**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF**

**VETERANS AFFAIRS**

![](media/image1.png){width="4.688888888888889in" height="4.5in"}

***Women Veterans: Past, Present and Future***

**Revised and Updated**

**May 2005**

######### 

######### Robert E. Klein, Ph.D., 

######### Office of the Actuary

######### Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy,

**Assistant Secretary for Policy, Planning, and Preparedness**

***Women Veterans:***

***Past, Present, and Future***

**Revised and Updated**

**May 2005**

**Robert E. Klein, Ph.D.**

Women are a vital part of the armed forces and the community of
veterans. The study of women veterans begins with the history of women
in the military and the changing role of women in the military.

**[Women in the Military: A Historical Perspective in
Brief]{.underline}**

Women have served valiantly in America's wars and conflicts throughout
our history. And although women were not formally under military command
until the early part of the 20^th^ century, they have served in various
capacities, beginning with America's War of Independence.

During the American Revolution, it was not uncommon for wives, mothers,
and daughters to follow their male loved ones into battle. While they
tended to their men, they were often given rations in exchange for
service to the troops, mostly tending to the wounded and serving as
cooks, seamstresses, and launderers. Some women distinguished themselves
on the battlefield for the Continental Army. For example, Margaret
Corbin and Mary McCauley, who was a heroine in the Battle of Monmouth in
1778 and thought to be the model for the legendary Molly Pitcher, fought
in the Battle of Fort Washington in 1776 (Holm, pp.3-4). Later during
the Civil War, at least 400 women on both sides of the conflict
disguised themselves as men and assumed combat roles alongside men.
Women in surprisingly large numbers served in other unconventional roles
as well, acting as spies, saboteurs, and couriers as well as taking an
active part in the execution of the war. Most women who served, however,
assumed conventional civilian roles as cooks, caregivers, and nurses
(Holm, p. 6).

The institutionalization of the nursing corps as an auxiliary of the
Army, which started during the Spanish-American War in 1901 (Thomas, p.
3) by an act of Congress, is generally recognized as the event that
established women as a formal part of the military. In 1908, the Navy
followed suit and established its own nursing corps. By the end of WW I,
about 34,000 women served as nurses in all of the armed forces, which
included by then nurses in the Marines and Coast Guard as well as in the
Army and Navy. However, it is generally acknowledged that the nursing
corps was still effectively given only marginal status, since military
women still had no military rank or were not given the benefits provided
to men in the military and to male veterans (Holm, p. 9).

In spite of the secondary status of women in the military at the time,
WW I seems to have been a turning point in the history of women in the
military. The significant role of nurses and women serving in other
roles during WW I firmly established the importance of women to the
armed forces.

Changes in the civilian work force after WW I, which saw an increasing
number of women in clerical positions, also had a profound impact on the
military. Women filled such roles, thus expanding the kinds of work
women did in the military---that is, from work almost exclusively in
nursing, to other jobs as well (Holm, p. 11), particularly during WW II.

If WW I was a turning point for women in the military, WW II was the
time when women served in relatively large numbers, responding to an
all-out mobilization because of a desperate need for personnel.
Acceptance of these women was not always given willingly, both in
Congress and within the military itself. At the end of the war, nearly
280,000 women were serving out of 12 million in the armed forces. In
all, roughly 350,000 women served in the military during the course of
the war (Holm, p. 100). At the end of fiscal year 2004, there were an
estimated 178,000 living women veterans of WW II (Office of the Actuary,
December 2004).

It was during WW II when women were first given full military status
with the establishment of the Women's Army Corps (WAC) by Congress in
1943. The WAC was headed by Oveta Culp Hobby of Texas, who later became
the second woman to serve as a cabinet secretary (after Labor Secretary
Francis Perkins in Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration). She served
as secretary under President Eisenhower of what is now the Department of
Health and Human Services. The WAC, its predecessor, the Women's Army
Auxiliary Corps (WAAC), the Navy's WAVES (Women Accepted for Volunteer
Emergency Service) (established in 1942), the Marine Corps Women's
Reserve, the Coast Guard Women's Reserve (known as SPARS, *Semper*
*Paratus*-Always Ready) (established in 1942), and the WASPS (Women Air
Force Service Pilots, made up of civil service pilots) all contributed
immensely in various ways to the war effort.

In spite of the contributions of women during WW II, there was a feeling
in some circles, including Congress, that the role of women in the
military should be reduced in a post-WW II world and that a general
de-mobilization should occur. Indeed, many women did leave the military,
as did many men. However, one who was not of the view that women as a
group should be demobilized was General Eisenhower, who was Army Chief
of Staff at the time. Eisenhower was a strong advocate of legislation
passed in 1947 making the WAC part of the regular Army and Reserve
(Holm, p. 105). In 1948, President Harry Truman signed the Women's Armed
Services Integration Act, making women permanent members of the Regular
and Reserve forces of the Army, Navy, Marines and the newly-created Air
Force (Women in Military Service for America Memorial Foundation, p.2).
A year later, the Air Force Nurse Corps was recognized as a separate
branch of the Air Force. Another milestone, Truman's Executive Order
9981, ended racial segregation in the armed forces in 1948.

Sentiments of retrenchment and isolation immediately after WW II were
short-lived in light of the ascendance of the Soviet Union and the
challenge it and its global allies presented. The Korean Conflict was
the first immediate post-WW II manifestation of that challenge and women
played an active role in the engagement.

At the time the war broke out in 1950, there were about 22,000 women in
the

armed forces, with roughly one-third in nursing or health-related jobs.
Over the next year, efforts to increase the number of active duty
military nurses succeeded, particularly by activating many military
nurses in the reserves who had served during WW II (Holm, pp. 149-150).
At its peak, the number of women

in the armed forces during the Korean Conflict was 48,700, declining to
about 35,000 by war's end in June 1955 (Holm, p. 157).

During the Korean Conflict (in 1951), the Defense Department Advisory
Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS) was established by
then-Secretary of Defense, George C. Marshall, to provide advice and
recommendations on matters and policies relating to the recruitment and
retention, treatment, employment, integration, and well-being of
professional women in the Armed Forces. DACOWITS exists to this day,
continuing to make recommendations on family issues related to
recruitment and retention of women in the military. Historically, the
civilian appointees to DACOWITS have been very instrumental in
recommending changes to laws and policies beneficial to military women
(Trowell-Harris, 2005).

During the Korean Conflict, there were ambitious goals by the military
to increase by several-fold the proportion of women in each of the
services. The overall goal was to mobilize one-half million to
one-million women to join. In spite of active recruiting and other
efforts, the military fell far short of its goals (Holm, p. 157).

The next big push to increase the number of women in the military came
in 1968 during the Vietnam War. The Department of Defense had a goal of
adding 6,500 women to the military (Holm, p. 187), thus trying to
reverse a downward trend after the Korean Conflict. Nearly 7,000 women
served in the military in the Southeast Asia theater of operations. Most
of those who served there were nurses (Women in Military Service for
America Memorial Foundation, p. 4). However, the military opened up many
other positions to women as a result not only of personnel shortages,
even in an era of conscription, but also as a reflection of general
societal changes in the role of women.

The Vietnam era was a time of considerable social ferment and unrest,
with many groups demanding and gaining equal status in society,
including women. Indeed, the passage of P.L. 90-130 in 1967 was meant,
in large part, to remove statutorily any obstacles to women becoming
high ranking military officers. In 1970, Brigadier General Anna Mae
Hays, head of the Army Nurse Corps, became the first woman to attain
star rank in nursing. By 1972, Rear Admiral Alene B. Duerk, head of the
Navy Nurse Corps, became the first woman admiral (Holm, p. 203) and also
in 1972, E. Ann Hoefly became Brigadier General in the Air Force Nurse
Corps.

The 1970's also saw the appointment of women to star rank who were not
nurses: Army Brigadier General Elizabeth P. Hoisington (1970); Air Force
Brigadier General Jeanne M. Holm (1971); Navy Rear Admiral Fran McKee
(1976); and Marine Brigadier General Margaret A. Brewer (1978) (Moseley
Brown, 2005). Gains made by women in the military continued through the
1970's.

The trend of gains remains, with fewer restrictions on women. Although
rules affirmed in 1994 by then-Defense Secretary Les Aspin exempt women
from assignments in small direct ground combat units or from collocating
with such units, the rules also lifted long-standing bans on women
serving in other combat-related roles (*The* *Washington Times*, 2004)
as a direct result of their performance during the Persian Gulf War in
1990 and 1991. Beginning in the early 1990s, women flew combat aircraft,
manned missile placements, served on ships in the Gulf, drove convoys in
the desert, and assumed other roles making exposure to combat more
likely. In the 2001 National Survey of Veterans, 12 percent of women
veterans reported having served in a combat or war zone. Nearly
one-quarter reported contact with dead, dying or wounded compatriots
during their military service (Office of Policy, Planning, and
Preparedness, April 2003, Table 2-8, p. 52). The army's newly-created
Combat Action Badge will honor any eligible soldier exposed to perilous
combat conditions, affecting thousands of soldiers not in infantry
ranks, including many women (Department of Defense, *ARNEWS*, 2005; *The
Washington Post*, 2005).

Some mark the beginning of the trend toward greater gender equality in
the military with the advent of the All-Volunteer Force (AVF) in 1973,
when occupational roles within the military opened up considerably for
women because of the need to fill those positions with a volunteer
force. That is, personnel demands could not be met with a force of male
volunteers alone. Data show that the AVF marked a sharp increase in the
absolute number of women in the military and an increase in the
proportion of women in the military as well. In spite of difficulties in
retaining women in the military shortly after the establishment of the
AVF, steps were taken to make the military more "family friendly" to
encourage women to enter service and to remain there as well. Arguably,
more needs to be done. But the numbers reflect, in some measure, those
steps. In 1973, for example, 55,000 women were in the active duty
military, making up 2.5 percent of the armed forces (Department of
Defense, 2003, Tables D-19 and D-29). By September 30, 2004, however,
the number of women on active duty nearly quadrupled to more than
212,000, making up nearly 15 percent of the active duty armed forces
(Department of Defense, 2004).

**[The Population of Women Veterans]{.underline}**[^1]

**Number**

The population of women veterans is affected directly by the number of
women in the military. At any one time, the number of veterans depends
on the varying size of cohorts leaving the military up to that time and
the survival rates among those cohorts to that time. In contrast to the
population of male veterans, the population of female veterans has
actually increased over the last decade or so because (a) of the
increasing number and proportion of women entering (and leaving) the
military, (b) a more favorable survival rate of women compared to men at
any given age, and (c) the younger age distribution of women veterans
compared to male veterans, which means relatively more women at younger
ages, with lower mortality rates.

According to the 1990 Census, there were 1.2 million women veterans. By
the next census in 2000, that number increased to 1.6 million, with an
estimated 1.7 million by the end of fiscal year 2004.

The accompanying figure[^2] shows the trend in the estimated and
projected number of women veterans in the U.S. and Puerto over the span
of 40 years, from 1980 to 2020. The population of women veterans rose,
and is projected to continue to rise, steadily from 1.1 million in 1980
to 1.2 million in 1990 to 1.6 million in 2000 to 1.8 million in 2010 and
1.9 million in 2020. In sharp contrast, the estimated and projected
population of male veterans is projected to decline (27.6 million in
1980; 27.3 million in 1990; 24.8 million in 2000; 20.3 million in 2010
and 16.2 million in 2020).

As a proportion of the veteran population, women went from nearly 4
percent in 1980 to 4 percent in 1990 and 6 percent in 2000[^3]. With
projected increases in the number of women in the military relative to
men, the proportion of the veteran population which is female is also
projected to increase steadily: 8 percent in 2010 (from 6 percent in
2000) and 10 percent by 2020.

**Age**

Not only do male and female veterans differ with respect to observed and
expected trends in their number and their respective share of the
veteran population, they also differ in their relative age as well. As
noted above, women veterans are younger, in the aggregate, than their
male counterparts. In 2004, for example, the estimated median age of
women veterans was 46, whereas the estimated median age of male veterans
was 60. Although the median age of women veterans is projected to
increase steadily over the next two decades, women veterans are
projected still to be younger than male veterans in the aggregate.

The proportions of women veterans who are 65 or older and 85 or older
are lower than the proportion of male veterans of those ages. In 2004,
an estimated 19 percent of women veterans were 65 or older and nearly 4
percent in the advanced ages of 85 or older. Among male veterans, an
estimated 40 percent were 65 or older and nearly 4 percent were 85 or
older. By 2010, the proportion of women veterans 65 or older is
projected to be nearly 17 percent, and about 5 percent projected to be
85 or older. Among male veterans, 42 percent are projected to be 65 or
older, with nearly 6 percent being 85 or older.

Age differences between female and male veterans are also reflected in
the differences by the period of service in which they served, with
women more likely to have served in the later war periods while men are
more likely to have served in earlier war periods. Specifically, among
wartime periods, the Gulf War era, which is still open, had the greatest
estimated number of women veterans in 2004 (642,000), followed by the
Vietnam Era (260,000), World War II (178,000), and Korea (80,000). More
than 558,000 women are estimated to have served in peacetime only. In
contrast, the greatest number of male veterans is estimated to have
served during the Vietnam Era (7,841,000) among all war periods,

followed by WW II (3,713,000), the Gulf War (3,441,000) and Korea
(3,328,000). An estimated 5,720,000 male veterans served during
peacetime only[^4].

Knowing how many women veterans there are (and projecting how many there
will be), how old they are and whether they are war or peacetime
veterans and in which periods they served are important for planning the
services VA provides. Such a picture, however, is not complete. Other
characteristics are equally important, such as race, what benefits they
have used, what social and economic characteristics they exhibit, the
status of their health, and where they live.

**Geographic Distribution**

In general, the geographic distribution of women veterans very much
parallels that of their male counterparts, with some exceptions. In
2004, the states with the highest estimated proportion of the total
women veteran population are among the largest in terms of the general
population: California (9.8 percent of all women veterans); Florida and
Texas (7.7 percent each), Virginia (4.4 percent), New York and Georgia
(4.0 percent), Pennsylvania and Ohio (3.7 percent), and North Carolina
(3.5 percent). These nine states alone are estimated to have accounted
for nearly one-half of the women veterans in the U.S. and Puerto Rico.
Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, and D.C. had the lowest estimated number
of women veterans, which can also be said generally of the distribution
of their male counterparts.

Looking at the estimated distribution of women veterans and their male
counterparts by the nine Census Bureau regions[^5] in 2004 shows general
similarity between them, although some differences are observed. For
example, the highest estimated proportion of both female and male
veterans is in the South Atlantic region (27.0 and 23.0 percent,
respectively) but the lowest proportion for women is New England (4.2
percent) and the East South Central for males (4.7 percent). While the
rank order of the regions with respect to the estimated distribution of
female and male veterans across regions differs somewhat, those
differences are not great, as seen in Table 1 below. Furthermore, the
respective proportion of the female and male veteran populations within
each region does not differ greatly. The main observation, therefore, is
that women veterans and their male counterparts are distributed across
states and regions in similar patterns.

**Table 1.**

**Percentage Distribution of the Estimated Female and Male Veteran
Population by Region**

**(see footnote 3)**

**September 30, 2004**

> [Region %Fem Region %Male]{.underline}
>
> N Eng 4.2% ESC 4.7%
>
> ESC 4.5% N Eng 4.9%
>
> WNC 6.3% WNC 7.3%
>
> Mt 8.3% Mt 7.5%
>
> Mid Atl 9.6% WSC 10.8%
>
> WSC 11.8% Mid Atl 12.0%
>
> ENC 13.1% Pac 14.1%
>
> Pac 15.2% ENC 15.7%
>
> [S Atl 27.0% S Atl 23.0%]{.underline}
>
> Total % 100.0% Total % 100.0%
>
> Number in 1,000's 1,682 22,849
>
> Source: VA Office of the Actuary, VetPop2004 Version 1.0, December
> 2004.

To plan for VA and other services, it is important to know where
veterans are located now, but also where they might live in the future.
By 2010, VA projections of women veterans by state show that states with
large numbers of veterans in the general population are projected to
have the largest share of women veterans. The projected top five states
are: California (161,400 women veterans; 9.1 percent of women veterans);
Texas (141,300, 8.0 percent); Florida (136,800; 7.8 percent); Virginia
(76,500; 4.3 percent); and Georgia (74,300; 4.2 percent). The projected
five smallest are: South Dakota (5,200; 0.3 percent); Wyoming (4,000;
0.2 percent); Vermont (3,700; 0.2 percent); North Dakota (3,700; 0.2
percent); and the District of Columbia (3,100; 0.2 percent).

**Race and Hispanic Origin**

Race and Hispanic origin are important demographic characteristics in
that they are often associated with such socioeconomic characteristics
as education, employment and income. The military is seen by many not
only as a way of serving the nation but also as an opportunity to learn
job skills, to reap educational benefits, and to enhance life skills in
general for use in the civilian world. Members of racial and ethnic
minorities, particularly in an all-volunteer force, have availed
themselves of those opportunities in relatively large numbers. This is
true of women as well as men.

Over the years, the military has seen an increase in the proportion of
women, racial and ethnic minorities, and women of racial and ethnic
minorities. Those numbers are reflected in changes in the racial and
ethnic composition of the veteran population over time. Between 1990 and
2000, for example, the proportion of White non-Hispanics among women
veterans declined from 83 percent to 72 percent, meaning that by the
year 2000, nearly 30 percent of women veterans identified themselves in
the Census as a member of a racial minority group. Most identified
themselves as Black (or African American). Specifically, 17 percent of
women veterans were Black non-Hispanic; 1 percent American Indian
non-Hispanic; 1 percent Asian non-Hispanic; less than 1 percent Pacific
Islander non-Hispanic; 2 percent were of some other race or multiple
race non-Hispanic. Women veterans, in fact, were more likely than their
male counterparts to identify themselves as a racial minority. Among
male veterans in 2000, 83 percent were White non-Hispanic; 9 percent
Black non-Hispanic; 1 percent American Indian non-Hispanic; 1 percent
Asian non-Hispanic; less than 1 percent Pacific Islander non-Hispanic; 1
percent of some other race or multiple race non-Hispanic.

The proportion of Hispanics among women veterans also increased (note,
Hispanics can be of any race). In 1990, the proportion was 3 percent
compared to 6 percent in 2000. Among male veterans in 2000, 5 percent
were Hispanic, compared to 3 percent in 1990. The 2000 Census showed
that nearly equal proportions or about 10 percent of males and females
in the Armed Forces identified themselves as Hispanic.

As of September 30, 2004, an estimated 7 percent of women veterans were
of Hispanic origin (115,000) (again, Hispanics can be of any race) (see
Table 2 below). Estimated proportions of women veterans by race were:
White non-Hispanic, 70 percent (1,175,000); Black non-Hispanic, 18
percent (306,000); American Indian non-Hispanic, 1 percent (18,000);
Asian non-Hispanic, 2 percent (25,000); Pacific Islander non-Hispanic,
less than 1 percent (3,000); and other or multiple race non-Hispanic, 2
percent (39,000). The estimated distribution among male veterans is
somewhat different from that of female veterans, with a lower proportion
of Hispanics (of any race) and minority races. Hispanics were 5 percent
(1,186,000) of male veterans. The estimated distribution by race was:
White non-Hispanic, 82 percent (18,811,000); Black non-Hispanic, 10
percent (2,242,000); American Indian non-Hispanic, 1 percent (162,000);
Asian non-Hispanic, 1 percent (250,000); Pacific Islander non-Hispanic,
less than 1 percent (26,000); and other or multiple race, 1 percent
(297,000). (Office of the Actuary, December 2004).

In the future, Hispanics and non-White non-Hispanics (including multiple
race non-Hispanics) are projected to make up an increasing share of the
veteran population for both males and females. For example, between 2000
and 2010, the proportion of women veterans who are Hispanic is projected
to increase from 6 percent to nearly 8 percent. For 2020, the projected
proportion is 9 percent.

**Table 2.**

**Percentage Distribution of the Estimated Female and Male Veteran
Population by Hispanic Origin and Race, September 30, 2004**

Percent

> [Hisp. Origin and Race Females Males]{.underline}
>
> Hispanic Origin\* 7 5
>
> White\*\* 70 82
>
> Black\*\* 18 10
>
> Amer. Indian\*\* 1 1
>
> Asian\*\* 2 1
>
> Pac. Islander\*\* \*\*\* \*\*\*
>
> [Other or Mult.Race\*\* 2 1]{.underline}
>
> Total 100 100
>
> Number (in Thousands) 1,682 22,973
>
> \* Can be of any race
>
> \*\*Non-Hispanic
>
> \*\*\* Less than 1 percent
>
> Source: VA Office of the Actuary, VetPop2004 Version 1.0, December
> 2004.

The proportion of non-White non-Hispanics among women veterans is
projected to increase from 22 percent in 2000 to 25 percent in 2010 to
27 percent in 2020. Among male veterans, Hispanics are projected to
increase from 5 percent in 2000 to 6 percent in 2010 and 7 percent in
2020. The proportion of non-White non-Hispanic male veterans is
projected to increase from 12 percent in 2000 to 14 percent in 2010 and
17 percent in 2020 (Office of the Actuary, December 2004). Table 3 below
summarizes some of these observations for five-year intervals between
2000 and 2020 (viz., the proportion of Hispanic and non-White
non-Hispanic veterans is projected to increase among both female and
male veterans, but that the proportion is higher among females).

> **Table 3.**
>
> **Percent Hispanic Origin and Non-White Non-Hispanic for**
>
> **Estimated and Projected Female and Male Veterans**
>
> **2000-2020**
>
> [Females]{.underline} [Males]{.underline}
>
> Percent Percent
>
> Percent Non-White Percent Non-White
>
> [Hispanic\*]{.underline} [Non-Hispanic]{.underline}
> [Hispanic\*]{.underline} [Non-Hispanic]{.underline}
>
> 2000 6 22 5 12
>
> 2005 7 24 5 13
>
> 2010 8 25 6 14
>
> 2015 8 26 6 15
>
> 2020 9 27 7 17
>
> \*Can be of any race
>
> Source: VA Office of the Actuary, VetPop2004 Version 1.0, December
> 2004.

**Marital Status**

Marital status can be an important consideration in assessing an
individual's economic and social well-being inasmuch as it is related to
such characteristics as living arrangements, family formation, income,
health status, and other dimensions of life style. Marital status is
usually a matter of choice. That is, (unlike widowhood), we choose to
marry, divorce, separate or remain single.

Data from the March 2002 Current population Survey (CPS)[^6] show that
among women 30 years of age or older, veterans were less likely to be
married than non-veterans: 49 percent of veterans were married compared
to 61 percent of non-veterans. This is observed for all age groups over
29. For example, among older women, 65 or older, about one-third of
veterans were married compared to 42 percent of non-veterans. It is
unclear what proportion among those not married was ever married.

**[Socio-Economic Characteristics]{.underline}**

**Educational Attainment**

Educational attainment is a crucial dimension of the social and economic
status of an individual. Not only are there countless intangible rewards
to education, but education affects life chances in general and income
and employment in particular. Data from the March 2002 CPS show that
women veterans fare well with respect to their educational attainment:
72 percent of women veterans had at least some college experience;
nearly 40 percent of those had at least a bachelor's degree. A
relatively small proportion, less than 3 percent, had no high school
diploma, which can be explained by the education requirements for
military service. One-quarter finished high school as the highest level
of education.

In general, women veterans fare better than male veterans. For example,
55 percent of male veterans had at least some college and 11 percent had
less than a high school diploma (compared to 72 percent and less than 3
percent, respectively, for women). This difference can be explained, in
part, by the older age distribution of male veterans. That is, many male
veterans entered the military service at a time when the education
requirements were not as high as they have been in recent years. During
WW II, for example, it was not uncommon for men to be drafted out of
high school. And due to extenuating circumstances, many did not go back
to school after the war to finish.

**Employment**

Data from Census 2000[^7] show that among women veterans age 25 to 64,
considered the major earning years, more than 70 percent were employed.
Only 4 percent were unemployed and 25 percent were not in the labor
force. Among women veterans of all ages, one-half who were not in the
labor force were age 65 or older. As a benchmark for evaluating the
employment status of women veterans, a comparison with non-veteran women
of comparable age shows some differences. For the group 25 to 64, women
veterans are more likely to be employed than non-veteran women (71
percent and 66 percent respectively), and less likely not to be in the
labor force (25 percent and 31 percent respectively). About 4 percent of
veterans and 3 percent of non-veterans are unemployed.

**Family Income**

Perhaps the most direct, immediate and measurable dimension of
socioeconomic status is income. Data from the 2000 Census^6^ on women
veterans show that compared to their non-veteran women counterparts,
veterans are less likely to be at the low end of the family income
distribution but also less likely to be at the high end. For example, 14
percent of veterans had family incomes less than \$14,000 compared to 17
percent of non-veterans. At the high end of the scale, 13 percent of
veterans earned \$90,000 or more compared to 16 percent of non-veterans.
For income groups between \$45,000 and \$90,000, the distribution of
women veterans and women non-veterans is very comparable. For example,
14 percent of veterans to 13 percent of non-veterans were in the
\$45,000 to \$59,999 category. A higher proportion of veterans than
non-veterans were in the categories between \$15,000 and \$44,999. Among
veterans, 21 percent were in the \$15,000 to \$29,999 category compared
to 18 percent of non-veterans. Among veterans, 19 percent were in the
\$30,000 to \$44,999 category compared to 16 percent of non-veterans.

Since these data from Census 2000 on veterans are based on a very large
sample, the differences observed are significant in a statistical sense
but may be too small to suggest any real inequalities. The general
picture which emerges is that overall, women veterans and non-veteran
women have comparable family income, in spite of differences in marital
status and age between them. Indeed, data from the March 2002 CPS show
that for calendar year 2001, the median family income of women veterans
was \$43,000 compared to \$44,000 for women non-veterans.

**[Use of VA Benefits]{.underline}**

VA's commitment to the needs of women veterans has been long-standing,
but has been particularly noteworthy since the early 1980's with the
establishment of the VA Advisory Committee on Women Veterans. Although
the number of women veterans is relatively small compared to their male
counterparts, the population of women veterans has been growing and is
projected to continue to grow, as well as to get older. These
demographic facts, coupled with the special needs of women veterans,
particularly with respect to health care, drive the need to consider how
many women veterans use VA benefits and the characteristics which might
be related to the need for and use of benefits, such as health status,
race, education, income, employment and marital status.

**Service-Connected Compensation and Nonservice-Connected Pension**

**Compensation**

At the end of fiscal year 2004, 163,027 women veterans world-wide
received service-connected compensation, among whom 161,328 lived in the
U.S. and Puerto Rico. The number of women receiving compensation
represents 9.6 percent of the total estimated population of women
veterans as of September 30, 2004. Among male veterans, the estimated
proportion receiving compensation is only slightly higher, 10.4
percent[^8], in spite of the older age of male veterans, on average, and
their greater exposure to combat.

There are also slight differences as well in the distribution of
compensated veterans by degree of disability between males and females.
Compensated women veterans tend to be at the lower and upper levels of
degree of disability, while their male counterparts are more likely to
be at the middle levels: for female and male compensated veterans
respectively, under 30 percent disabled, 47.3 and 42.9 percent; between
30 and 60 percent disabled, 33.3 and 39.8 percent; and at 70 percent or
greater disability, 19.4 and 17.4 percent. Compensated male veterans,
however, are more likely to be rated 100 percent disabled than their
female counterparts: 8.6 and 5.7 percent, respectively. But for the most
part, the distributions are quite similar (Office of Policy, Planning,
and Preparedness, September 2004, Tables on Compensation)[^9].

**Pension**

VA pensioners are veterans who served during wartime and are deemed to
be in economic need based on established VA eligibility criteria. In
September 2004, 10,073 women veterans received pension compared to
332,830 male veterans. Among female pensioners, nearly one-half, 46.5
percent, served during WW II. In contrast, among male pensioners, about
one-third, 34.9 percent, served during WW II, with the largest group
having served during the Vietnam era, 42.5 percent. The differences
between male and female pensioners with respect to period of service
reflect in part, the relative size of the cohorts among male and female
veterans (products of both the number who served and the number who
survive to date) and differences in economic need by age and sex (Office
of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness, September 2004, Table on
Pension).

**Educational Benefits**

The GI Bill, started in 1944, has been heralded widely as one of the
most successful government programs in our Nation's history. It enhanced
the lives of countless veterans and their families, helping to establish
a strong middle class in the United States after W W II. VA education
benefits continue to thrive.

Data on VA's current education benefits show that as of September 2004,
195,567 women veterans used Chapter 30, the Montgomery G.I. Bill,
available to veterans entering the military after June 30, 1985. The
vast majority of these women veterans (181,598 or 92.9 percent) used
benefits to attend college. Among them, 82,431 used benefits for junior
college, while 19,416 used them for post-graduate programs. Nearly
14,000 women (13,969) used Chapter 30 benefits for other programs, such
as vocational or technical training, flight school or for job
apprenticeships. The earlier program, Chapter 32 (the Post-Vietnam Era
Veterans Educational Assistance Program\--VEAP) was used by 21,616 women
veterans as of March 2004. This program was available to veterans who
entered the military between January 1, 1977 and June 30, 1985. And as
observed for Chapter 30, women used Chapter 32 benefits mainly to pay
for college-level training: 20,193 (or 93.4 percent) used Chapter 32 for
college. The proportion of male veterans using either Chapter 30 or
Chapter 32 benefits for college was comparable to the proportion of
women veterans doing so---among male users, 90.9 percent used Chapter 30
for college and 91.0 percent used Chapter 32 for college (Office of
Policy, Planning and Preparedness, September 2004, Tables on Chapters 30
and 32). These high proportions among both male and female users of the
programs are not surprising because most veterans of these cohorts
entered the military with at least a high school diploma and many
enlisted to receive benefits for post-high school education.

Among women veterans, the 2001 National Survey of Veterans showed that
34 percent used at least one VA education benefit, somewhat lower than
the 40 percent of male veterans who used such benefits

**Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment**

Data for FY 2002 show that of the 61,250 applicants for Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment (Chapter 31) benefits 9,009 or nearly 15
percent were women. Among the women applicants, nearly 6,000 (5,918 or
about two-thirds) were authorized to receive benefits. This compares to
54 percent of male applicants who were authorized benefits. Out of
53,600 Chapter 31 participants in FY 2003, 11,917 or 22.2 percent were
women. Among participating women, 1,741 were considered to have been
successfully rehabilitated during the year. Nearly 8,500 male
participants successfully completed rehabilitation. Successful women
participants, on average, increased their income 6--fold after
completing rehabilitation. That is, the average annual earnings prior to
training was about \$4,100 compared to an average of \$25,700 after
training. Among successful male participants, there was a 7-fold
increase in average earnings. Among veterans in the National Survey of
Veterans, 4 percent of women reported ever using Vocational
Rehabilitaion services, comparable to the 3 percent of males reporting
such use.

Data from FY 2004 indicate that nearly 12,800 women veterans
participated in Vocational Rehabilitation compared to 43,000 male
veterans (VR and E, April 2005).

**VA Home Loan Guaranty**

Between 1944 (when the VA Home Loan Guaranty Program began) and the end
of FY 2004, VA has guaranteed more than 17.6 million home loans
(Veterans Benefits Administration, June 2004, p. 61; and Veterans
Benefits Administration, Loan Guaranty Service, April 2005). During FY
2004, more than 335,000 loans were guaranteed: 302,300 for male veterans
and nearly 33,500 for women veterans[^10]. For FY 2004 loans, the
average loan amount and the average guaranty on those loans was slightly
higher for women veterans than for their male counterparts. The average
loan for women veterans was \$132,800 compared to \$131,300 for males.
The average guaranty on home loans for women veterans was \$38,000
compared to \$37,600 for males (Veterans Benefits Administration, Loan
Guaranty Service, April 2005).

**VA Life Insurance**

VA life insurance is available to veterans as a way for those who leave
military service to maintain government life insurance after discharge.
VA life insurance serves to establish the continuity of government life
insurance coverage offered to active military personnel who might be
considered at greater risk of death during military service by private
insurance vendors not willing to assume the liability.

Data from the 2001 National Survey of Veterans show that among both male
and female veterans, roughly the same proportion---11 percent\--had VA
life insurance coverage. Among older veterans, however, the proportion
increases to 17 percent of females and 20 percent of males, perhaps
reflecting the salience of life insurance to older people and
differences in VA life insurance programs which changed from period to
period. The fact that a majority of both female and male veterans do not
have VA life insurance coverage does not mean they are without coverage.
In fact, the survey data show that 70 percent of female veterans and 75
percent of male veterans had life insurance from a source other than VA.
Among veterans 65 or older, the proportions are 58 percent and 72
percent, respectively (Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness,
April 2003, Table 7-2, p. 395).

**VA Burial Benefits**

VA's National Cemetery Administration's memorial programs honor veterans
and eligible family members in many ways, including in-ground burial,
cremation burial, grave markers and headstones, and Presidential
certificates. Data from the 2001 National Survey of Veterans show that
among those planning in-ground burial or cremation and remains placed in
a columbarium, 22 percent of female veterans and 18 percent of male
veterans wanted burial in a Veterans' cemetery (Office of Policy,
Planning, and Preparedness, April 2003, Table 9-14. pp. 583-584). Most
of those wanting burial but not at a Veterans' cemetery cited location
closer to family or having made other arrangements already as the main
reasons (Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness, April 2003, Table
9-26, p. 609). Among those wanting burial, however, a near majority of
both female and male veterans wanted VA-provided headstones or markers:
46 percent and 42 percent, respectively (Office of Policy, Planning, and
Preparedness, April 2003, Table 9-30,. pp. 615-616).

**Health Care**

A major component of the array of benefits provided to veterans by VA is
health care. The FY 2004 budget allotted nearly 25.5 billion dollars for
medical care out of a total of 59.9 billion dollars for all VA programs.
In FY 2004, 209,350 women veterans sought VA medical care, the majority
of those (57.8 percent) were veterans from the more recent post-Vietnam
and Gulf War eras. In fact, 42.3 percent were under age 45 with an
average age of just under 50. Male veterans seeking VA medical care are,
on average, older. The difference reflects in part the different age
distribution of male and female veterans and any difference by age and
gender in reliance on VA for medical care. In FY 2004, the top three
diagnostic categories for women veterans treated by VA were
hypertension, depression, and hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol, for
example). Nearly 65,000 women veterans were in Priority Categories 1 and
2, which include veterans with service-connected disabilities. Another
67,400 women veterans were in Priority Category 5. (VISN Support Service
Center, 2005). This category includes non-service-connected veterans who
meet the low income criteria for eligibility.

Data from the March 2002 supplement to the Census Bureau's Current
Population Survey (CPS) indicate that among women veterans not
Medicare-eligible (under age 65), 10 percent were without any health
insurance compared to a similar proportion among their male counterparts
(11 percent uninsured). Lack of health insurance is most frequently
associated with unemployment and low income. VA is often the source of
health care for those veterans, male and female, with limited resources
to find health care elsewhere. Therefore, a significant proportion of
those women veterans in Priority Category 5 could be unemployed and
without health insurance. Most veterans, however, do have some form of
health insurance. About three-quarters of women veterans under the age
of 65 had some private health insurance coverage compared to 81 percent
of male veterans of that age.

**[A Final Thought]{.underline}**

The important role of women in our nation's defense and as part of the
veteran population over the years cannot be over-stated nor covered
adequately in these few short pages. Their history is a glorious one and
sadly one not always acknowledged or appreciated. With time, however,
has come deserved recognition, both for women in the military and for
women as veterans. And with their projected larger numbers, with full
integration in all branches, including combat units, and with greater
racial and ethnic diversity in the armed forces, women will change the
face not only of our military, but of our veteran population as well.
Women will make up a larger share of the veteran population, add to its
diversity, and require veteran services geared to their specific needs.
The debt owed to all our veterans and to women in particular demands
nothing less than full attention and action.

**[References]{.underline}**

Department of Defense. 2005 (May 4). "Army announces Combat Action
Badge," *ARNEWS*.

Department of Defense. 2004 (September). Active Duty Military Personnel
by Rank/Grade Total and Women Only. Washington, DC.

Department of Defense. 2003 (March). *Population Representation in the
Military Services, Fiscal Year 2001*. Washington, DC.

Holm, Jeanne. 1982. *Women in the Military: An Unfinished Revolution*
(Revised Edition). Novato, CA: Presidio Press.

Moseley Brown, Betty. 2005 (May 4). Personal communication.

Office of the Actuary, VA. 2004 (December). *VetPop2004 Version 1.0*.
Washington, DC.

Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness, VA. 2004 (September).
Tables 1-3 on Veterans Receiving Service-Connected Compensation.

Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness, VA. 2004 (September).
Table 7 on Veterans Receiving Nonservice-Connected Pension.

Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness, VA. 2004 (September). COIN
Report EDU 704 Ch. 30 and COIN Report EDU 704 Ch. 32.

Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness, VA. 2003 (April). *2001
National Survey of Veterans, Tabulation Volume*.

*The Washington Post*. 2005 (May 5). "Army to issue combat badge for
soldiers not in infantry, " p. A23.

*The Washington Times*. 2004 (December 13). "Report leans toward women
in combat."

Thomas, Patricia J. 1978. *The Role of Women in the Military: Australia,
Canada, and the United States,* Special Report 78-10. San Diego, CA:
Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.

Trowell-Harris, Dr. Irene. 2005 (May 4). Personal Communication.

Veterans Benefits Administration. 2005 (April). Loan Guaranty Service,
Data on Home Loan Guaranty for FY 2004.

Veterans Benefits Administration. 2004 (June). *Annual Benefits Report,
FY 2003*. VA, Washington, DC.

VISN Support Service Center, VA . 2005. *Women's Health Program Services
Reports, FY 2004*, on VA intranet, klfmenu.med.va.gov.

Vocational Rehabilitation and Education, Program Management Report, FY
2004. April 2005.

Women in Military Service for America Memorial Foundation. No Date.
*Highlights in the History of Military Women.*
[www.womensmemorial.org/educatio/timeline.html](http://www.womensmemorial.org/educatio/timeline.html).

**[Acknowledgements]{.underline}**

Many thanks to the following people for their suggestions and help in
preparing this report (the author is solely responsible for any
remaining deficiencies):

Dr. Irene Trowell-Harris, Director, Center for Women Veterans, VA;

Betty Moseley Brown, Associate Director, Center for Women Veterans, VA;

Mike Wells,Office of Data Management and Analysis, VA; and

Eddie Thomas, Office of the Actuary, VA.

Janet Somers, Office of Data Management and Analysis, VA

**[Contact]{.underline}**

Robert E. Klein, Ph.D.

Office of the Actuary (008A2)

Department of Veterans Affairs

Washington, DC 20420

202-273-5101

Robert.Klein@va.gov

[^1]: Veteran population estimates and projections cited in this section
    generally pertain to the U.S. and Puerto Rico. An estimate or
    projection for a given year is as of September 30 of that year; data
    cited for the decennial census years of 1990 and 2000 are as of
    April 1 of those years. Source of estimates and projections: VA
    Office of the Actuary, VetPop2004 Version 1.0, December 2004.

[^2]: Eddie Thomas of the VA Office of the Actuary compiled the data for
    this figure and smoothed the data prior to 2000 to be consistent
    with estimates and projections beyond 2000 from the latest model,
    VetPop2004 Version 1.0.

[^3]: For the most part, percentages are rounded to the nearest percent.
    However, some percentages are to the nearest tenth of a
    percent\--for example, percentages based on numbers from
    administrative records, which are not estimates, or for numbers
    where the display of nuanced differences is intended, such as with
    geographic distribution.

[^4]: War period totals include those who served in more than one war
    period; a veteran is counted in all the war periods in which he or
    she served. Therefore, the period totals add to a number greater
    than the total number of veterans.

[^5]: The regions are: New England; Middle Atlantic; South Atlantic;
    East South Central; West South Central; East North Central; West
    North Central; Mountain; Pacific. Puerto Rico is not officially part
    of any census region of the U.S. and therefore excluded from this
    table.

[^6]: Source of data from the March 2002 CPS is special tabulations
    provided by the Office of Data Management and Analysis, Assistant
    Secretary for Policy, Planning and Preparedness, VA.

[^7]: Data from the 2000 Census on employment and income are more
    detailed than data from the 2002 March CPS available to the author.

[^8]: This percent, and the comparable percent for women veterans,
    pertains to all veterans, not just those in the U.S. and Puerto
    Rico.

[^9]: The distributions described are for all veterans, regardless of
    age and the types of disability for which veterans are compensated.

[^10]: The number might understate the number of women veterans
    benefiting from a VA loan guaranty in that the figure does not
    include women whose husbands are also veterans and in whose name a
    VA loan guaranty is made.