Making a Case for Premarital Education" – Article Review
Based on current information gathered from empirical analysis, professional/public opinion, and rational debate, Stanley (2001) constructed four arguments that support an increased need for premarital counseling. The arguments were “ presented for the plausible benefits of engaging in premarital preventive efforts on a broad scale” (Stanley, 2001, p. 272). The author’s arguments include: 1. Using premarital strategies to slow couples down in an effort to allow them time get to know one another better before jumping into marriage.2. Using premarital counseling strategies to emphasize the importance of the marital union and the long-term family and societal consequences attached to the decision to marry. 3. The use of premarital strategies will demonstrate that there are resources available to assist couples when they start to experience marital discord. 4. Couples participation in premarital education programs are less likely to have marital problems and are less likely to divorce (Stanley, 2001). Stanley (2001) presents the arguments as possible research programs that could be studied further to help develop a better understanding of what strategies can be implemented to lower and/or prevent divorce and decrease marital distress. Scott Stanley makes some compelling arguments for the need of premarital counseling and places emphasis on all of society taking an attitude of prevention in regards to developing strategies to effectively deal with the high divorce rate and high levels of marital discord that our country is currently battling. While the arguments have a sound basis are very rational, they lack validity from empirical research. Stanley (2001) acknowledges the need for more empirical research is needed to determine how to successfully prevent marital distress for society as a whole and lower the current divorce rates. Silliman and Schumm (2000) support the need for more research on this topic when...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document