Philip and many of the Terman men in the armed forces served in combat, but a significant number served in support roles. Some went overseas while others served in Washington, D.C., or on home bases. Many others contributed to the war effort in their civilian roles, especially as aircraft engineers, architects, chemists, and administrators, both inside and outside government. What they did and why they did it made a huge difference to their later health.
War and Stress
In Philip’s case, the war cost him dearly. As a child in 1922, fidgety Philip was described as charismatic and a bit vain, not particularly diligent for a smart student, and somewhat prone to anxiety. He was not one of the more conscientious Terman children, but with his intelligence and engaging interpersonal style he got along well. After he married Arlene in 1935, he was quite content sharing their interests in music and social activities. They had a baby girl, Margaret. But despite his good health, loving family, and steady work, Philip remained uneasy, according to his parents. His own self-assessment in 1940 corroborated this, suggesting that his childhood tendencies toward neuroticism and low conscientiousness had carried through into adulthood. In their 1936 report, his parents noted Philip’s apparent inability to save and be prudent with money, despite the tough economic times.
Philip joined the war effort and was soon a noncommissioned officer bound for the Aleutian Islands. By the time he returned home, in 1945, he had been swept far south and had seen combat in the Philippines, Guadalcanal, and the Solomon Islands. In addition to the stresses of combat, Philip felt the pain of the long separation from his wife and daughter. Shortly after his return, he reported feeling ambivalent about his wartime service. Although he realized that there were positive aspects to his service, he was frustrated and resentful over his circumstances and felt that both his child and his marriage had suffered as a result of his absence.
Philip and Arlene separated shortly after he returned from the Pacific, then reunited, then separated again. He felt that she “no longer cared” and that his time away had created an emotional distance between them. They were divorced in 1947. Philip remarried less than one year later. A light to moderate drinker before the war, Philip’s alcohol use increased dramatically upon his return. Research studies have shown this to be generally true—men exposed to trauma or extreme stress are very likely to increase their drinking and, if available, their use of other drugs.
In 1950 Philip responded to a question about his use of liquor by remarking, “I am a fairly heavy drinker; I drink to excess rather frequently but do not feel that it has interfered seriously with my work or relationships with others.” He stated that he still enjoyed music and was a member of the Chamber of Commerce, the Army and Navy Club, and the Elks.
In 1955 Philip reported having high blood pressure, insomnia, and congestive heart disease. By 1960 he listed more health problems, including “slight heart trouble” and angina. He was still engaged with the Army and Navy Club but indicated that his leisure time included “less physical activity.” He also noted that his attempts to stop drinking had been unsuccessful. When asked what aspects of his life brought him the most satisfaction he listed his marriage as most important, and his children second.
Over the next decade Philip kept drinking, reported suffering from depression, and indicated that his heart disease was worsening. In 1972 he described his health as “fair” and said that he had to limit some of his activities due to low energy levels. He stated that his work was “tolerable” but said he would be glad to escape it when it was time to retire, which he believed would be in just a few years. He was looking forward to having time to “do more of the things [we] never had time to do.” As he anticipated his retirement, he wasn’t able to say that he expected to enjoy those years thoroughly; instead he said that he had “little idea what life will be like then.” Philip didn’t get a chance to find out. He died at age sixty-four from a massive heart attack.
Desk Jockeys vs. Infantrymen: The Effects of Stressful War Service
Over two hundred of the Terman men were sent overseas in the war, while about one hundred were stationed and remained in the United States. To study the long-term effects of service in the armed forces, we teamed up with the distinguished sociologist Glen Elder and his colleagues Scott Brown and Elizabeth Clipp.91 The team’s research assistants, with knowledge of American military history, constructed records that documented the wartime experiences of each Terman study veteran.
After determining which of the servicemen went overseas, we analyzed whether they had faced combat. The combat experiences revealed in the records included being fired upon, witnessing death and destruction, and going missing or being taken prisoner. We also knew who had received Silver Stars and Purple Hearts.
We were not able, however, to ascertain the precise depth of combat each man faced. This means that our findings about the effects of war are underestimates, as some precision of measurement is missing. That is, things are probably even worse than what we found.
Looking at the risk of death during the half century following the end of the war, we discovered that the men who had served overseas were more than one and a half times as likely to die in any given year (after the war) than were those veterans who served only on the home front. That is, those who went overseas and survived their deployment were much more likely than their compatriots to become ill and pass away in the years after they returned home. Was it stress?
Where You Fight Your Battles
With Midway, the Marshall Islands, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, and more, the fighting in the Pacific was especially fierce, with sea battles, island warfare, and aircraft carrier-based air combat. So we zeroed in on fighting in this area. We asked whether duty in the Pacific theater of war—what Philip faced—produced different long-term consequences than did military service in Europe. Although the fight against the Nazis was certainly no picnic, the Pacific theater was especially brutal. Soldiers fighting in Asia faced tropical diseases, island-to-island fighting, distant cultures, and especially harsh enemy tactics.
In contrast to Philip, John spent three years doing intelligence work in England. Although his contribution was crucial to the war effort, and it entailed a good deal of stress, he didn’t usually have to worry about his personal safety and he was able to maintain regular contact with his parents and siblings back in Palo Alto, California. Late in the war, he knew about and had to come to terms with Nazi atrocities in the concentration camps. Some of his associates landed at Normandy on D-day, but none of his close friends were killed in combat. He maintained ties with his wartime “buddies” after his return home, transitioning rather smoothly back into his civilian job and life.
In a series of statistical analyses, we found that those men like Philip who fought against the Japanese in the Pacific theater were much more likely to die during the ensuing five postwar decades than were those men like John who served elsewhere overseas. The theater of fighting made a difference.
91
For more about our core study on the Terman veterans, see G. H. Elder, E. C. Clipp, J. S. Brown, L. R. Martin, and H. S. Friedman, “The Life-Long Mortality Risks of World War II Experiences,”