Distressed couples and marriage education^*

Abstract

Professionals generally believe that couples who choose to attend marriage education programs are not as distressed as are clinical couples and that distressed couples are not good candidates for marriage education. We examined these assumptions in 129 married couples who enrolled in a PAIRS, Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills (Gordon, 1994), marriage education course. Using the Enriching Relationship Issues, Communication and Happiness Inventory (Olson, 2002) typology classification with other measures of relationship adjustment, participants were classified as highly distressed, conflicted, and devitalized. Findings suggest that highly distressed married couples are among those who seek a marriage education experience. Implications for marriage education providers are discussed.

It's About Time! Examining Received Dosage and Program Duration as Predictors of Change Among Non‐Distressed and Distressed Married Couple and Relationship Education Participants

“…An emerging reality, however, is that whereas CRE was originally intended as a preventive intervention, relationally distressed couples are also attending programs in non‐trivial numbers (see Blanchard et al., ), with some studies reporting distressed couples consisting of as high as 70% (Kaiser et al., ) and 93% (DeMaria, ) of the sample. Because it is apparent that programs include relationally distressed couples, and effects may differ for these couples (e.g., Carlson, Rappleyea, Daire, Harris, & Liu, ; Quirk, Strokoff, Owen, France, & Bergen, ), it is time that research identifies what works for whom‐ or whether predictors of change are the same for non‐distressed and distressed couples.…”

Relationship Education for Stepcouples Reporting Relationship Instability—Evaluation of the Smart Steps: Embrace the Journey Curriculum

“…Given the potential for challenges in stepfamilies, scholars and practitioners suggest the use of preventative measures such as educational programs to preemptively address family challenges and transitions (Michaels, ; Pasley & Garneau, ). Educational programs have been effective for a broad population of stepcouples (e.g., Lucier‐Greer & Adler‐Baeder, ; Lucier‐Greer, Adler‐Baeder, Ketring, Harcourt, & Smith, ), yet research suggests that individuals in couple relationships often enter community psycho‐educational programs with notable levels of distress and relational instability (DeMaria, ), characteristics that are consistently linked to poorer relationship quality (Knobloch & Knobloch‐Fedders, ). While some in our field differentiate the purpose of educational programs as a mechanism to build knowledge and skills and family therapy as a means to help families repair relationships, there is a growing recognition of the necessary overlap of family life education (FLE) and family therapy as individuals, couples, and families voluntarily participate in educational programs at varying points in their development (Myers‐Walls, Ballard, Darling, & Myers‐Bowman, ).…”

Flexible Delivery Approaches to Couple Relationship Education: Predictors of Initial Engagement and Retention of Couples

“…Although RE is conceptually distinct from couple therapy, a substantial proportion of couples presenting for RE have at least mild relationship distress (de Maria 2005). For these distressed couples RE might have similar benefits as couple therapy in producing an increase in relationship satisfaction immediately after RE.…”