"Apologize to my parents, and get therapy, and I'll marry you."

UPDATE 8/8/07.  One of the individuals named in the NYT story quoted below has contacted me and asked that I delete their names.  This person says that the NYT reporter mischaracterized the situation terribly, so the person is trying to reduce the embarrassment and fallout from it and wants this post to stop coming up when people Google the names.   That's the reason for the bracketed substitutions.

This story from the NYT (reprinted in the Strib) about unmarried couples seeking "couples therapy" struck me as kind of creepy.

[WOMAN'S NAME] and [MAN'S NAME] met two years ago while teaching at a high school in Amherst, N.H. They planned to move in together at the start of the school year. But two weeks before the move [MAN'S NAME], 28, dropped a bomb. He didn't want to go ahead with it. In fact he didn't know if he wanted to be with [WOMAN'S NAME] at all....

Finally [MAN'S NAME] decided he wanted to stay together and to marry. [WOMAN'S NAME] put forth conditions: He had to write a letter of apology to her parents; he had to cut down on his "frat-boy activities," and he had to agree to go to couples therapy. He agreed.

The article never mentions what [he] did to [her] parents that required an apology.

At first I thought that it was [he] and [she] who were so creepy, rather than the idea of couples therapy itself. 

But wait.  It would be a mistake to equate this with what is known as "premarital counseling"---which is designed to guide a couple through the discussions that should take place during an engagement, in order to prepare them adequately for marriage. 

For unwed couples encountering problems and who have decided, at least for the moment, not to break up, therapy serves as a sort of vetting system for the relationship, a role once taken by parents or religion. Today, couples seek a therapist not just to manage a crisis -- for volatile arguments, when infidelity has occurred, when one person wants a commitment but the other is reluctant -- but often, experts say, as validation: a second opinion on whether the relationship has legs.

I wonder if it really means "I have now realized that marrying you would be a mistake.  I should find out if you are likely to change, before I have to admit that we need to sell our house and divide up our stuff."

I thought this statement was alarming, though:

Psychotherapy techniques for young, unmarried couples are no different from those for marital therapy.

In other words, marriage therapists approach married couples with the same ideas, techniques, suggestions, attitudes that they would approach young, unmarried couples?

There's no difference in the eyes of therapists between "we're married" and "we split the rent?"  The level of commitment is assumed to be the same?

At least the therapists that the NYT writer, Zoe Wolff, bothered to interview and quote.  If I were a dedicated pro-marriage therapist---and there are many out there---I'd be pretty annoyed that  nobody bothered to get a quote from a therapist with the opinion that married couples are essentially different from couples who are not married.

From the practical point of view of the therapist, the answer to a very important question changes:  In what circumstances is it ethical for a therapist to recommend that the couple separate?

Comments

[Bill Ware]

Hi Erin,

I was pointed here by Sara at Family Scholars Blog. I am enjoying your posts.

I mentioned you in a comment I left there, so I thought I'd best post a version here too:

“Psychotherapy techniques for young, unmarried couples are no different from those for marital therapy.”

This would be the case when we think of therapy as a process. This basic process would apply to individuals and couples alike.

Therapy is based on the reality of the situation the couple finds themselves in, so of course the marital status and the number and ages off any children would be of primary interest during any discussion. It would be off base to suggest that these important factors aren't taken into consideration.

Suppose a couple goes to a real estate agent looking for a house. The agent finds out about the family members, what their needs and interests are, and shows them the the houses available that might meet their payment capabilities and living requirements. The agent provides information about the local schools, the neighborhood, taxes, restrictions and so forth, and answers any questions as hsr knowledge allows. In the end, though, it has to be the couple who makes the decision as to which house to buy. They have to be satisfied that they used the information available to make the best possible choice in light of their capabilities and needs since they will have to live with that decision well into the future.

I practiced a form of therapy referred to as "client centered therapy" which works in a similar way. The couple comes to therapy with certain objectives in mind and it is the therapist's responsibility to help the couple reach these goals. Information is exchanged; communication, goal setting and other skills are enhanced; options and their consequences are discussed. In the end, though, it has to be the couple who decide on which course of action to take. After all, the couple know more about themselves than a therapist could ever presume to know, and it is the couple who will have to live with these decisions for the rest of their lives.

When you ask, "In what circumstances is it ethical for a therapist to recommend that the couple separate?" the answer is no, no, no, no. A competent therapist would never do such a thing. It's arrogant and counter-therapeutic.

Just as in the real estate example, therapy is a communication among adults. Treating the couple like children by telling them what they ought and ought not to be doing is resented, resisted, and the individuals will do what they want later anyway. They might have started out mad at each other, now they're mad at the therapist as well. This approach is a recipe for disaster.

A function of therapy is to help each individual become a competent adult. That is, a person who recognizes hsr needs, gathers and analyses information in a rational way, who can set realistic goals and can pursue them successfully. Making decisions (suggestions, recommendations) for them is the opposite of this. It fosters dependency and allows them to avoid responsibility by making the therapist at fault if something goes wrong.

The therapist can provide all the best information possible, but the individuals have to make the decisions themselves and take full responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Note: hsr = his or her