war events, such as killing a noncombatant or being unable to help civilian women and children. In the present study, we examined surveys from 402 soldiers following deployment (i.e., baseline) and again 13 months later (i.e., Year 1). Regression analyses were conducted across a range of behavioral health (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, suicide ideation, anxiety, somatic, insomnia, aggression) and benefit-finding measures, each controlling for two combat event categories while assessing the predictive utility of a third. The results suggested that life-threatening events were associated with poor behavioral health at baseline, relative risk (RR) = 10.00, but not at Year 1, RR = 2.67. At both baseline and Year 1, killing enemy combatants was not associated with behavioral health, RRs = 1.67-3.33, but was positively associated with benefit-finding, RRs = 26.67-40.00. Exposure to unjust war events was associated with a transdiagnostic pattern of behavioral health symptoms at baseline, RR = 40.00, and Year 1, RR = 23.33. Overall, the results suggest unjust war event exposure is particularly injurious, above and beyond exposure to other combat-related events. Future research can build on these findings to develop clearer descriptions of the combat events that might place service members at risk for moral injury and inform the development of assessment and treatment options.