What is couple relationship education? : why is it needed? -- Approaches to couple relationship education and their effectiveness -- Assessment in an evidence-based approach to couple relationship education -- Couple care : program overview and tips for implementation -- Unit 1: Self-change -- Unit 2: Communication -- Unit 3: Intimacy and caring -- Unit 4: Managing differences -- Unit 5: Sexuality -- Unit 6: Looking ahead
Grounded in extensive research and clinical experience, this indispensable book addresses the "whats," "whys," and "how-tos" of conducting effective marriage and relationship education. Leading authority W. Kim Halford reviews a range of contemporary models and provides an in-depth description of his own approach, Couple CARE. Session-by-session guidelines for therapists show how to help groups or individual couples including those facing major life changes or stressors-foster closeness and communication, manage conflicts, and prevent common relationship problems. The book also explains how to use commercially available online assessment tools to help each couple develop their own relationship goals. It includes 35 reproducible handouts and forms.
Abstract: The current study examined the learning processes involved in professionally supported self‐directed couple relationship education (CRE). Fifty‐nine couples completed Couple CARE, a systematic, self‐directed CRE program designed in flexible delivery mode to be completed at home. Couples watched a DVD introducing key relationship ideas and skills and then completed a structured guidebook. The learning process was supported by telephone‐based coaching sessions from a professional relationship educator. Couples completed the learning tasks associated with the programe and successfully implemented a wide range of relationship self‐change, and most reported continuing implementation of program learning at 6 months follow‐up. These findings suggest that Couple CARE is readily accessible and results in effective skill acquisition for couples.
AbstractThis study explored whether attributions for negative partner behavior mediate the association between insecure attachment and negative couple communication, using both self‐report and observational data. A sample of 59 married and cohabiting Australian couples completed self‐report measures of attachment, attributions, and communication; were videotaped participating in two 10‐min problem‐solving discussions; and were assessed on their attributions during the discussions using video‐mediated recall. Multilevel modeling found that female attachment insecurity was the most consistent predictor of self‐reported and observed couple communication, and negative attributions mediated the association between attachment and self‐reported couple communication. These findings suggested that attachment insecurity increased the likelihood that negative attributions were generated, which, in some cases, then influenced the style of communication each partner reported.
ObjectiveTo examine couple and parenting outcomes from an American version of Couple CARE for Parents (CCP) in low‐income, unmarried couples.BackgroundWe adapted an evidence‐based, flexibly delivered program for use with low‐income, unmarried couples, for whom the outcome literature is scarce.MethodCouples (N = 443) were recruited from maternity units and began CCP. They completed measures before, during, and immediately after the intervention and again 6 months later.ResultsExperience of moderate psychological intimate partner violence (IPV) declined and perceived parenting efficacy increased over time; there was no change in severe psychological or physical IPV. Individuals with lower levels of relationship commitment than their partners showed improvement in relationship satisfaction, whereas those with similar or higher levels of commitment maintained their baseline levels despite being in a period of expected satisfaction decline.ConclusionCCP showed some signs of helping low‐income couples during a stressful period, and its flexible service delivery model allowed these couples to participate by reducing the impediments of transportation challenges, conflicting work schedules, and overall time poverty.ImplicationsThe results of this study suggest practitioners interested in using CCP with low‐income couples would likely maximize the impact by (a) focusing on pregnant, first‐time parents; (b) integrating CCP within postnatal health care; and (c) assuming that a considerable minority of couples will avail themselves of only up to two sessions, and thus practitioners should frontload content, making other content optional or just‐in‐time. In addition, nonpsychoeducational elements (e.g., gamification, easy computerized tasks to reduce angry responses, watching couple‐themed movies) could enliven preventative offerings for perinatal couples.
