A Premarital Assessment Program
Author(s): Lynn P. Buckner and Connie J. Salts
Source: Family Relations, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Oct., 1985), pp. 513-520
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/584012
Accessed: 10-08-2015 22:41 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Family Relations.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A Premarital Assessment
Program*
LYNNP. BUCKNERAND CONNIEJ. SALTS**
A description is presented of a marital preparation program provided couples by a
marital and family therapy training center. Included are the goals, topics, techniques,
and procedures for conducting a premarital assessment.
In an attempt to stimulate furtherwork in the
area of premarital counseling, Schumm and
Denton (1979) discussed the current trends,
issues, and needs in this important but
neglected area. In response to Schumm and
Denton, Salts and Buckner (1983) developed a
training program for marital and family therapists in the area of premarital counseling. A
premarital assessment program for couples
was also designed which meets both training
needs of beginning marital and family therapists and the needs of couples at various
stages of relationship development. The purpose of this paper is to describe the premarital
assessment program.
The approaches to premarital preparation
used by various professionals and defined by
Schumm and Denton (1979) include the generalized education preparation, instructional
counseling, therapeutic counseling and couple
enrichment. The premarital assessment approach is related to instructional counseling,
which has a goal of "preparing couples to
realistically adjust their expectations of marriage by providing them with information and
exposure to a variety of frequently occurring
maritalproblems" (Schumm & Denton, 1979, p.
24). The premarital assessment goes beyond
providing information by seeking to make the
couple aware of the strengths and weaknesses
in their relationship. The program will help
*Presented in part at the spring conference, Illinois Division of AAMFT, March, 1983, Oakbrook, IL.
-Lynn P. Buckner is a marital and family therapist at Central Austin Counseling Center, 440 Mayfield, Chicago, IL60044.
Connie J. Salts is an Associate Professor, Department of Family and Child Development, Auburn University, Auburn, AL
36849.
Key Words: marriage preparation, premarital counseling,
premarital couinseling training, prevention, relationship
assessment.
(Family Relations, 1985, 34, 513-520.)
October1985
clarify potential problem areas and help the
couple realize their own personal resources in
solving these problems.
The assessment
model, unlike therapeutic
counseling, is not limited to meeting the needs
of couples presenting specific problems. It is
applicable to all premarital couples. Assessment provides the opportunity for a couple to
reevaluate and confirm their commitment and
decision to marry. It may also lead to referral or
contracting for therapy or couple enrichment,
such as the Premarital Relationship Enhancement (Guerney, 1977).
Ball and Henning (1981) found that couples
anticipating marriage typically hold unrealistic
expectations about the nature of the marital
relationship. Even couples who acknowledge
that problems often arise after marriage, have
not objectively assessed
their own relationship. The assessment model is designed to individualize the premarital preparation for each
couple, thus providing greater impact upon the
of their relationship
awareness
couple's
dynamics as opposed to educational preparation.
The premarital assessment
program also
provides training in specific skills for the
beginning marital and family therapist. The
training and research center in which the program was developed uses a systems approach
to family therapy. The premarital assessment
program is designed to provide training in
assessing couple relationships using a basic
developmental/structural framework. Barnhill's
(1979) dimensions of a healthy family and the
developmental family life cycle concepts addressed by Carter and McGoldrick (1980) provide a theoretical basis on which the assessment of couple functioning is made.
The development of the premarital assessment program began with an extensive review
of the literature. Programs which educated and
counseled groups of couples included Bader,
Microys, Sinclair, Willett, and Conway (1980);
Bader, Riddle, and Sinclair (1980); Eichelberg
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
513
and Wilson (1972); Family Service of Milwaukee
(1980); Freeman (1965); Gangsei (1971); Gleason
and Prescott (1977); Meadows and Taplin
(1970); Nachman (1980); Rolfe (1975, 1977); and
Rutledge (1968). Individual couple premarital
and
programs which educated, counseled,
assessed each couple separately included Ball
and Henning (1981); Elkin (1977); Mudd,
Freeman, and Rose (1941); Oates and Rowatt
(1975); Olson, Fournier, and Druckman (1979);
Rolfe (1976); Shonick (1975); Stahmann &
Hiebert (1980); Trainer (1979); and Wright (1977).
Five other group programs were reviewed
of their relevancy to premarital
because
assessment.
Two dealt with communication
(Bienvenu, 1975; Van Zoost, 1973) and two dealt
with relationship
enhancement
(D'Augelli,
Deyess, Guerney, Hershenberg, & Sborofsky,
1974; Hinkle & Moore, 1971). One program
and mutual problem
taught communication
solving skills (Ridley, Avery, Harrell, Leslie, &
Dent, 1981). Baur and Steen (1973) discussed
sexual counseling and related it to premarital
couples. Sager's (1981) concept of marriage
contracts was found pertinent to premarital
assessment.
Mace's (1972) do-it-yourself approach to premarital preparation was examined
as well as two reviews of premarital programs
(Bagarozzi & Rauen, 1981; Schumm & Denton,
1979).
The programs and materials reviewed were
first categorized according to the method, approach, and structure of providing premarital
programming. Goals from all the programs
were then reviewed, followed by the specific
topics and techniques used to accomplish
these goals. In order to select the most valuable format, goals, topics and techniques to
meet both training needs and couple needs, all
aspects of the reviewed programs were evaluated as to their reported success, frequency of
use, their applicability to the premarital clients
served at the center, and the theoretical approach of the training program.
Premarital Assessment
Program
Premarital assessment is conducted with individual couples, rather than using a group approach. The authors believe that focusing on
the individual couple is the best approach for
assessing relationship dynamics and addressing specific issues with couples. The assessment is a joint effort between the therapist and
is
the couple. The purpose of the assessment
to help the couple discover areas of the relationship they might want to change. Strengths
and weaknesses, as well as functional and dysfunctional patterns and dynamics of the relationship are pointed out to the couple and the
are
possibilities for overcoming weaknesses
explored.
One introductory session and six assessment sessions are held over a period of at least
514
12 weeks. During this extended time period,
the couple has a greater opportunity to work on
discovered weaknesses, thus providing greater
input for the assessment
and making the
assessment a realistic process. A postwedding
check is done after the couple has been married about 3 months.
Stuart's Premarital Counseling Inventory is
used to aid the therapist with the assessment
of the couple (Stuart & Stuart, 1975). This instrument is a short answer form providing
basic demographic information, past marital
history and present relationship information.
The inventory contains information on attitudes of the couple towards roles of wives and
husbands, male dominance, and traditionalism. Also provided are the couple's expectations, a measure of the optimism in the relationship, and concerns each individual may
have regarding the relationship. Finally, the inventory assists in discovery of problem and
nonproblem areas by revealing the similarities
and differences of the couple's expectations of
the marital relationship and perceptions of the
current relationship.
The main goal of the premarital assessment
program is to enable the couple to examine
themselves, their partner, and their relationship in order to reevaluate and confirm that indeed this is the person they want to marry. This
goal is achieved by assessing
the quality of
relationship maintaining skills possessed
by
the couple. These skills include effective communications, ability to solve problems, and
conflict negotiation. Individual and couple expectations, goals, roles, and needs as suggested by Sager (1981) are explored in order to
help the couple fully realize their differences.
The second goal of the program is to examine some of the frequent problem areas for
couples. These areas include friends, family
and in-laws, religion, values,
recreation,
finances, children, sex, and affection. A third
goal of the program is to help the couple feel
comfortable in seeking professional help in the
future if they are having marital or family problems.
In order to accomplish the goals set forth,
several areas must be covered in each session.
After the introductory session, the first assessment session includes the dating history of the
couple and some parent information. The second session covers expectations, goals, roles,
and the needs of each individual and of the
couple. In the third session, family, children,
finances,
friends, and recreation are discussed. The fourth session includes a meeting
with the couple's parents. The fifth session
deals with communication and conflict resolucovers
session
tion. The last assessment
values and sexuality.
It is important to cover all the topics suggested, however, the sequencing and amount
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
October1985
of time devoted to each topic will vary with
each couple's needs. Even though the purpose
of the premarital assessment program is not to
resolve problem areas for the couple, more
time is spent assessing
problem areas than
nonproblem areas.
between the
In the sessions,
discussions
couple and the therapist and use of dyadic
structured and unstructured exercises provide
information for the assessment. The format of
each session includes a wrap up of the previof the homework
ous session,
discussion
assignment, introduction of a new theme, and
assignment of new homework.
A detailed description of each premarital
assessment
session follows. Included in the
description are the goals of each session,
topics and suggested techniques, examples of
to ask the couple, assessment
questions
issues for the therapist to answer, and homework for the couple.
Introductory Session
The goals of the introductory session are to
provide the couple with a clear understanding
of the goals, purposes, and requirements of
the premarital assessment program, to reduce
any anxiety the couple may have regarding the
assessment
process, and to have the couple
complete the Stuart's Premarital Inventory and
other agency forms.
Session
I: Dating History and Wedding Plans
The goals of this session are to join the
couple and to obtain a general sense of the patterns of the couple's relationship. This is accomplished by obtaining an historical view of
the couple's relationship from the time prior to
the couple's first meeting to the present
(Shonick, 1975). This can be done visually by
putting three time lines on the board, one
under the other. The middle represents the
relationship and the two other lines the individuals. This technique is an adaptation from
Stahmann and Hiebert's (1980) dynamic relationship history. A brief look at the wedding
plans is important to determine whether or not
the couple and the families are in agreement
with the arrangements (Oates & Rowatt, 1975).
Some questions asked the couple include:
How long have you been dating? How did you
happen to start going out? What attracted you
to each other? When did you start dating each
other regularly? How did you narrow your
choice to each other? Who else were you
dating when you started to see each other?
Have you ever stopped seeing one another during the time you have been dating? If so, why?
Have you ever been apart from each other for a
long period of time? How was this separation
handled? Who decides to go on a date? When
you have to make a decision on something,
what normally happens? How did you decide
October1985
you were going to marry? How do your parents
feel about your partner? What is your relationship with your parents and with your partner's
parents? What attracts you and worries you
about your partner now? How are the wedding
plans coming? Are there any differences of
opinion between the two of you on how the
wedding should be handled? If so, how are you
dealing with these differences? Are there any
with your parents about the
disagreements
wedding?
Assessment issues considered after the first
session include: Who makes the decisions?
Who is in control? Who is dependent in the
relationship and how does that affect the relationship? How is conflict and separation
handled in the relationship? What is each person's self-esteem? What is each person receiving from and giving to the relationship? Have
the partners dated enough to feel like this is
not their only choice and are they willing to be
committed to one person? What kind of relationship does the couple have with their
parents and future in-laws? What patterns and
dynamics in the relationship are considered
strengths/weaknesses?
What signs of immaturity exist? Do wedding preparations
reflect the couple's own style?
Homework to be completed by the couple
before the second session is written out by
both partners without comparing answers. The
five questions adapted from Wright (1977, p.
90) provide a good introduction to session two.
(1) Write 12 to 15 reasons why you want to
marry your partner. (2) Describe the goals you
have for your marriage; what you want the marriage to accomplish. (3) Write a paragraph on
what you are bringing to this marriage that will
make it work. (4) Write down your role and the
responsibilities that you will have within the
marriage; then write down what you believe the
role and responsibilities of your spouse will be.
Be specific and detailed. (5) What will you get
out of marriage that you would not have gotten
if you had remained single?
Session 11:Expectations,
and Goals
Roles, Needs,
The goals of session two are to begin the
discovery of both conscious and unconscious
expectations, roles, needs, and goals that are
compatible and incompatible in the couple's
system; to uncover problem areas and to show
the couple some of their assurned expectations; and to help clarify what each partner
wants from the marriage (Eichelberg & Wilson,
1972; Family Service of Milwaukee, 1980;
Freeman, 1965; Gangsei, 1971; Meadows &
Taplin, 1970; Rolfe, 1975, 1976, 1977; Wright,
1977). The homework is a good introduction for
the session. The issue of household maintenance should be addressed if the couple has
not covered this in their answers. Meeting indi-
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
515
vidually with each partner helps to explore
wants and expectations of the marriage and
allows them to discuss the dependency of
each partner.
Questions asked the individuals include:
What kind of career plans do you have? What
are you expecting your partner's career plans
to be? What is your definition of marriage?
How have your attitudes toward marriage been
influenced and who has influenced them?
When do you feel most psychologically distant
from your partner? How does this psychological distance make you feel? Do you ever feel
suffocated by your partner's closeness? Are
there any problems you would like to discuss
with your partner,but do not know how to bring
them up?
Assessment issues considered after session
two include: Does the couple have rigid expectations, needs, roles, and goals or are these
flexible? What effect will this have on the
couple later in their relationship? Why is each
person getting married and can their partner
meet these needs? What are the conscious as
well as unconscious expectations, needs,
roles, and goals of the couple? How well do
these fit together for this particular couple?
Does the couple have the ability to function
compatibly and what is the probability of the
couple continuing to function compatibly in
the future? Is there maturityand compatibility
in the homework answers? Were there drastically different attitudes or very similar attitudes between the couple's answers when
seen individually? Is the couple likely to
become trapped in any of the following "think
traps": One's partner is responsible for making
the other feel good. If one partner is feeling
bad, the other one must feel bad. One partner
must be at fault in an argument. Partners are
responsible for the other's self-esteem. One
partner must give total approval of the other
one's actions (Ball & Henning, 1981).
For homework, the couple plan their first
year's budget and bring a copy to the next session.
Session 111:Family, Finances, Friends, and Fun
Goals of this session are to help the couple
understand their particular family of origin
dynamics and how they apply to the family
they are forming (Bader et al., 1980; Oates &
Rowatt, 1975; Rolfe, 1976; Stahmann &Hiebert,
1980; Wright, 1977); to help the couple understand what needs their partnermeets and what
needs their family and friends meet (Hinkle &
Moore, 1971; Wright, 1977); and to help the
couple discover how compatible they are in the
areas of recreation, finances, and children
(Baderet al., 1980; Ball &Henning, 1981; Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972; Elkin, 1977; Family Service of Milwaukee, 1980; Freeman, 1965;
516
Meadows & Taplin, 1970; Oates & Rowatt, 1975;
Rolfe, 1975, 1977; Wright, 1977).
A genogram (Guerin & Pendagast, 1976) is
helpful in discussing each partner's relationship with their parents, siblings and future inlaws, as well as discovering family rules and
the type of relationship modeling their parents
have provided. Including the couple's expected
children in the genogram is important. The
topics of relationships with friends, jealousy
issues, and recreational activities of the couple
and of the individuals are checked. Other
topics discussed include financial plans, experiences of the couple with financial responsibilities, and compatibility of career goals and
lifestyle expectations.
Questions
asked
the couple
include:
Describe your parent's marriage. How is your
parent's marriage a model for your marriage?
How do you get along with your brothers and
sisters? What regrets do either of you have
from childhood? How do you as a couple handle family visits? How successful are you in
making decisions that involve your family? Are
you planning to have children? How many?
When? What will your life be like after your
children are born? Who in the marriage will
have the responsibility for the children's major
caretaking? If joint, how is that to be handled?
How. much experience have you had with children? How do you anticipate disciplining the
children? How will affection toward children be
shown? Who will be in charge of the bookkeeping? How will the money be divided? How
social is your partner and how social are you?
Do you have any friends as a couple? How
close are these friends and how often do you
see them? How are your friends chosen?
Together? Separately? How will you choose
friends after the wedding? Do you have
opposite-sex
friends? How do your friends
view your upcoming marriage? What do each of
you seek from friends? What do you like to do
together and apart from recreation? Is there
any interest you have both developed together? How much time is devoted to your
separate interests? Is this more or less time.
than you would like?
Assessment issues considered after session
three include: Is one partner harboring resentment towards the other's family? Are there any
dysfunctional structures within either's family
which might influence the couple? Are the
partners from families with compatible family
What are problems that may
constellations?
develop between one partner and future inlaws? How ready are the families to give up one
of their members to marriage? How does the
couple see life after the children are born and
is it realistic? Is the couple's financial plan
realistic? Is the couple satisfied with the way
they have arranged their friendships? Are there
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
October1985
any jealousy issues? If so, how are they being
dealt with? Do the individuals understand and
realize that they cannot and need not try to
fulfill all of the other's emotional and recreational needs? Does the couple have a support
system? If the couple does not have any
friends together, are they planning to do so in
the future? What interests do the couple share/
not share; how do they feel about the differences? How has each person expanded the
other's interests? Does either partner force the
other to participate in an interest that they do
not share? Are there excessive attachments to
parents, partners, orKfriends by either member
of the couple? Is there a balance in the quantity
and quality of the partner's relationship in
regards to friends?
Homework for the next session is tailored
according to couple needs. A task that would
help the couple become more clear on any of
the topics discussed is assigned.
Session IV:Parent's Meeting
The goals of the parent meeting are to see
the family systems in action, to help the couple
see their parents in a changing role, and to
possibly resolve some previous problem (Elkin,
1977; Rolfe, 1975; Shonick, 1975; Stahmann &
Hiebert, 1980). The couple and parents are encouraged to discuss and compare their past
roles with how their roles will change when the
couple marries. The transition that each person
is going through with the couple's marriage is
also explored. These include continued family
life without the presence of the child and the
parent's releasing of their child; the children
leaving their parent's care and looking to their
spouse as their primary source of love and
care; and each newlywed becoming the primary giver of love and care back to the spouse.
The parents also have the opportunity to share
a bit of knowledge gained through their marital
experiences. Discussion of problems regarding parents that surfaced in earlier sessions is
sometimes appropriate. Creative use of letters,
audio/video tapes, or the telephone is used
when parents cannot be convened because of
distance.
Some questions asked at the parent meeting
include: What would you, as parents, do differently now if you were raising your child over
again? What bit of knowledge regarding your
son/daughter do you have for your future in-law
that might make living with them easier? Is
there any knowledge you would like to share
about married life with the couple? How will
the relationship between you and your son!
daughter be different once he/she is married?
Are there any comments or issues that any one
would like to discuss?
Assessment issues considered after session
four include: How do the future spouses get
along with their future in-laws? Are there any
October1985
family dynamics that may signal a problem in
the future? How much support do the parents
provide the couple? Are any relationship
dynamics of the parents repeated in the
couple? Is there adequate individualization of
the couple from their families?
For homework, each partner writes out ways
he/she and his/her partner constructively and
destructively fight.
Session V:Communication and Conflict
The goals of session five are to assess the
couple's communication skills, problem solving ability, conflict negotiation skills, and positive behavior change strategies (D'Augelli et
al., 1974; Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972; Family
Service of Milwaukee, 1980; Freeman, 1965;
Hinkle & Moore, 1971; Riley et al., 1981; Rolfe,
1976; Van Zoost, 1973; Wright, 1977). During
this session the couple shares successful and
unsuccessful
communication
experiences
with their partner. The couple also talks about
the homework assignment on the constructive
and destructive fighting methods they use. A
note is made of any issues discussed by the
couple which are unresolved. The couple is requested to resolve one of their disagreements
during the session in order for the therapist to
observe firsthand how they deal with disagreements. The therapist also explores how the
couple handles disagreements
with their
parents.
Questions asked during session five include:
In what way are you trying to change your
destructive methods of fighting? What areas of
disagreement do you foresee in the future?
Assessment issues considered after session
five include: In the disagreements the couple
demonstrated, what processes did the couple
see? What processes did the therapist see? Is
the nonverbal communication consistent with
the verbal behavior? Is there openness and
clarity in the giving and receiving of information? Can the couple express emotions openly? What are the power and control issues?
How does the couple disagree? What is the
level of their problem solving skills and communication skills? Does this couple need problem solving training or communication training?
Homework for the next session is tailored
according to the couple's needs.
Session VI:Values and Sexuality
The goals of session six are to help the
couple better understand each other's values;
to determine any potential problem areas regarding values (Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972;
Oates & Rowatt, 1975; Stahmann & Hiebert,
1980; Wright, 1977); to assist the couple in
communication about their sexual needs; and
to determine potential sexual problems (Bauer
& Steen, 1973; Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972;
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
517
Freeman, 1965; Gangsei, 1971; Hinkle & Moore,
1971; Meadows & Taplin, 1970; Rolfe, 1975,
1977; Stahmann & Hiebert, 1980; Trainer, 1979;
Wright, 1977).
During this session the therapist discusses
with the couple their religious orientations,
and how any differences are being handled.
One of the partners speaks for the other and
shares what they know about their partner's
values, all the while checking whether or not
the other agrees with their partner's perceptions. Cultural issues, moral code, and political
values are examined. The couple discusses differences and similarities in their values. The
therapist checks the compatibility of the
couples expression of sexual needs.
Some questions asked include: Which of
your partner's values do you like and respect?
Which of your partner's values will be hardest
to live with? How do you show your partner affection? How did your parents show affection
in the home? How do you want affection to be
shown in your home? How do you want affection to be shown in public? What kinds of sexual experiences have been good experiences in
your relationship together? Where or when do
you foresee, or may have already experienced,
any problems in your sexual relationship? How
do you handle or how will you handle the fact
that sometimes one of you is in the mood for
sex and the other is not? Are you using any
birth control methods? If not, have you discussed birth control? If yes, how satisfied are
you with your birth control decision?
Assessment issues considered after session
six include: Is there a general agreement on
priorities, such as money, culture, school,
moral code, religion, and
home, clothes,
politics. Are there great differences between
the partners' values? Are the couple affectionate with one another? How is the couple
dealing with their sexuality? Is it mutually pleasant for both in love making? If not, what are
they doing about it? Is the couple responsibly
using birth control if they are having intercourse? If the woman is pregnant, have alternatives other than marriage been explored?
Some additional general assessment issues
are also considered throughout the assessment process. Is there a balance of independence and dependence in the couple's relationship? Can each survive without the other? Is
there a healthy reliance on one's partner for
some things? Is there a balance in the couple
when it comes to activity and passivity? Can
each take the responsibility for getting what
they want both in action and ideas? On the
and distance continuum, can the
closeness
couple be close without smothering? Can each
individual tolerate intimacy? How does the
couple use and abuse power? How is power
shared in the marriage? Can each individual
use power wisely? If need be, can one member
518
give up power for a while? On the dominancesubmission scale, who is dominant and who is
submissive and in what situations? In what
ways does the couple have an equalitarian relationship? To what extent is love for the mate
motivated by fear of being alone? How does
each spouse expect to prevent loneliness for
the other? Does one or both of the individuals
need to possess and control their mate in order
to feel secure? How anxious is each individual? What does the partner do to make the anxiety worse or better? What kind of defenses
does each partner have? Does each partner
love the other? How is love understood? What
is each partner's sense of their gender identity? Does each partner measure up to the other
partner's desired characteristics as a sexual
partner? Can each of the partners love both
themselves as well as others? Do the partners
have similar ways of processing information, or
can they tolerate differences? Are there any
danger signs of immaturity, unrealistic expectations, low motivation, or rigid behavior on the
part of either partner? Are there other danger
signs, such as frivolous reasons for the couple
to get married? Is there some mental, emotional, physical, or other handicap that might
endanger the marriage? Is there a marked personality incompatibility? If this is a second
marriage for either partner, has sufficient time
elapsed since the first marriage ended? Is
unpassive,
either partner uncommitted,
responsive, or insensitive? What is the level of
apprehension, pessimism, anger and aggression of each partner?
Following the sixth assessment session, the
therapist provides the couple with a written
This summary
summary of the assessment.
statement includes the significant strengths,
resources, and potential liabilities in the relationship; the degree of maturity, awareness of
relationship issues, and commitment to the
marriage; possible impediments to a well functioning marriage; and prognosis and recommendations for the couple.
Session:
Post Wedding Check-up
The goals of the post wedding check-up are
to allow the couple to review what they learned
and for the
in the premarital assessment
couple to review their married life in order to
pinpoint problems and joys.
Questions asked include: What strengths
have you discovered in your relationship since
you have been married? What happened to the
problems you were experiencing when you
were in the premarital assessment? What new
areas of concern have developed? How do you
anticipate dealing with these?
Summary
In an effort to evaluate the P.A.P. program,
feedback on the strengths and limitations of
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
October 1985
the program was requested from couples and
from therapists. A self-report questionnaire
was used with couples and an interview and
questionnaire were used with the therapists.
Couples and therapists
reported that the
benefits of the assessment
included the partners knowing one another better; clarification
of the couple's expectations of the relationship, both for the individuals and the couple;
and better understanding of the dynamics of
the relationship.
Strengths of the program include the opportunity for the couple to discuss in a formal setting issues they may not have previously discussed,
thereby verbalizing expectations.
Homework assignments and time space of the
program encourage the couple to explore
topics in more depth out of the session, thus
helping the couple to better assess their own
relationship. Although most couples are not
able to objectively assess their relationship
during the "infatuation" stage, the couple can
be supported by the therapist to begin recognizing that it is normal for couples to experience some disappointments or hardships.
One major limitation of the program is that it
provides few immediate gratifications for the
couples, as no skills, such as problem solving,
are taught. The program also contains much
more material than can be thoroughly dealt
with in a session. Couples, however, sometimes see the time commitment of six assessment sessions as too great. It then becomes
the task of the therapist to deal effectively with
the couple's motivation.
The P.A.P. as designed is geared for the
young couple. When working with more mature
individuals, the therapist must make adjustments to account for increased life experiences of the couple. In addition, the P.A.P.
is not designed for couples who are having
serious problems. The assessment
is viewed
as more effective for couples who are seeking
the program or will accept the commitment
than for couples who are only meeting a requirement of their church.
Preliminary evaluation of the P.A.P. suggests that partners' relationship expectations
become more congruent as a result of participation in the program. Sager's (1981) major
work of marital therapy seeks to improve
couple
relationships
by helping married
couples arrive "at one functioning contract the
terms of which both partners are aware of and
can subscribe to." As expectations of the marriage are a large portion of this contract, it is
hypothesized that increasing congruency of
the partners' expectations
during the premarital relationship would positively affect the
marital relationship. Research involving marital
and premarital expectations is currently being
designed to explore the relationship between
expectations and marital satisfaction.
October-1985
REFERENCES
Bader, E., Microys, G., Sinclair, C., Willett, E., & Conway, B.
(1980). Do marriage preparation programs really work?: A
Canadian experiment. Journal of Marital and Family
Therapy, 6, 171-179.
Bader, E., Riddle, R., & Sinclair, C. (1980). Do marriage preparation programs help? (A five year study). Toronto, Canada:
University of Toronto, Department of Family and Community Medicine.
Bagarozzi, D. A., & Rauen, P. (1981). Premarital Counseling: Appraisal and status. The American Journal of Family Therapy,
9(3), 13-28.
for
Ball, J. D., & Henning, L. H. (1981). Rational suggestions
Journal of Marital and Family
premarital counseling.
Therapy, 7(1), 69-73.
Barnhill, L. R. (1979). Healthy family systems. The Family Coordinator, 28, 94-108.
Bauer, R., & Steen, J. (1973). Sex counseling on campus: Shortterm treatment techniques. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 43, 824-839.
B3enveniu, M. J., Sr. (1975). Measurement of marital communication. The Family Coordinator, 24, 65-68.
Carter, E. A., & McGoldrick, M. (1980). The family life cycle: A
framework for family therapy. New York: Gardner Press, Inc.
D'Augelli, A. R., Deyess, C. S., Guerney, B. G., Hershenberg, B.,
& Sborofsky, S. (1974). Interpersonal skills training for
dating couples: An evaluation of an educational mental
21,
health service. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
385-389.
Eichelberg, S. G., & Wilson, A. J. (1972). Experiments in group
premarital counseling. Social Casework, 53, 551-562.
Elkin, M. (1977). Premarital counseling for minors: The Los
Angeles experience. Family Coordinator, 26, 429-443.
Family Service of Milwaukee. (1980). Marriage preparation program. Unpublished manuscript. (Available from Family Service of Milwaukee, Community Education Department, 2819
West Highland Blvd., P.O. Box 08434, Milwaukee, WI 63202.)
Freeman, D. (1965). Counseling engaged couples in small
groups. Social Work, 10, 36-42.
Gangsei, L. B. (1971). Manual for group premarital counseling.
New York: Association Press.
Gleason, J., & Prescott, M. R. (1977). Group techniques for premarital preparation. Family Coordinator, 26, 429-443.
Guerin, P. J., & Pendagast, E. C. (1976). Evaluation of family
system and genogram. In P. J. Guerin, (Ed.), Family therapy:
theory and practice. New York: Gardner Press, Inc.
Guerney, B. G., Jr. (1977). Relationship enhancement: Skill
training programs for therapy, problem prevention and
enrichment. San Francisco: Jossey-Boss.
Hinkle, J. E., & Moore, M. (1971). A student couple's program.
The Family Coordinator, 20, 153-159.
Mace, D. R. (1972). Getting ready for marriage. Nashville, TN:
Abingdon Press.
Meadows, M. E., & Taplin, J. F. (1970). Premarital counseling
with college students: A promising triad. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 17, 516-518.
Mudd, E. H., Freeman, C. H., & Rose, E. K. (1941). Premarital
counseling in the Philadelphia marriage counsel. Mental
Hygiene.
Nachman, M. J. (1980). Premarriage handbook: A one-day program for couples preparing for and thinking about marriage.
Unpublished manuscript. (Available from Christ the Teacher
University Parish, 512 Normal Road, DeKalb, IL 60115.)
Oates, W. F., & Rowatt, W. (1975). Before you marry them.
Nashville, TN: Broadman Press.
Olson, D. H., Fournier, D. G., & Druckman, J. M. (1979). Prepare
II counselor manual. Unpublished manuscript. (Available
from Prepare, Inc., P.O. Box 190, Minneapolis, MN 55440.)
Ridley, C. A., Avery, A. W., Harrell, J. E., Leslie, L. A., & Dent, J.
(1981). Conflict management: A premarital training program
in mutual problem solving. The American Journal of Family
Therapy, 9(4), 23-32.
Rolfe, D. J. (1975). Marriage preparation manual. New York:
Paulist Press.
of teenage
Rolfe, D. J. (1976). Premarriage assessment
couples. Journal of Family Counseling, 4, 32-39.
Rolfe, D. J. (1977). Techniques with premarriage groups.
British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 5, 89-97.
Rutledge, A. L. (1968). An illustrative look at the history of premarital counseling. In J. A. Peterson (Ed.), Marriage and
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
519
family counseling: Perspective and prospect. New York:
Association Press.
Sager, C. J. (1981).Couples therapyand marriagecontracts. In
A. S. Gurman & D. P. Kniskern(Eds.), Handbook of family
therapy, pp. 85-130. New York:Brunner/Mazel.
Salts, C. J., &Buckner,L. P. (1983).Premaritalcounseling training. Unpublished manuscript. (Availablefrom NorthernIllinois University,Departmentof Home Economics, DeKalb,
IL60115.)
Schumm, W. R, &Denton, W. (1979).Trends in premaritalcounseling. Journal of Maritaland Family Therapy,5(4),23-30.
Shonick, H. (1975). Premaritalcounseling: Three years experience of a unique service. The Family Coordinator, 24,
321-324.
Stahmann, R. F., & Hiebert, W. J. (1980). Premarital counseling.
Lexington, KY: D E Health.
Stuart, R. B., & Stuart, F. (1975). Pre-marital counseling inventory. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Trainer, J. (1979). Pre-marital counseling and examination.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 5, 61-78.
Van Zoost, B. (1973). Premarital communication skills education with university students. The Family Coordinator, 22,
187-191.
Wright, N. H. (1977). Pre-marital counseling. Chicago: Moody
Press.
The English-Speaking Union is offering Winston Churchill Traveling
Fellowships tenable in 1987 to professionals working in the care and
treatment of victims of family violence. Applicants must be U.S. citizens
between the ages of 25 and 45 years, and must spend at least 50 percent
of their time working with victims of family violence. Grant amounts
range from $3,000 to $5,000, and grantees must spend at least six weeks
in a Commonwealth country. The field of award changes every year.
Application deadline is December 31, 1985. For further information and
applications, contact The English-Speaking Union, Education Department, 16 East 69th Street, New York, NY 10021. Telephone #: (212)
879-6800, ext. 225.
520
FAMILY RELATIONS
This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:41:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
October-1985