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 clarify potential problem areas and help the
area of premarital counseling, Schumm and couple realize their own personal resources in
Denton (1979) discussed the current trends, solving these problems.
issues, and needs in this important but The assessment model, unlike therapeutic
neglected area. In response to Schumm and counseling, is not limited to meeting the needs
Denton, Salts and Buckner (1983) developed a of couples presenting specific problems. It is
training program for marital and family thera- applicable to all premarital couples. Assess-
pists in the area of premarital counseling. A ment provides the opportunity for a couple to
premarital assessment program for couples reevaluate and confirm their commitment and
was also designed which meets both training decision to marry. It may also lead to referral or
needs of beginning marital and family thera- contracting for therapy or couple enrichment,
pists and the needs of couples at various such as the Premarital Relationship Enhance-
stages of relationship development. The pur- ment (Guerney, 1977).
pose of this paper is to describe the premarital Ball and Henning (1981) found that couples
assessment program. anticipating marriage typically hold unrealistic
The approaches to premarital preparation expectations about the nature of the marital
used by various professionals and defined by relationship. Even couples who acknowledge
Schumm and Denton (1979) include the gener- that problems often arise after marriage, have
alized education preparation, instructional not objectively assessed their own relation-
counseling, therapeutic counseling and couple ship. The assessment model is designed to in-
enrichment. The premarital assessment ap- dividualize the premarital preparation for each
proach is related to instructional counseling, couple, thus providing greater impact upon the
which has a goal of "preparing couples to couple's awareness of their relationship
realistically adjust their expectations of mar- dynamics as opposed to educational prepara-
riage by providing them with information and tion.
exposure to a variety of frequently occurring The premarital assessment program also
maritalproblems" (Schumm & Denton, 1979, p. provides training in specific skills for the
24). The premarital assessment goes beyond beginning marital and family therapist. The
providing information by seeking to make the training and research center in which the pro-
couple aware of the strengths and weaknesses gram was developed uses a systems approach
in their relationship. The program will help to family therapy. The premarital assessment
program is designed to provide training in
assessing couple relationships using a basic
*Presented in part at the spring conference, Illinois Divi- developmental/structural framework. Barnhill's
sion of AAMFT, March, 1983, Oakbrook, IL. (1979) dimensions of a healthy family and the
-Lynn P. Buckner is a marital and family therapist at Cen-
tral Austin Counseling Center, 440 Mayfield, Chicago, IL60044.
developmental family life cycle concepts ad-
Connie J. Salts is an Associate Professor, Department of Fami- dressed by Carter and McGoldrick (1980) pro-
ly and Child Development, Auburn University, Auburn, AL vide a theoretical basis on which the assess-
36849. ment of couple functioning is made.
The development of the premarital assess-
Key Words: marriage preparation, premarital counseling, ment program began with an extensive review
premarital couinseling training, prevention, relationship of the literature. Programs which educated and
assessment.
counseled groups of couples included Bader,
Microys, Sinclair, Willett, and Conway (1980);
(Family Relations, 1985, 34, 513-520.) Bader, Riddle, and Sinclair (1980); Eichelberg

October1985 FAMILY RELATIONS 513

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
 and Wilson (1972); Family Service of Milwaukee 12 weeks. During this extended time period,
(1980); Freeman (1965); Gangsei (1971); Gleason the couple has a greater opportunity to work on
and Prescott (1977); Meadows and Taplin discovered weaknesses, thus providing greater
(1970); Nachman (1980); Rolfe (1975, 1977); and input for the assessment and making the
Rutledge (1968). Individual couple premarital assessment a realistic process. A postwedding
programs which educated, counseled, and check is done after the couple has been mar-
assessed each couple separately included Ball ried about 3 months.
and Henning (1981); Elkin (1977); Mudd, Stuart's Premarital Counseling Inventory is
Freeman, and Rose (1941); Oates and Rowatt used to aid the therapist with the assessment
(1975); Olson, Fournier, and Druckman (1979); of the couple (Stuart & Stuart, 1975). This in-
Rolfe (1976); Shonick (1975); Stahmann & strument is a short answer form providing
Hiebert (1980); Trainer (1979); and Wright (1977). basic demographic information, past marital
Five other group programs were reviewed history and present relationship information.
because of their relevancy to premarital The inventory contains information on atti-
assessment. Two dealt with communication tudes of the couple towards roles of wives and
(Bienvenu, 1975; Van Zoost, 1973) and two dealt husbands, male dominance, and traditional-
with relationship enhancement (D'Augelli, ism. Also provided are the couple's expecta-
Deyess, Guerney, Hershenberg, & Sborofsky, tions, a measure of the optimism in the rela-
1974; Hinkle & Moore, 1971). One program tionship, and concerns each individual may
taught communication and mutual problem have regarding the relationship. Finally, the in-
solving skills (Ridley, Avery, Harrell, Leslie, & ventory assists in discovery of problem and
Dent, 1981). Baur and Steen (1973) discussed nonproblem areas by revealing the similarities
sexual counseling and related it to premarital and differences of the couple's expectations of
couples. Sager's (1981) concept of marriage the marital relationship and perceptions of the
contracts was found pertinent to premarital current relationship.
assessment. Mace's (1972) do-it-yourself ap- The main goal of the premarital assessment
proach to premarital preparation was examined program is to enable the couple to examine
as well as two reviews of premarital programs themselves, their partner, and their relation-
(Bagarozzi & Rauen, 1981; Schumm & Denton, ship in order to reevaluate and confirm that in-
1979). deed this is the person they want to marry. This
The programs and materials reviewed were goal is achieved by assessing the quality of
first categorized according to the method, ap- relationship maintaining skills possessed by
proach, and structure of providing premarital the couple. These skills include effective com-
programming. Goals from all the programs munications, ability to solve problems, and
were then reviewed, followed by the specific conflict negotiation. Individual and couple ex-
topics and techniques used to accomplish pectations, goals, roles, and needs as sug-
these goals. In order to select the most valu- gested by Sager (1981) are explored in order to
able format, goals, topics and techniques to help the couple fully realize their differences.
meet both training needs and couple needs, all The second goal of the program is to ex-
aspects of the reviewed programs were evalu- amine some of the frequent problem areas for
ated as to their reported success, frequency of couples. These areas include friends, family
use, their applicability to the premarital clients and in-laws, religion, values, recreation,
served at the center, and the theoretical ap- finances, children, sex, and affection. A third
proach of the training program. goal of the program is to help the couple feel
comfortable in seeking professional help in the
Premarital Assessment Program future if they are having marital or family prob-
Premarital assessment is conducted with in- lems.
dividual couples, rather than using a group ap- In order to accomplish the goals set forth,
proach. The authors believe that focusing on several areas must be covered in each session.
the individual couple is the best approach for After the introductory session, the first assess-
assessing relationship dynamics and address- ment session includes the dating history of the
ing specific issues with couples. The assess- couple and some parent information. The sec-
ment is a joint effort between the therapist and ond session covers expectations, goals, roles,
the couple. The purpose of the assessment is and the needs of each individual and of the
to help the couple discover areas of the rela- couple. In the third session, family, children,
tionship they might want to change. Strengths finances, friends, and recreation are dis-
and weaknesses, as well as functional and dys- cussed. The fourth session includes a meeting
functional patterns and dynamics of the rela- with the couple's parents. The fifth session
tionship are pointed out to the couple and the deals with communication and conflict resolu-
possibilities for overcoming weaknesses are tion. The last assessment session covers
explored. values and sexuality.
One introductory session and six assess- It is important to cover all the topics sug-
ment sessions are held over a period of at least gested, however, the sequencing and amount

514 FAMILY RELATIONS October1985

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
of time devoted to each topic will vary with you were going to marry? How do your parents
each couple's needs. Even though the purpose feel about your partner? What is your relation-
of the premarital assessment program is not to ship with your parents and with your partner's
resolve problem areas for the couple, more parents? What attracts you and worries you
time is spent assessing problem areas than about your partner now? How are the wedding
nonproblem areas. plans coming? Are there any differences of
In the sessions, discussions between the opinion between the two of you on how the
couple and the therapist and use of dyadic wedding should be handled? If so, how are you
structured and unstructured exercises provide dealing with these differences? Are there any
information for the assessment. The format of disagreements with your parents about the
each session includes a wrap up of the previ- wedding?
ous session, discussion of the homework Assessment issues considered after the first
assignment, introduction of a new theme, and session include: Who makes the decisions?
assignment of new homework. Who is in control? Who is dependent in the
A detailed description of each premarital relationship and how does that affect the rela-
assessment session follows. Included in the tionship? How is conflict and separation
description are the goals of each session, handled in the relationship? What is each per-
topics and suggested techniques, examples of son's self-esteem? What is each person receiv-
questions to ask the couple, assessment ing from and giving to the relationship? Have
issues for the therapist to answer, and home- the partners dated enough to feel like this is
work for the couple. not their only choice and are they willing to be
committed to one person? What kind of rela-
Introductory Session
tionship does the couple have with their
The goals of the introductory session are to parents and future in-laws? What patterns and
provide the couple with a clear understanding dynamics in the relationship are considered
of the goals, purposes, and requirements of strengths/weaknesses? What signs of im-
the premarital assessment program, to reduce maturity exist? Do wedding preparations
any anxiety the couple may have regarding the reflect the couple's own style?
assessment process, and to have the couple Homework to be completed by the couple
complete the Stuart's Premarital Inventory and before the second session is written out by
other agency forms. both partners without comparing answers. The
five questions adapted from Wright (1977, p.
Session I: Dating History and Wedding Plans
90) provide a good introduction to session two.
The goals of this session are to join the (1) Write 12 to 15 reasons why you want to
couple and to obtain a general sense of the pat- marry your partner. (2) Describe the goals you
terns of the couple's relationship. This is ac- have for your marriage; what you want the mar-
complished by obtaining an historical view of riage to accomplish. (3) Write a paragraph on
the couple's relationship from the time prior to what you are bringing to this marriage that will
the couple's first meeting to the present make it work. (4) Write down your role and the
(Shonick, 1975). This can be done visually by responsibilities that you will have within the
putting three time lines on the board, one marriage; then write down what you believe the
under the other. The middle represents the role and responsibilities of your spouse will be.
relationship and the two other lines the individ- Be specific and detailed. (5) What will you get
uals. This technique is an adaptation from out of marriage that you would not have gotten
Stahmann and Hiebert's (1980) dynamic rela- if you had remained single?
tionship history. A brief look at the wedding
plans is important to determine whether or not Session 11:Expectations, Roles, Needs,
the couple and the families are in agreement and Goals
with the arrangements (Oates & Rowatt, 1975). The goals of session two are to begin the
Some questions asked the couple include: discovery of both conscious and unconscious
How long have you been dating? How did you expectations, roles, needs, and goals that are
happen to start going out? What attracted you compatible and incompatible in the couple's
to each other? When did you start dating each system; to uncover problem areas and to show
other regularly? How did you narrow your the couple some of their assurned expecta-
choice to each other? Who else were you tions; and to help clarify what each partner
dating when you started to see each other? wants from the marriage (Eichelberg & Wilson,
Have you ever stopped seeing one another dur- 1972; Family Service of Milwaukee, 1980;
ing the time you have been dating? If so, why? Freeman, 1965; Gangsei, 1971; Meadows &
Have you ever been apart from each other for a Taplin, 1970; Rolfe, 1975, 1976, 1977; Wright,
long period of time? How was this separation 1977). The homework is a good introduction for
handled? Who decides to go on a date? When the session. The issue of household mainte-
you have to make a decision on something, nance should be addressed if the couple has
what normally happens? How did you decide not covered this in their answers. Meeting indi-

October1985 FAMILY RELATIONS 515

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
 vidually with each partner helps to explore Meadows & Taplin, 1970; Oates & Rowatt, 1975;
wants and expectations of the marriage and Rolfe, 1975, 1977; Wright, 1977).
allows them to discuss the dependency of A genogram (Guerin & Pendagast, 1976) is
each partner. helpful in discussing each partner's relation-
Questions asked the individuals include: ship with their parents, siblings and future in-
What kind of career plans do you have? What laws, as well as discovering family rules and
are you expecting your partner's career plans the type of relationship modeling their parents
to be? What is your definition of marriage? have provided. Including the couple's expected
How have your attitudes toward marriage been children in the genogram is important. The
influenced and who has influenced them? topics of relationships with friends, jealousy
When do you feel most psychologically distant issues, and recreational activities of the couple
from your partner? How does this psychologi- and of the individuals are checked. Other
cal distance make you feel? Do you ever feel topics discussed include financial plans, ex-
suffocated by your partner's closeness? Are periences of the couple with financial respon-
there any problems you would like to discuss sibilities, and compatibility of career goals and
with your partner,but do not know how to bring lifestyle expectations.
them up? Questions asked the couple include:
Assessment issues considered after session Describe your parent's marriage. How is your
two include: Does the couple have rigid expec- parent's marriage a model for your marriage?
tations, needs, roles, and goals or are these How do you get along with your brothers and
flexible? What effect will this have on the sisters? What regrets do either of you have
couple later in their relationship? Why is each from childhood? How do you as a couple han-
person getting married and can their partner dle family visits? How successful are you in
meet these needs? What are the conscious as making decisions that involve your family? Are
well as unconscious expectations, needs, you planning to have children? How many?
roles, and goals of the couple? How well do When? What will your life be like after your
these fit together for this particular couple? children are born? Who in the marriage will
Does the couple have the ability to function have the responsibility for the children's major
compatibly and what is the probability of the caretaking? If joint, how is that to be handled?
couple continuing to function compatibly in How. much experience have you had with chil-
the future? Is there maturityand compatibility dren? How do you anticipate disciplining the
in the homework answers? Were there drasti- children? How will affection toward children be
cally different attitudes or very similar atti- shown? Who will be in charge of the bookkeep-
tudes between the couple's answers when ing? How will the money be divided? How
seen individually? Is the couple likely to social is your partner and how social are you?
become trapped in any of the following "think Do you have any friends as a couple? How
traps": One's partner is responsible for making close are these friends and how often do you
the other feel good. If one partner is feeling see them? How are your friends chosen?
bad, the other one must feel bad. One partner Together? Separately? How will you choose
must be at fault in an argument. Partners are friends after the wedding? Do you have
responsible for the other's self-esteem. One opposite-sex friends? How do your friends
partner must give total approval of the other view your upcoming marriage? What do each of
one's actions (Ball & Henning, 1981). you seek from friends? What do you like to do
For homework, the couple plan their first together and apart from recreation? Is there
year's budget and bring a copy to the next ses- any interest you have both developed to-
sion. gether? How much time is devoted to your
separate interests? Is this more or less time.
Session 111:Family, Finances, Friends, and Fun than you would like?
Goals of this session are to help the couple Assessment issues considered after session
understand their particular family of origin three include: Is one partner harboring resent-
dynamics and how they apply to the family ment towards the other's family? Are there any
they are forming (Bader et al., 1980; Oates & dysfunctional structures within either's family
Rowatt, 1975; Rolfe, 1976; Stahmann &Hiebert, which might influence the couple? Are the
1980; Wright, 1977); to help the couple under- partners from families with compatible family
stand what needs their partnermeets and what constellations? What are problems that may
needs their family and friends meet (Hinkle & develop between one partner and future in-
Moore, 1971; Wright, 1977); and to help the laws? How ready are the families to give up one
couple discover how compatible they are in the of their members to marriage? How does the
areas of recreation, finances, and children couple see life after the children are born and
(Baderet al., 1980; Ball &Henning, 1981; Eichel- is it realistic? Is the couple's financial plan
berg & Wilson, 1972; Elkin, 1977; Family Ser- realistic? Is the couple satisfied with the way
vice of Milwaukee, 1980; Freeman, 1965; they have arranged their friendships? Are there

516 FAMILY RELATIONS October1985

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
any jealousy issues? If so, how are they being family dynamics that may signal a problem in
dealt with? Do the individuals understand and the future? How much support do the parents
realize that they cannot and need not try to provide the couple? Are any relationship
fulfill all of the other's emotional and recrea- dynamics of the parents repeated in the
tional needs? Does the couple have a support couple? Is there adequate individualization of
system? If the couple does not have any the couple from their families?
friends together, are they planning to do so in For homework, each partner writes out ways
the future? What interests do the couple share/ he/she and his/her partner constructively and
not share; how do they feel about the dif- destructively fight.
ferences? How has each person expanded the
other's interests? Does either partner force the Session V:Communication and Conflict
other to participate in an interest that they do The goals of session five are to assess the
not share? Are there excessive attachments to couple's communication skills, problem solv-
parents, partners, orKfriends by either member ing ability, conflict negotiation skills, and posi-
of the couple? Is there a balance in the quantity tive behavior change strategies (D'Augelli et
and quality of the partner's relationship in al., 1974; Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972; Family
regards to friends? Service of Milwaukee, 1980; Freeman, 1965;
Homework for the next session is tailored Hinkle & Moore, 1971; Riley et al., 1981; Rolfe,
according to couple needs. A task that would 1976; Van Zoost, 1973; Wright, 1977). During
help the couple become more clear on any of this session the couple shares successful and
the topics discussed is assigned. unsuccessful communication experiences
with their partner. The couple also talks about
Session IV:Parent's Meeting the homework assignment on the constructive
The goals of the parent meeting are to see and destructive fighting methods they use. A
the family systems in action, to help the couple note is made of any issues discussed by the
see their parents in a changing role, and to couple which are unresolved. The couple is re-
possibly resolve some previous problem (Elkin, quested to resolve one of their disagreements
1977; Rolfe, 1975; Shonick, 1975; Stahmann & during the session in order for the therapist to
Hiebert, 1980). The couple and parents are en- observe firsthand how they deal with disagree-
couraged to discuss and compare their past ments. The therapist also explores how the
roles with how their roles will change when the couple handles disagreements with their
couple marries. The transition that each person parents.
is going through with the couple's marriage is Questions asked during session five include:
also explored. These include continued family In what way are you trying to change your
life without the presence of the child and the destructive methods of fighting? What areas of
parent's releasing of their child; the children disagreement do you foresee in the future?
leaving their parent's care and looking to their Assessment issues considered after session
spouse as their primary source of love and five include: In the disagreements the couple
care; and each newlywed becoming the pri- demonstrated, what processes did the couple
mary giver of love and care back to the spouse. see? What processes did the therapist see? Is
The parents also have the opportunity to share the nonverbal communication consistent with
a bit of knowledge gained through their marital the verbal behavior? Is there openness and
experiences. Discussion of problems regard- clarity in the giving and receiving of informa-
ing parents that surfaced in earlier sessions is tion? Can the couple express emotions open-
sometimes appropriate. Creative use of letters, ly? What are the power and control issues?
audio/video tapes, or the telephone is used How does the couple disagree? What is the
when parents cannot be convened because of level of their problem solving skills and com-
distance. munication skills? Does this couple need prob-
Some questions asked at the parent meeting lem solving training or communication train-
include: What would you, as parents, do dif- ing?
ferently now if you were raising your child over Homework for the next session is tailored
again? What bit of knowledge regarding your according to the couple's needs.
son/daughter do you have for your future in-law
that might make living with them easier? Is Session VI:Values and Sexuality
there any knowledge you would like to share The goals of session six are to help the
about married life with the couple? How will couple better understand each other's values;
the relationship between you and your son! to determine any potential problem areas re-
daughter be different once he/she is married? garding values (Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972;
Are there any comments or issues that any one Oates & Rowatt, 1975; Stahmann & Hiebert,
would like to discuss? 1980; Wright, 1977); to assist the couple in
Assessment issues considered after session communication about their sexual needs; and
four include: How do the future spouses get to determine potential sexual problems (Bauer
along with their future in-laws? Are there any & Steen, 1973; Eichelberg & Wilson, 1972;

October1985 FAMILY RELATIONS 517

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
 Freeman, 1965; Gangsei, 1971; Hinkle & Moore, give up power for a while? On the dominance-
1971; Meadows & Taplin, 1970; Rolfe, 1975, submission scale, who is dominant and who is
1977; Stahmann & Hiebert, 1980; Trainer, 1979; submissive and in what situations? In what
Wright, 1977). ways does the couple have an equalitarian rela-
During this session the therapist discusses tionship? To what extent is love for the mate
with the couple their religious orientations, motivated by fear of being alone? How does
and how any differences are being handled. each spouse expect to prevent loneliness for
One of the partners speaks for the other and the other? Does one or both of the individuals
shares what they know about their partner's need to possess and control their mate in order
values, all the while checking whether or not to feel secure? How anxious is each individu-
the other agrees with their partner's percep- al? What does the partner do to make the anx-
tions. Cultural issues, moral code, and political iety worse or better? What kind of defenses
values are examined. The couple discusses dif- does each partner have? Does each partner
ferences and similarities in their values. The love the other? How is love understood? What
therapist checks the compatibility of the is each partner's sense of their gender identi-
couples expression of sexual needs. ty? Does each partner measure up to the other
Some questions asked include: Which of partner's desired characteristics as a sexual
your partner's values do you like and respect? partner? Can each of the partners love both
Which of your partner's values will be hardest themselves as well as others? Do the partners
to live with? How do you show your partner af- have similar ways of processing information, or
fection? How did your parents show affection can they tolerate differences? Are there any
in the home? How do you want affection to be danger signs of immaturity, unrealistic expec-
shown in your home? How do you want affec- tations, low motivation, or rigid behavior on the
tion to be shown in public? What kinds of sex- part of either partner? Are there other danger
ual experiences have been good experiences in signs, such as frivolous reasons for the couple
your relationship together? Where or when do to get married? Is there some mental, emo-
you foresee, or may have already experienced, tional, physical, or other handicap that might
any problems in your sexual relationship? How endanger the marriage? Is there a marked per-
do you handle or how will you handle the fact sonality incompatibility? If this is a second
that sometimes one of you is in the mood for marriage for either partner, has sufficient time
sex and the other is not? Are you using any elapsed since the first marriage ended? Is
birth control methods? If not, have you dis- either partner uncommitted, passive, un-
cussed birth control? If yes, how satisfied are responsive, or insensitive? What is the level of
you with your birth control decision? apprehension, pessimism, anger and aggres-
Assessment issues considered after session sion of each partner?
six include: Is there a general agreement on Following the sixth assessment session, the
priorities, such as money, culture, school, therapist provides the couple with a written
home, clothes, moral code, religion, and summary of the assessment. This summary
politics. Are there great differences between statement includes the significant strengths,
the partners' values? Are the couple affec- resources, and potential liabilities in the rela-
tionate with one another? How is the couple tionship; the degree of maturity, awareness of
dealing with their sexuality? Is it mutually plea- relationship issues, and commitment to the
sant for both in love making? If not, what are marriage; possible impediments to a well func-
they doing about it? Is the couple responsibly tioning marriage; and prognosis and recom-
using birth control if they are having inter- mendations for the couple.
course? If the woman is pregnant, have alter-
Session: Post Wedding Check-up
natives other than marriage been explored?
Some additional general assessment issues The goals of the post wedding check-up are
are also considered throughout the assess- to allow the couple to review what they learned
ment process. Is there a balance of indepen- in the premarital assessment and for the
dence and dependence in the couple's relation- couple to review their married life in order to
ship? Can each survive without the other? Is pinpoint problems and joys.
there a healthy reliance on one's partner for Questions asked include: What strengths
some things? Is there a balance in the couple have you discovered in your relationship since
when it comes to activity and passivity? Can you have been married? What happened to the
each take the responsibility for getting what problems you were experiencing when you
they want both in action and ideas? On the were in the premarital assessment? What new
closeness and distance continuum, can the areas of concern have developed? How do you
couple be close without smothering? Can each anticipate dealing with these?
individual tolerate intimacy? How does the
Summary
couple use and abuse power? How is power
shared in the marriage? Can each individual In an effort to evaluate the P.A.P. program,
use power wisely? If need be, can one member feedback on the strengths and limitations of

518 FAMILY RELATIONS October 1985

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
the program was requested from couples and REFERENCES
from therapists. A self-report questionnaire Bader, E., Microys, G., Sinclair, C., Willett, E., & Conway, B.
was used with couples and an interview and (1980). Do marriage preparation programs really work?: A
questionnaire were used with the therapists. Canadian experiment. Journal of Marital and Family
Couples and therapists reported that the Therapy, 6, 171-179.
Bader, E., Riddle, R., & Sinclair, C. (1980). Do marriage prepara-
benefits of the assessment included the part- tion programs help? (A five year study). Toronto, Canada:
ners knowing one another better; clarification University of Toronto, Department of Family and Communi-
of the couple's expectations of the relation- ty Medicine.
Bagarozzi, D. A., & Rauen, P. (1981). Premarital Counseling: Ap-
ship, both for the individuals and the couple; praisal and status. The American Journal of Family Therapy,
and better understanding of the dynamics of 9(3), 13-28.
the relationship. Ball, J. D., & Henning, L. H. (1981). Rational suggestions for
premarital counseling. Journal of Marital and Family
Strengths of the program include the oppor-
Therapy, 7(1), 69-73.
tunity for the couple to discuss in a formal set- Barnhill, L. R. (1979). Healthy family systems. The Family Co-
ting issues they may not have previously dis- ordinator, 28, 94-108.
cussed, thereby verbalizing expectations. Bauer, R., & Steen, J. (1973). Sex counseling on campus: Short-
term treatment techniques. American Journal of Ortho-
Homework assignments and time space of the
psychiatry, 43, 824-839.
program encourage the couple to explore B3enveniu, M. J., Sr. (1975). Measurement of marital communi-
topics in more depth out of the session, thus cation. The Family Coordinator, 24, 65-68.
helping the couple to better assess their own Carter, E. A., & McGoldrick, M. (1980). The family life cycle: A
framework for family therapy. New York: Gardner Press, Inc.
relationship. Although most couples are not D'Augelli, A. R., Deyess, C. S., Guerney, B. G., Hershenberg, B.,
able to objectively assess their relationship & Sborofsky, S. (1974). Interpersonal skills training for
during the "infatuation" stage, the couple can dating couples: An evaluation of an educational mental
health service. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 21,
be supported by the therapist to begin recog-
385-389.
nizing that it is normal for couples to ex- Eichelberg, S. G., & Wilson, A. J. (1972). Experiments in group
perience some disappointments or hardships. premarital counseling. Social Casework, 53, 551-562.
One major limitation of the program is that it Elkin, M. (1977). Premarital counseling for minors: The Los
Angeles experience. Family Coordinator, 26, 429-443.
provides few immediate gratifications for the Family Service of Milwaukee. (1980). Marriage preparation pro-
couples, as no skills, such as problem solving, gram. Unpublished manuscript. (Available from Family Ser-
are taught. The program also contains much vice of Milwaukee, Community Education Department, 2819
more material than can be thoroughly dealt West Highland Blvd., P.O. Box 08434, Milwaukee, WI 63202.)
Freeman, D. (1965). Counseling engaged couples in small
with in a session. Couples, however, some- groups. Social Work, 10, 36-42.
times see the time commitment of six assess- Gangsei, L. B. (1971). Manual for group premarital counseling.
ment sessions as too great. It then becomes New York: Association Press.
Gleason, J., & Prescott, M. R. (1977). Group techniques for pre-
the task of the therapist to deal effectively with marital preparation. Family Coordinator, 26, 429-443.
the couple's motivation. Guerin, P. J., & Pendagast, E. C. (1976). Evaluation of family
The P.A.P. as designed is geared for the system and genogram. In P. J. Guerin, (Ed.), Family therapy:
theory and practice. New York: Gardner Press, Inc.
young couple. When working with more mature
Guerney, B. G., Jr. (1977). Relationship enhancement: Skill
individuals, the therapist must make ad- training programs for therapy, problem prevention and
justments to account for increased life ex- enrichment. San Francisco: Jossey-Boss.
periences of the couple. In addition, the P.A.P. Hinkle, J. E., & Moore, M. (1971). A student couple's program.
The Family Coordinator, 20, 153-159.
is not designed for couples who are having Mace, D. R. (1972). Getting ready for marriage. Nashville, TN:
serious problems. The assessment is viewed Abingdon Press.
as more effective for couples who are seeking Meadows, M. E., & Taplin, J. F. (1970). Premarital counseling
the program or will accept the commitment with college students: A promising triad. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 17, 516-518.
than for couples who are only meeting a re- Mudd, E. H., Freeman, C. H., & Rose, E. K. (1941). Premarital
quirement of their church. counseling in the Philadelphia marriage counsel. Mental
Preliminary evaluation of the P.A.P. sug- Hygiene.
Nachman, M. J. (1980). Premarriage handbook: A one-day pro-
gests that partners' relationship expectations gram for couples preparing for and thinking about marriage.
become more congruent as a result of partici- Unpublished manuscript. (Available from Christ the Teacher
pation in the program. Sager's (1981) major University Parish, 512 Normal Road, DeKalb, IL 60115.)
work of marital therapy seeks to improve Oates, W. F., & Rowatt, W. (1975). Before you marry them.
Nashville, TN: Broadman Press.
couple relationships by helping married Olson, D. H., Fournier, D. G., & Druckman, J. M. (1979). Prepare
couples arrive "at one functioning contract the II counselor manual. Unpublished manuscript. (Available
terms of which both partners are aware of and from Prepare, Inc., P.O. Box 190, Minneapolis, MN 55440.)
Ridley, C. A., Avery, A. W., Harrell, J. E., Leslie, L. A., & Dent, J.
can subscribe to." As expectations of the mar- (1981). Conflict management: A premarital training program
riage are a large portion of this contract, it is in mutual problem solving. The American Journal of Family
hypothesized that increasing congruency of Therapy, 9(4), 23-32.
the partners' expectations during the pre- Rolfe, D. J. (1975). Marriage preparation manual. New York:
Paulist Press.
marital relationship would positively affect the Rolfe, D. J. (1976). Premarriage assessment of teenage
marital relationship. Research involving marital couples. Journal of Family Counseling, 4, 32-39.
and premarital expectations is currently being Rolfe, D. J. (1977). Techniques with premarriage groups.
British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 5, 89-97.
designed to explore the relationship between Rutledge, A. L. (1968). An illustrative look at the history of pre-
expectations and marital satisfaction. marital counseling. In J. A. Peterson (Ed.), Marriage and

October-1985 FAMILY RELATIONS 519

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
 family counseling: Perspective and prospect. New York: Stahmann, R. F., & Hiebert, W. J. (1980). Premarital counseling.
Association Press. Lexington, KY: D E Health.
Sager, C. J. (1981).Couples therapyand marriagecontracts. In Stuart, R. B., & Stuart, F. (1975). Pre-marital counseling inven-
A. S. Gurman & D. P. Kniskern(Eds.), Handbook of family tory. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
therapy, pp. 85-130. New York:Brunner/Mazel. Trainer, J. (1979). Pre-marital counseling and examination.
Salts, C. J., &Buckner,L. P. (1983).Premaritalcounseling train- Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 5, 61-78.
ing. Unpublished manuscript. (Availablefrom NorthernIlli- Van Zoost, B. (1973). Premarital communication skills educa-
nois University,Departmentof Home Economics, DeKalb, tion with university students. The Family Coordinator, 22,
IL60115.) 187-191.
Schumm, W. R, &Denton, W. (1979).Trends in premaritalcoun- Wright, N. H. (1977). Pre-marital counseling. Chicago: Moody
seling. Journal of Maritaland Family Therapy,5(4),23-30. Press.
Shonick, H. (1975). Premaritalcounseling: Three years experi-
ence of a unique service. The Family Coordinator, 24,
321-324.

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 Depart-
ment, 16 East 69th Street, New York, NY 10021. Telephone #: (212)
879-6800, ext. 225.

520 FAMILY RELATIONS October-1985

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