Official Site of the U.S. Air Force   Right Corner Banner
Join the Air Force

News > DADT repeal study reveals no loss in readiness, retention
 
Photos 
Academy experts discuss effects of DADT repeal
A panel comprising the Air Force Academy's senior chaplain, the chief diversity officer, an attorney with the judge advocate office and a professor in the Behavioral Sciences and Leadership Department spoke about the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and its effects on the Air Force Academy in early October. (U.S. Air Force image/Don Branum)
Download HiRes
DADT repeal study reveals no loss in readiness, retention

Posted 9/28/2012   Updated 9/27/2012 Email story   Print story

    


by Don Branum
Air Force Academy Public Affairs


9/28/2012 - U.S. AIR FORCE ACADEMY, Colo. (AFNS) -- Two professors with the Behavioral Sciences and Leadership Department here contributed to a study released by the Palm Center Sept. 20 that reaffirmed findings in the Defense Department's 2010 comprehensive working review group prior to the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Col. Gary Packard Jr., the Behavioral Sciences and Leadership Department head, and Dr. Steven Samuels, a professor in the same department, are two of four service academy instructors who contributed to the study, which found that repealing DADT had no effect on recruiting, retention or readiness.

What's notable about the paper, Samuels said, is that "it's been described as 40 single-spaced pages of 'nothing happened.'"

While no significant changes in military readiness occurred -- as studies have predicted for nearly 20 years since the Rand Corporation study in 1993 -- the available data soundly disproves statements by retired flag officers that repeal would "undermine recruiting and retention ... and eventually break the all-volunteer force."

"I think this paper, more than anything else, is a vindication for why we value science over simple opinion," Samuels said.

The study acknowledges that some people's morale dropped because they don't agree with the change but notes that the positive effect on morale of gay, lesbian and bisexual service members balanced it out.

"The bottom line is, when you look at the key attributes -- can we do our job, can we fight the nation's wars, will it affect the readiness of the United States military -- we predicted the answer would be no," Packard said. "And the data at least one year out suggests that the answer is that this does not affect the key factors of the military's ability to do its job."

The environment at the Academy didn't significantly change after DADT was repealed, Samuels said.

"I don't think anyone's noticed anything," he said. "There was a pride flag on Sept. 20 last year that appeared on the Ring Wall, and I haven't heard anything else."

"The anniversary came and went," Packard added. "Not a peep."

One reason for that might be that cadets don't see it as a big deal.

"I wouldn't say nobody cares, but it's a fairly small minority," Packard said.

He said the most memorable response from a cadet was, "Well, some people's Facebook statuses have changed, and that's about it."

Dr. Dave Levy, a professor with the Management Department, also contributed to the study. Levy recalled talking to cadets in a class for Rhodes and Marshall scholar applicants about DADT before the repeal last year.

"A kid raises his hand and says, 'Sir, no offense, but why are you here?' And I said, 'None taken. I'm here to talk about DADT. Isn't it a significant issue?'" he said.

The cadet replied that no one cared because they all knew gay and lesbian cadets were already here.

"It wasn't just one cadet," Levy said. "There was a whole lot of agreement, and the big issue was, why are we making a non-issue an issue? The issue was that DADT existed when the culture had actually changed already, and I think it took us a while to recognize that the culture moved without us."

However, that's not to say there's no conflict at all or that there won't be in the future, Packard said.

"It's naïve to think we're not going to have incidents," he said. "But we've had incidents based on race since we've integrated racially; we've had incidents based on gender since we've integrated women more fully into the force.

"We still ... have people who are really struggling with this issues, who don't agree with it, and that's fine," he continued. "The resolution of this is not to change everyone's mind to work the same way. The resolution of this is, how do you professionally deal with these incredibly difficult differences of opinion and do it in a proper way?"

For the Defense Department, the answer was to get commanders in front of the policy change.

"What really matters from a military leadership perspective is ... you ought to see me as the commander supporting the policies and the laws of the land in accordance with my oath of office and really not have a good perspective on where I stand on this issue personally," Packard said. "I might talk personally to my commander when I disagree with the policy, but when I'm out in public, I'm a servant of this nation, and I follow the laws of this land."

That's what Packard witnessed while deployed as the 379th Air Expeditionary Wing's director of staff when the training rolled out.

"I went to probably greater than 80 percent of the individual commanders' briefings," Packard said. "I can tell you without exception, every commander stood up and delivered the (repeal) message correctly. I can tell you from talking to them personally, not all of them agreed with the change."

The emphasis on professional leadership is a sharp contrast from the climate when women entered the Air Force Academy, Packard said.

"When I was a four-degree, the class of '79, the last all-male class, were seniors. So I got to see that transition firsthand, and that was an openly debated topic in classrooms," he said. "Faculty members were not shy about telling you their opinions about whether or not women should be here, pro and con."

"Not all commanders were on board. You heard commanders saying, 'Come on, we've got to do this. It's a dumb idea, but you know we've got to do this,' which is why it was so brutal for (women in) those early classes," Samuels added.

"Much different leadership message than what we got last year," Packard said.

Opponents of the repeal have said it's too early to tell what the repeal's full effect will be, but Samuels disagreed.

"We know from behavioral science that most of your problems come when they're proximal, not when they're distal --that is, most of the problems come immediately, not in the distant future," he said. "You had more racial problems when desegregation happened immediately, not afterwards. So to say that things are going to become worse over time ... doesn't hit reality at any two contiguous points."

Packard holds a Doctorate in Developmental Psychology from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. Samuels has a PhD in psychology from Stanford University. Levy, a 1988 Academy graduate, has a PhD in organizational behavior from Webster University.



tabComments
10/4/2012 4:04:41 PM ET
So JP you can come on here and express opinions like homosexuality etc. but nobody else can Maybe you should just not read the ignorance here and then you won't be astounded. I did not intend nor perceive anything inflammatory in here at all.
Paul, SATX
 
10/4/2012 2:47:52 PM ET
Someone in this made a very good point all that matters here is the law of the land. In this case that's DADT Repeal and we don't get to act outside of that as servicemen. Your religious or personal beliefs have zero bearing on any of this and should be kept in check as a professional military member. If you have an issue with that you can do what others whose personal beliefs place them in conflict with the law of government says and depart. To attach sexual crimes to the DADT repeal is a bit far fetched and sensational with no intent other than to cloud the real issue. I don't care for homosexuality but on the bigger scale it's not going to ruin my day in the context of the job getting done. The ignorance here astounds me and makes me wonder if the AF.mil site needs to revise it's participation policies to keep such inflamatory discussions completely above board.
JP, VA
 
10/4/2012 10:57:24 AM ET
PSNCO good point. That was and is a foul but I'll still argue that the people of color had no choice as opposed to homosexual behavior. As a side note, Darwin would not be happy with the progress we've made on your point. And Analyst my last line was more of a generic statement than directed at anything you said in your comments. I should have made that clear. I stand by my comment about unfair comparison and certainly realize it won't drive policy.
Paul, SATX
 
10/4/2012 8:16:20 AM ET
Paul: Allow me to adapt Stuart's original post to fit the situation better. Interracial relationships were a moral issue for many and still are for some. Many localities criminalized it as miscegenation. Society in general and the military in particular have moved past considering this an objectionable behavior, yet some would still decry the military for allowing it within the ranks. It is their right to hold predjudices but not their right to foist them upon others. Perhaps that sounds familiar.
Probationary SNCO, Ramstein
 
10/3/2012 9:49:13 PM ET
Paul, I think you are missing the point. Say your belief all you want. I am telling you why beliefs don't get to drive public policy. And if you read what I wrote, I did not call you homophobic, intolerant or a right wing fanatic.
Analyst, USAFA
 
10/3/2012 1:48:42 PM ET
Again Analyst, you did not read my original post. I simply said that comparing race and gender integration to DADT is not a fair comparison. I then stated my beliefs. YOU turned it in to me forcing my religion on others, not I. I believe this is what Dave was saying. Can't even state an opinion without someone calling us homophobic, intolerant, right wing fanatics.
Paul, SATX
 
10/3/2012 11:24:19 AM ET
Dave and Paul, holding others to the tenants of your religion is pushing your religion on them. This is not infringement of freedom of speech. You get to say whatever you like. It isn't even infringing upon your freedom of religion because you still get to believe as you want and choose for yourself if you want to condone or participate in homosexuality. You just don't get to make the decision for others or descriminate against them for their consentual acts.
Analyst, USAFA
 
10/3/2012 3:39:26 AM ET
@Analyst You're last comment is what the problem is. You folks are quick to point out that that we should not force our values on others but fail to see it from our perspective. We feel that you are pushing your values onto us. We get hammered if we disagree with them.
Dave, Kabul
 
10/2/2012 5:02:03 PM ET
Analyst you had an understandable response in your first reply to me and then had to go into a different mode and misquote me. Nowhere did I say I wanted to force my religion on anyone. Just another example of freedom of speech unless you happen to be Christian.
Paul, SATX
 
10/2/2012 9:59:38 AM ET
More heterosexual men are responsible for crimes than alternate sexual preference men ever were. If you would check the jails, prisons, criminal records...who are responsible for those types of crimes? Surprise, not gay men! FYI, no I am not gay nor a man. As a taxpayer, I say ANY PERSON who is willing to fight for their country should not have their sexual orientation determine if they are fit to do so.
Shaw, Dallas TX
 
10/2/2012 9:45:51 AM ET
Maj, Incest, rape and murder have nothing to do with homosexuality. What two consenting adults do in their bedroom is none of your business. Paul, Just because it is in your bible does not mean you get to force other people to follow your religion.
Analyst, USAFA
 
10/2/2012 9:11:49 AM ET
@Jay and @Maj....Jay, this SNCO agrees with the study. I have seen no adverse consequences nor did I expect to. Major, really how can you compare rape to consensual behavior? If you do not agree with the repeal, either retire or leave the military. The choice is yours. But honestly, can you say that you agree with everything your commander/supervisor says? Of course not but after voicing your objections privately, you go press on and salute smartly.
SMSgt K, Langley
 
10/1/2012 6:52:31 PM ET
Paul, We know from behavioral science that most of your problems come when they're proximal not when they're distal --that is most of the problems come immediately not in the distant future, Samuels said.
Analyst, USAFA
 
10/1/2012 4:49:41 PM ET
As a Retired Master Sergeant with 22 years in the USAF, all I can add is that I Came Out 2 months ago to my family at the age of 46. During my 22 years in the Air Force My morals were kept and the fact that I'm Gay I managed to put the Air Force First and lived a lonely, boring, celebate life. It was supervising the Straight People that provided most of my entertaining and challenging moments.Peace Out
Alan Campbell, Scott AFB IL
 
10/1/2012 11:32:25 AM ET
Eighty percent of rapes among service members in Iraq were male-on-male ... in 2008. So Jay don't talk to us about extra men who were raped in the military since the repeal. Rape has nothing to do with sexual preference.
PB, US
 
10/1/2012 11:05:07 AM ET
I think the best course of action for anyone who's morally opposed to homosexual behavior is to not engage themselves in homosexual acts and not worry about how anyone ELSE lives.
PB, US
 
10/1/2012 8:20:08 AM ET
Stuart most definitions of morality deal with actions. In the case of racial and gender people of color and women had no choice in that they were born that way and therefore that is an issue of bias. I know you'll argue that homosexuals were born that way but I'd argue that they still have a choice on whether they choose to act out homosexual acts. The bible calls those unnatural acts. Therefore I believe it is an unfair comparison.
Paul, SATX
 
10/1/2012 6:45:05 AM ET
Nothing like going to the kiddies that have been indoctrinated with this stuff since childhood to get backing for your positon. Col Packard says no one cares about this issue. I wonder if the extra men that were raped in the military since the repeal went into effect have that same opinion Ooooops I guess it was bad that I let that little fact out in the open since some in the DoD try so hard to keep it quiet. ColPackard why don't you go out into the field and ask a larger sampling of folks I can assure you none of my old troops who are now Sr NCO's agrees with it
Jay SMSgt ret, DC
 
9/30/2012 12:09:00 PM ET
Stuart does that mean that incest rape and murder are not moral issues because some individuals see them as being ok and someday rapists and murderers will not be arrested and charged with crimes and therefore be allowed in the military If you answer yes I'm going to get a swastika tattooed on my face and see if you think that is still ok for me to serve. A very large group of people were once good to go with what that represented as well.
Maj, Home for a change
 
9/30/2012 2:56:17 AM ET
Race and gender WERE moral issues at one point as well -- our nation was divided and fought a war over slavery and women were not allowed to vote until about 100 years ago. All because blacks and women were considered inferior or deserving of less rights by the moral majority of the day. Islamic nations still hold the same views of women so how is any discrimination not a moral issue
Stuart, Planet Earth
 
9/28/2012 1:31:35 PM ET
Once again people are trying to compare racial or gender integration to a moral issue. Not a fair comparison. I have nothing against homosexuals in general but I am morally opposed to homosexual behavior and I believe that's how most that are against the repeal of DADT feel. Race and gender simply were not morality issues. I believe this honeymoon period will soon be over.
Paul, SATX
 
9/28/2012 10:42:59 AM ET
Chalk up another win for science. I think this paper more than anything else is a vindication for why we value science over simple opinion. I love that quote.
Analyst, USAFA
 
Add a comment

 Inside AF.mil

ima cornerSearch

tabSubscribe AF.MIL
tabMore HeadlinesRSS feed 
Discovery Channel series highlights C-17

Elmendorf P38 Lightning  4

Welsh honors two Airmen from AFMAO  1

Airmen showcase C-17 to New Zealanders  1

Retroactive Stop Loss application deadline nears

'REEP'ing the rewards of energy conservation

13th Air Force inactivates, merges with PACAF  |  VIDEO

Electronic payments required for TRICARE Reserve Select and Retired Reserve monthly premiums  2

Operation Deep Freeze main season begins

One family, one mission, a lifetime of readiness

Academy identifies cadet who died Sept. 28

Air Force stands up single unit to execute global CE operations  1

NORTHCOM marks 10 years protecting U.S. homeland

OSI introduces new smartphone anonymous tip line  3

tabCommentaryRSS feed 
First things first: Get your degrees in order  6

Special needs families find support from DoD panel


Site Map      Contact Us     Questions     Security and Privacy notice     E-publishing