The Transition Mapping Study -Understanding the Transition Process for Service Personnel Returning to Civilian Life
Abstract: Since the Armed Forces Covenant was published in 2000, there has been increased interest in the process of helping Service people transition from the Armed Forces into civilian life. In 2006 this process was formalised when the Ministry of Defence published its Strategy for Veterans. The Forces in Mind Trust (FiMT), which has been set up to improve the transition process, commissioned The Futures Company to review existing research, to understand how the transition process currently works, how it is viewed by stakeholders and by recent Service leavers, to develop a model that quantified the costs of poor transition to the UK as a whole, and to make recommendations on how to reduce the number of poor transitions. The research focussed on fulltime personnel, not reservists. Transitioning from military service into civilian life is inevitable for almost all Armed Forces personnel; only a tiny proportion proceeds through to a full career. Most transitions are successful. One of the reasons for this is because of the resources invested in them by the Armed Forces. At the same time, a “good transition” is undefined. For the purposes of this project we developed with help from stakeholders the following definition: “A good transition is one that enables ex-Service personnel to be sufficiently resilient to adapt successfully to civilian life, both now and in the future. This resilience includes financial, psychological, and emotional resilience, and encompasses the ex-Service person and their immediate families.”
Abstract: Background: Exposure to potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) during military service can lead to moral injury (MI) outcomes and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). This longitudinal study examined the relationships between PMIE exposure, MI outcomes, and PTSS among Israeli combat veterans, and the potential protective role of dispositional forgiveness in these associations. Method: Participants were 169 Israeli combat veterans who participated in a six-year longitudinal study with four measurement points (T1: 12 months before enlistment, T2: Six months following enlistment- pre-deployment, T3: 18 months following enlistment- post-deployment, and T4: 28 months following discharge). Participants’ characteristics were assessed via semi-structured interviews (T1) and validated self-report measures (T2-T4) between 2019-2024. Results: Approximately 36% of participants reported exposure to PMIEs during service, with 13% exceeding the clinical threshold for probable PTSD at T4. PMIE-Betrayal at T3 was positively associated with MI outcomes of shame and trust violation at T4. The indirect effect of PMIEs on PTSS through MI outcome-Shame depended on forgiveness levels. Among veterans with low forgiveness, higher exposure to PMIE-Betrayal was associated with increased MI shame, which was linked to more severe PTSS. Conversely, for those with high forgiveness, exposure to PMIE-Self and Other was associated with decreased MI shame and subsequently reduced PTSS. Conclusion: Dispositional forgiveness moderates the relationship between PMIE exposure and MI outcomes, particularly shame, which mediates the development of PTSS. These findings highlight forgiveness as a potential target for intervention in treating moral injury and preventing PTSS among combat veterans.