.7 1/36““ ”1%)” 9-". «.67; 't 3'93" ”7. 5133 .12?“ : “3L '3'- 7.79:3“ 3"" ' "'53 In ‘ ' :5“;- VT"?! cu. - .I f3a'é‘ ”Mum" fi'§"‘\§'37 >33’fi'gilfig; 7M7333773- 3?" an ‘ “ ' . “:77; ‘ 77.. 177,7; .. .777; m 733'. I Is' 3""? ‘8‘ 7.: 5:7 ‘o‘: ' II" 'P' I] 7- n. ' l Hm» '- 9 5‘ ‘7- J «‘n'l I. 7‘ }- T :1'.\". ’“ ‘~ “ ”'3333‘4735375‘7‘3 um}. ., '. 777-7711" ‘ L"‘“7E'~"‘ .7 ‘ " 1.777; lU'-' ,': . 3"..“3 3W7: "Phat" W '7. '3‘ ""7" Ill.‘ 'ln‘ :VVAuL 7 “£51 .571. ‘{:2'L ' “3: A ‘ - H... V... ‘7, 7 77¢— ““73...“ :75"! :u. I 2—,” I V "I . “'2' w”. “.7 77"i‘7‘x‘fr-17777 . "'1 .7 .. h- v.".~-<.- - - I 7 - 77> 7;; g. 'Xl -y’fi;‘i '."R-' “tr-3:; “ “'3‘: :‘éfif '( .773 w. £753 5%.}? :xwmfim . wag? ~- “'T “ . . 9;! ‘1 ‘V V > 'v ._; it; .I; “1 r. T .-’ L ‘-' “.2 .‘ “.713. ii ' “. . .‘ w W . “an“ 1:." “41‘? 4‘,me ’e?‘ . 2L . I. . . ..I. ‘ "'35:! . .I4?.I I Jau¢1wjkt.§‘é O; 9"” ' E'It""9""1 "‘3' 1‘“ mi: , --’-L.-.-§:I—:' 7‘ - ..l I . v . - 2-D :“‘3*."—I.‘..'t. “.1 \ .I' I. ““1. (77w; ' . 12...;- 1 u‘é‘flI le‘IquI -.(' .' "'ww‘ H'IJF'" II':'!' I‘; 7‘ "I L!" IIII'II I N‘anII “I .. F . ' , 7 ‘4‘ '3'I' 7' ~ -' ' 3 f ' I I V “ I . , . -' I I' LIII- 4.‘ I‘I . ' I .. I" , I'm '..3' "I I'Hl 'I II .' I '. ' 3 'I mulrurfl'“ "' " Hf \' :. ':'.' .. . . 4;. .. - - “ O I \l. l, . 7' '7' .- u; “I. 7. :7 , . . .. .' , ... I737" .‘7 :7’II"I 7 7 - ." . .7 ; ' .‘7I I .. "3': " ‘ ".I "3 7" 3'“ II' .. 7' "ll 4" " " 7 . 7' {I} II'II1."‘II:IIi I . "M |':."I~. I. h , ,7 ‘J I‘ III XIII" 'II‘ ‘\\y"'" , l' {3 IIII-IIIV .'7""" I 'fliuf II 37"] I "IIIIIII .7373." "fil-IIHI {| ‘ Ii" )I H" I "3 :7. ‘ .77 '}' ' ”f ';.'"' "3' "“33" Infill; 7 '7'3' 7' "3 3"‘3II“,'7Lf-" "1":qu 7%: 3‘" '31'T"'33I'."'31I"3II '3' '3'” |‘(.I:I'I '34." " .I I'Tl’fl'}: l 'l'y'lb'" '7 3:4,: 1% 3. .ul. ,IIII ”I 3".” I' ”"333: 7,77; ”.3333 "W?” "M. 7.37" .. {7717.77 .7.) .3 777’.“ 7: .77 7377177771" L._,___ .— @ ‘ *J .‘44" __ {L At: M M MMMMM MMMMMMMMMM 3 1293 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled TOWARD A GROUNDED THEORY OF FAMILY STRENGTH IN HIGH QUALITY HIGH STABILITY MARRIAGE presented by Vivian Collins Campbell has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . D . degree in Fami 1y Eco lo gy $749241», @04/ Ma jOI‘ professor December, 1983 Date MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 MSU LIBRARIES RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. MAY .. I x} l t '1 Ir . | n 0 I . {a 2 6 2092. q .‘1 ; t: ,1 u 31. U +- V oer“ 4‘ n 3 ‘ lug w -~-—-..- . ‘ IP32 $71990 9e 101 "1 i I TOWARD A GROUNDED THEORY OF FAMILY STRENGTH IN HIGH QUALITY HIGH STABILITY MARRIAGE By Vivian Collins Campbell A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family and Child Ecology 1984 ABSTRACT TOWARD A GROUNDED THEORY OF FAMILY STRENGTH IN HIGH QUALITY HIGH STABILITY MARRIAGE BY Vivian Collins Campbell A grounded theory of marital strength using the methodology of Glaser and Strauss (1967) is presented. The researcher studied one icouple ‘whose marriage was characterized by high quality and high stability. Attention was given not only to each individual spouseds perceptions but to their perceptions as a unit. The purpose of this study was to generate theory not to establish verification of hypotheses. Researchers have devoted considerable research time to marriages of low quality and low stability. More information is needed about positive family models and what strong families are like. Such information may be helpful to others desiring to achieve greater family and marital quality. Family strength is considered as an overall, global quality. Marital strength is one component of family strength. In order to gain insight into the sources of family strength the nature and patterns of the linkages between the marital couple and its informal support systems were identified. The family ecological framework was employed for i a identifying family strength and examining interrelationships between the marital couple and its informal support systems. Data were collected by the researcher's participant observation and ethnographic interviewing. The observations and interviews were guided by these questions: 1. What are the sources of family strength? 2. What are the evidences of family strength? 3. What is the nature of the linkages between the family and its informal support systems? A. What are the patterns of the linkages between the family and its informal support systems? Four types of support were considered. These were social- emotional, physical, economic and informational. ‘ It was discovered that marital strength is an intangible internal resource of the couple as a unit that can be developed. The core concept is commitment to each other. .Facets that affect development of commitment are (a) appreciation, (b) communication, (0) acceptance, (d) family esteem and (e) purpose. In high quality high stability marriage couples develop generativity of the couple as a unit. They support other persons and causes.in accordance with their greatest perceived responsibility, need and desire to give. When support is received the preferred sources in rank order are (a) adult children, (b) other kin, (c) friends , (d) neighbors and last of all (e) formal support systems. 5—. ! >_ n. -“ DEDICATION To Glen, best friend and spouse ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS During the last few months an incredibly large informal support system of family and friends formed to offer me social-emotional, informational, physical and economic help. I will not name them all but wish them to know that they are remembered and appreciated. I am grateful to my committee members, Dr. Margaret Bubolz, Dr. Linda Nelson, Dr. Dolores Borland and Dr. Joseph Levine who have supported my efforts. Dr. Margaret Bubolz, my major professor and a co-director of research, has provided valuable insight, encouragement and has increased my understanding of theory. Dr. Linda Nelson, co-director of research, has provided valuable assistance with the methodology and has also been generous in giving time and counsel. Special thanks is extended to the "Congers" family. The names are fictitious but the«quality of their lives is real. I especially want to thank Barbara Lee and Hale Collins for the countless hours they spent word processing and printing. Appreciation is also extended to the College of Human Ecology for providing a dissertation fellowship. iii I. 'h ..5-.__‘, n a; Finally, I am thankful for those who prayed for my physical endurance when I needed a source of strength I" greater than myself. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures . . . . . . Chapter I Introduction . Chapter II Review of Literature . Marital Quality and Marital Stability .. Chapter III Methodology . . Research Approach . The Ethnographic Method Reliability and Validity The Grounded Theory Method Criteria for Selection of Family Research Procedure . The Ethnographic Procedure 0 Selection of the Family . . Agreements With the Family Techniques for Collecting and Recording Data . Implementation of Strategies . Implementation of Grounded Theory . Limitations . . . Chapter IV History and Description of Family History of Family . . Description of Family Members Description of the Home V 20 20 20 22 24 26 28 28 28 31 33 36 N1 43 HS 45 52 65 .-~ 0 Chapter V Emerging Theory I . . . . . . Part I Sources and Evidence of Family Strength Sources of Family Strength . Shared Enjoyment of Each Other and Humor Continuing Constructive Communication and Tolerance of Some Differences A Strong Positive Family Feeling . Shared Values and Ideals Continuing Commitment to Continuing Commitment to Beyond Themselves . . Evidence of Family Strength . Shared Enjoyment of Each Continuing Constructive Communication and Tolerance of Some Differences Each Other a Purpose Other and Humor A Strong Positive Family Feeling . Shared Values and Ideals Continuing Commitment to Continuing Commitment to Beyond Themselves . . Part II The Nature and Patterns of systems 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 Nature of the Linkages Between the Family Its Informal Support Systems Supports Between the Spouses Marital Couple . . . . Supports Between the Marital and Adult Children . . Supports Between the Marital and Extended Kin . . . Supports Between the Marital and Friends . . . . . vi Each Other a Purpose the Linkages Between the Family and Its Informal Support of the. Couple Couple Couple 69 69 7O 7O 7O 7O 71 71 71 72 72 75 79 82 86 89 92 92 92 93 93 93 Supports Between the Marital Couple and Neighbors . . . . . . . . . . . . Evidences of Support Between the Marital Couple and Its Informal Support Systems . . Supports Between the Spouses of the Marital Couple . . . . . . . . . . . . Supports Between the Marital Couple and Adult Children . . . . . . . . . . Supports Between the Marital Couple and Extended Kin . . . . . . . . . . . Supports Between the Marital Couple and Friends 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Supports Between the Marital Couple and Neighbors . . . . . . . . . . . . Patterns Affecting Support Given by the Marital Couple 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Support Was Given According to Where Perceived Responsibility Was Greatest Support Was Given According to Where Perceived Need Was Greatest . . . . . Support Was Given According to Where Desire to Give Was Greatest . . . . . Evidence of Support Given by the Marital Couple 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Support Was Given According to Where Perceived Responsibility Was Greatest Support Was Given According to Where Perceived Need Was Greatest . . . . . Support Was Given According to Where Desire to Give Was Greatest . . . . . ChapterVI Integration of Emerging Theory With Literature 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Sources of Family Strength .. . .. . .. . .. . Shared Enjoyment of Each Other and Humor. . . Continuing Constructive Communication and Tolerance of Some Differences . . . . . . . vii 93 94 9h 95 102 104 106 107 108 108 108 109 109 111 113 115 118 118 119 A Strong Positive Family Shared Values and Ideals Continuing Commitment to Continuing Commitment to Beyond Themselves . . Feeling Each Other . . a Purpose Nature of the Linkages Between the Family and Its Informal Support Systems . Patterns of the Linkages Between the and Its Informal Support Systems . Chapter VII Emerging Theory II . Commitment to Each Other . . Appreciation . . . . . Communication . . . . . Acceptance . . . . . . Family Esteem . . . . . Purpose . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . . . . . . . Chapter VIII Summary and Implications Summary of the Process . . . Summary of the Emerging Theory . Reflections About Use of the Family Ecological Framework . . . 0 Implications for Practitioners . Implications for Research and Theory Appendix A Letter to Family . . . Appendix B Consent Form . .. . . Appendix C Fieldnotes Format . . Appendix D Memo . . . . . . . . . Appendix E Calendar of Daily Activities of Researcher viii Family 121 122 124 126 127 133 137 137 137 137 137 137 137 139 1111 1111 11111 145 1H6 148 xi xiii xiv xv xvi List of References ix XX LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 An Exchange Typology of Marital Quality and Marital Stability . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 2 Kinship chart of Congers family . . . . . . . 30 Figure 3 Floor plan of Philip's House . . . . . . . . 66 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Throughout recorded history marriage and family have been basic institutions in all societies. Family life meets individual needs for affection and emotional security as well as societal needs of reproduction, socialization, order and stability. Husbands and wives today are more likely than in the past to evaluate their marriage primarily in terms of how well it satisfies their individual emotional needs. This increases the likelihood of divorce. If present trends continue for the next ten to twenty years, about half of the marriages begun in the mid-19703 will end in divorce. Divorce is typically a traumatic process causing short-term distress for most and longer distress for some. Many adults and children experience a chaotic life style and a period of disorganization especially during the first year after divorce. Although it appears that most children recover from the initial distress of parental divorce within a few years, we know little as yet about the long-term effects on them (Cherlin 1981). _Intense social, emotional and economic difficulties often occur during the first few years after divorce, impacting not only the family but society in general. A satisfying and stable family life is becoming more of a scarce resource. Rapid changes in marriage, divorce and remarriage strain the adaptive capacity not only of the family but other social institutions as well. 1 2 Over the years families with pathological problems have received much attention from researchers. Spanier and Lewis (1980) affirm that considerable research time is devoted to marriages of low quality and low stability, that is, those unhappy marriages that end in divorce. Stinnett (1979) states that we need information about the problems, but that we also need a balanced view. More information is needed about positive family models and what strong families are like. Hansen in 1981 said, We have good descriptions of some of the most dysfunctional families; yet we have few descriptions of what is usual for "healthy" families or what degree of success they can achieve. Such knowledge is vital and perhaps can be a guide toward achieving greater satisfaction in living for all families. (p. 5”) This research focuses on what is going right with families, rather than on what is going wrong. The objectives of this research are: 1. To gain deeper insight into family strength by identifying sources and evidence of family strength, discovering how a marital couple perceives its strength, and by describing the linkages between a family and its informal support systems. 2. To work toward a grounded theory of family strength with particular emphasis on the marital unit. In this study family strength is considered as an overall, global quality, comprised of several components. One component of a strong family is high quality high stability marriage. ‘There are other components of family strength, for example high quality parent-child 3 relationships. The focus of this study is the marriage component. In discovering how the marital couple perceives its strength, attention is given not only to each individual spouse's perceptions but to the couple's perceptions as well. Spanier and Lewis (1980) in recommending directions for research related to marital quality and stability state that, There is still a problem of the assessment of the marriage versus the partner's perceptions of the marriage. Much of today's research implies an analysis of the marriage, when it is really the individuals who reside in the marriage who are being studied. (p. 836) In order to add insight into the sources of family strength, the nature and patterns of the linkages between the marital couple and its informal support systems are identified. The family ecological framework described by Andrews, Bubolz and Paolucci (1980)i§1useful in examining these interrelationships. The authors explain that a family ecosystem has three central organizing components: the environed unit, environment and tn”: patterning of interactions and transactions between them. For the purpose of this study the first component, the environed unit or family, is defined as the marital couple only. The second component, the near environment, includes the adult children, extended kin, friends and neighbors. The third component of this family ecosystem is the interaction and reciprocal relationships between the first and second components, that is, the marital couple and its near 4 environment. Informal support systems are considered as synonymous with near environment. Three broad dimensions of family ecosystems are identified by Insel and Moos (197A). 1. Relationship dimensions identify the nature and intensity of personal relationships within the environment. They assess the extent to which individuals are involved in the environment and the extent to which they support and help one another. 2. Personal development dimensions consider the potential or opportunity in the environment for personal growth and the development of self-esteem. 3. Systems maintenance and system change dimensions assess the extent to which the environment is orderly and clear in its expectations, maintains control, and is responsive to change. While all three dimensions are important, the intent of this study is to focus on the relationship dimensions in assessing the extent to which the marital couple and its informal support systems support and help one another. Four types of help were mentioned, buttuH3defined by Andrews, Bubolz and Paolucci (1980). For this study they are described as follows: 1. Social-emotional help consists of companionship, pleasant association, affection or empathic support. 5 2. Economic help consists of merchandise, commodities or financial support. 3. Physical help consists of services. A. Informational help consists of counsel, advice, instruction, humuma-um an“: oaouuo-uuud humaaso sum: .H spun-auou~< emu-henna: a ouauuu hum_an..m so; unwansa :04 H man 4 nouoov numnancua sum: mama-:0 36A .bu accuse-uuu< 18 They consist of a balance of alternative attractions outside of the marriage and external pressures acting on the marriage. The three assumptions of the typology as stated are: 1. The greater the marital quality the greater the marital stability. 2. Alternative attractions to a marriage negatively influence the strength of the relationship between marital quality and marital stability. 3. External pressures to remain married positively influence the strength of the relationship between marital quality and marital stability (p. 288). Couples found in quadrant 1 represent the ideal. Although most couples could be found in this quadrant at some time during their marriage (most likely in the early years) only a minority of couples could be found in this quadrant at any point in time (Spanier, 1976; Spanier, Lewis and Cole, 1976; Hicks & Platt, 1970; Spanier, 1971; Rollins & Feldman, 1970). In sum, these reviews of research have three significant findings. Greater marital quality is associated with greater (a) social and personal resources, (b) spousal satisfaction with their life style and (c) rewards from spousal interaction. The relationship between marital quality and marital stability is a neglected area of 19 research. This study focuses on marital quality and stability as components of family strength. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY In this study, the ethnographic method was used for discovering a grounded theory of family strength. The family ecosystem framework was used to (a) focus observations and interviews, (b) analyze and describe family strength, and (c) examine interrelatedness between the marital couple and its informal support systems. Data were collected by the researcher's participant observing and ethnographic interviewing. The following sections will explicate the research approach, actual procedures followed and techniques used. Research Approach Wis—Nettles A comprehensive ethnography tries to document a total way of life. It was decided to use the method to produce a topic-oriented ethnography focusing on linkages between the marital couple and self-perceptions of their strength and its support systems. At the same time an attempt was made to gain understanding of the family as a whole, and through description bring them to life for the reader. According to LeCompte and Goetz (1982), the ethnographic method produces an "analytic description of an intact cultural scene. It delineates the shared beliefs, practices, artifacts, folk knowledge and behavior of a group of people" (p. 54). Before one imposes theories on the 20 21 people being studied,iJ;is essentialtxafind out how they define their own situation. It's not necessarily that ethnographers don't want to test hypotheses, it's just that if they do, the variables and operationalizations and sample specifications must grow from EH1 understanding of the group rather than from being hammered on top of it no matter how poor the fit. (Agar, 1980, p. 70) This researcher focused on language, behavior and artifacts to discover meanings to the persons involved. Data collection and analysis are accomplished concurrently. Collection of data begins first by making broad descriptive observations and finally by making increasingly focused observations. One strategy of ethnography is working with informants to discover their perspectives and perceptions. Spradley (1979) clearly identified the major differences in research with subjects and with informants. Research with Subjects Research with Informants 1. What do I know about a 1. What do my informants know problem that will allow about their culture that I me to formulate and test can discover? a hypothesis? 2. What concepts can I use 2. What concepts do my inform- to test this hypothesis? ants use to explain their experience? 3. How can I operationally 3. How do my informants define define these concepts? these concepts? A. What scientific theory a. What folk theory do my can explain the data? informants use to explain their experience? 5. How can I interpret the 5. How can I translate the results and report them cultural knowledge of my in the language of my informants into a cultural colleagues? description my colleagues will understand? (Spradley, 1979, p. 30) 22 In sum, the purpose of research with subjects is to find data to match or verify theory and the purpose of research with informants is to generate theory to explain data. Following is a description of strategies used to help reduce the problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. WW3 According to LeCompte and Goetz (1982) ethnographic research may approach rather than attain external reliability. Following their suggestions 1x) approach external reliability it was decided to: 1. Clearly identify the role and status of the researcher within the family observed, that is, the relationship that provides access to some kind of special knowledge. 2. Choose a family to study who would be only minimally affected by her presence, and would continue to talk and act normally. 3. Explain the physical, social and interpersonal contexts of the family for possible replication of the study. 9. Explain the strategies used to collect the data. For internal reliability the researcher decided to: 1. Use a format for fieldnotes with ample space for low-inference descriptions, phrased in terms as concrete as possible, based on observed data, and verbatim accounts of what people said as well as narratives of behavior and 23 activity. High-inference interpretive comments were placed in brackets within the text. Fieldnotes were analyzed and presented in excerpts to substantiate inferred categories. 2. Use informants for their interpretations of events and situations, descriptions and conformation. Although the problems of reliability often threaten the credibility of ethnographic work, validity may be its major strength. Following the suggestions of LeCompte and Goetz (1982),fkn'interna1 validity the researcher decided to do the following: 1.’ Live with the family being studied. 2. Record discourse and behavior with richness of detail. 3. Use retrospective tracing by questioning about artifacts, documents and oral histories. 4. Enter into the experience of observing with as little bias as possible. 5. Check with informants as to meaningfulness of categories to them. In giving consideration to external validity, it was decided to: 1. Keep in contact with the research directors as needed. 2. Continually cross check with informants. The implementation of these strategies is described in the procedure section of this chapter. In the section that follows is an explanation of the grounded theory method. 24 Spradley (1980) affirms that the ethnographic method offers an excellent strategy for discovering grounded theory. W In describing the climate for family research in the 19803 Hill (1981) said, I see family scholars turning away from large-scale definitive studies to do more exploratory descriptive research involving small, nonrepresentative samples mapping, for example, the uncharted processes of the family in transaction with its near environment.. . . Much of this work can be undertaken inexpensively with students working with cooperating families. This was how most of our descriptive work was done in the not- too-distant past before public and private funding of family research had become commonplace. We can make a virtue out of poverty, if that is what we face in the 19803: Exploratory, descriptive work generates more discoveries per hour expended than large scale qualitative verification or experimentally designed studies in laboratories. (p. 256) To achieve the researcher's purpose of generating theory, the method of Glaser and Strauss (1967) was used. The purpose of grounded theory is generation of theory, not verification of hypotheses. Qualitative research is oriented toward the context of discovery. Questions appropriate for qualitative design are often not easily quantified or may lose meaning;in quantification. Quantitative research is concerned with differences in amount or degree while qualitative research focuses on differences in kind. A purpose of quantitative research is to verify or confirm. Qualitative research is of necessity less structured to facilitate discovery. As indicated in Chapter I, the researcher begins with a particular focus or question in mind, in”: without 25 preconceived expectations or theory. Categories and properties are concepts that emerge or are indicated by the data. ‘They are elements of theory and they vary in degree of abstraction. A category stands by itself as a conceptual element of the theory. A property is an element or a conceptual aspect of a category. Lower level concepts tend to emerge early and higher level conceptualizations and the properties that elaborate them come later during the analysis of the data. Concepts may be borrowed from existing data only if they are continually reviewed to make sure that they still fit. Care needs to be taken that creativity is not stifled if concepts are borrowed. Hypotheses may be pursued and generated simultaneously in the process of joint data collection and analysis. They may be generated by acquiring only enough evidence to establish a suggestion, rather than an excessive piling up of evidence to establish proof. The hypotheses may seem unrelated at first, but as concepts emerge and develop in abstraction, integration increases. According to Glaser and Strauss (1967), "For substantive theory, the analyst is very likely to discover an integration scheme within his data, since the data and the interrelations of his theory lie so close together" (p. 41). Integration of theory is best when it emerges like the concepts, and further collection of data cannot be planned in advance of the emerging theory. Theoretical sampling is the process of data collection for generating theory whereby 26 the analyst jointly collects, codes and analyzes the data. The researcher then decides what.data to collect next, and where to find them in order to develop the theory as it emerges. The first decisions are not based on a preconceived framework. A discovered, grounded theory tends to combine concepts and hypotheses that have emerged from the data, along with some existing ones that are useful. Saturation of a category means that the researcher starts seeing similar instances over and over again. 11:13 a way of obtaining an adequate sample, comparable to statistical sampling. The researcher arbitrarily decided to consider a category saturated after five similar instances were recorded. The constant comparative method requires only saturation of data, not consideration of all available data, since no proof is involved (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Further explanation of the constant comparative method of grounding theory is in the procedure section of this chapter. In the following section is an explanation of the criteria for selection of a family for this study. Wham Since the purpose of this study is generation of theory, rather than verification, randomness of selection is not important. As Glaser and Strauss (1967) explain, The researcher who generates theory need not combine random sampling with theoretical sampling when setting forth relationships among categories and properties. The relationships are suggested as hypotheses pertinent to directions of relations, not tested as descriptions of direction and magnitude. Conventional theorizing claims generality of scope; that is, one assumes that if the relationship holds for one group, under certain 27 conditions it will probably hold for other groups under the same conditions. (p. 63) When examining concepts, a representative population is not required since the research does not need to be generalizable. Glaser and Strauss (1967) explain that rules of comparability are a deterrent to the generation of theory. "Rules of comparability are important when accurate evidence is the goal, but they hinder the generation of theory, in 1which 'non-comparability' cfi‘ groups is irrelevant" (p. 51). It is essential however to choose a group to study that meets essential criteria. For this study it was essential to select a marital couple whose dyadic rewards were greater than their dyadic costs, and whose external costs of breaking up were greater than external rewards. It was decided that essential criteria for selection would be: 1. The marital couple will have at least one living child. 2. The child need not be living at home. 3. The couple will have been married at least twenty- five years as an indicator of high stability. A. The couple will have a reputation of a marital relationship characterized by high quality. High quality will be evidenced as follows: a. The couple will appear to enjoy time together. b. They will appear to have positive regard for each other. e. They will communicate easily. 28 d. There will be no overt evidence of continuing discord or unresolved conflict. 5. The family will be English speaking and reside in either the United States or Canada. 6. The family will have enough space in their home to provide respite for the researcher and privacy for themselves, for a two to three week period. It is proposed that the researcher live with the family for two to three weeks, but not continuously. 7. The marital couple will be willing to participate. 8. It will be essential to have two generations of family members available. An attempt will be made to select a family with three generations available. 9. No particular socio-economic variables will be criteria for selection, however they will be described after the selection. In this section the research approach has been explained. The ethnographic method is used for the discovery of grounded theory. Criteria for selection of a family for study have been explicated. In the following section the research procedure is described. Research Procedure Ins—BMW Selectinn.af.the.£amilx Since the criteria for selecting the family were explained in the section preceding they will not be restated here. Next, the actual selection process will be described. 29 Over the past twenty years the researcher has met many families while serving on the staff for church sponsored family related activities such as camps and workshops, and has lived in the homes of many families for a week or more, some on numerous occasions. Since the nature of this study required good rapport with both spouses, the church related group was the population from which the family was selected. The researcher consulted with two other professionals who also knew the pool of families. Five families were identified as meeting all of the criteria for selection. Of these five, two were eliminated from consideration. In one case the marital couple was moving to another geographic area. In the other case, the young adult children were moving and would be unavailable to participate. It was decided that an additional criterion would need to be added. That was, the family must live within the geographic area. Of the three remaining families the Congers (fictitious name) family was considered first because three generations of the family lived in the same community. For convenience, see the kinship chart.of the Congers family (Figure 2%. On this chart a date above a symbol indicates year of birth and a date below a symbol indicates year of death; a date between male and female symbols indicates year of marriage; in one case both marriage and divorce dates are indicated. The researcher and her consultants assumed that this family would be only minimally affected by the researcher's presence and would continue to talk and act normally. .mSI-u cue-sou mo ahead 93:: .u can»: dN @ 1... me...” an...” a q < 82 8: 32 .aaaoa man: ”an. aaaaau on." «nag . as." anon Q 0.... 0.1.4 OHM % Q .05 my on." «sad "as“ an." ens“ . .aaaoaconn nus-n an.- as“. aoau< noun-x ~u..a AAA-u _ _ ._... P _ _ _ o..~ me: Q fl” :0 :2 22 22 gamut-u Auun uu.x —3 — o Q So a a: a cl: Imam 31 On November 17, 1982 the researcher sent a letter to Jack and Harriet Congers. A copy of the letter is in Appendix A. She inquired if they would be willing to participate in a study of stable marriages of 25 or more years. No mention was made of marital quality. The researcher explained what would be required of them if they permitted their family to be studied. Harriet Congers contacted the other family members and then responded by telephone to the researcher to express their willingness to participate. The researcher was not aware until then that both Harriet and Jack had retired early. Harriet explained that three generations of the family would not be available until spring. Daughter Sue's family was on the East Coast while her husband was on a temporary work assignment, and the grandparents were south for the winter. Since the researcher had other commitments during the winter months, she decided to accept the Congers' invitation and wait until spring. WW After the family agreed to participate in the study, there were certain facets of the consent agreement that needed to be negotiated. A copy of the consent form is in Appendix B. The items involving choices were as follows: 1. The actual days of the researcher's residence with the family. 32 2. Whether or not the family would keep the tapes of interviews after completion of the research. If they chose not to keep them they would be destroyed. 3. How the researcher's presence would be explained to others in order to assure confidentiality. 4. Whether or not the family would read the researcher's description of their family and make comments or add reflections. 5. Whether or not the family members would choose .their own fictitious names for the written report. The family's responses to these choices were as follows: 1. Actual time of residence was negotiated with the researcher and the family. It was a total of 17 days from Friday, April 22 through Sunday, May 8, 1983. 2. The family chose to keep the tapes as a part of their family's history. 3. It was decided that only family members would know that the family was being studied. Friends were simply informed that the researcher was residing with them while working on a research project. The Congers live within walking distance of a graduate center and some friends simply 1assumed that the researcher was involved there. Since no one directly asked, this assumption was neither denied or affirmed. A. The family agreed to read the historical and descriptive material. They read a draft form of Chapter IV 33 and advised the researcher by mail that they were satisfied with it as written. The researcher promised to send the family a copy of the study. 5. Family members chose fictitious names amid much laughter from the daughters, who chose names for themselves and their families. Jack and Harriet chose fictitious first and last names for themselves and other relatives, and selected names for their children who are dead. The researcher made one input to the selection process of the family. Since the real name of the Congers' last child was derived from her fatherwsname, it was suggested that the child's fictitious name be a derivative of the father's fictitious name. The couple agreed that this naming had significance and chose the fictitious names of Jack and Jacqueline. The researcher chose fictitious names for friends and neighbors. In order to minimize potential risk to the family of invasion of privacy and inconvenience caused by the presence of the researcher, she chose to observe only in the common living area of the home. It was also explained to the participants that they always had the right to pass if they preferred not to answer questions, and that they might withdraw from the study at any time without recrimination. MMWWW Prior to beginning research, in order to try out the method for recording data, the researcher completed a three day participant observation experience with a family. The 34 family was known by the researcher and her consultants but was not identified as having met criteria for selection for this research. The family met some but not all of the essential criteria. As a result of this experience the researcher refined her fieldnote format. Following is a summary of the techniques used for the recording of data: 1. Condensed fieldnotes A condensed account was written as conversation and behavior occurred or as soon afterward as possible. For speed in recording, key phrases, single words and unconnected phrases were used. Expanded fieldnotes Wide margins were used for purposes of analysis. A copy of the form developed by the researcher is in Appendix C. Journal A record of personal reactions and feelings was kept while the researcher was in the field. Memos Expanded thoughts (”1 categories and relationships that were grounded in the data and not speculative, were recorded on self-carboning paper. The duplicate copies were sorted according to categories before writing the theory. A copy of the form developed by the researcher is in Appendix D. 35 Tape recording Some interviews and conversations were taped. All interviews were private with the exception of those including both Jack and Harriet. Notes were also made during tapings and verbatim transcriptions were accomplished as soon afterward as possible. The following techniques were selected as desirable to elicit the kinds of information needed for this study. They were selected after reading about various techniques and experimenting with them with other families. 1. Kinship chart A kinship chart was developed to help organize historical data and to help orient the reader. Mapping of the family system A family system map as explained by Wedemeyer and Grotevant (1982) was used as a projective technique by the researcher with the husband and the wife. Mapping the floor plan of the home A simplified mapping of the common living areas of the home was developed to help orient the reader. Oral histories Some historical information was recorded to provide context and different perspectives for various events and situations. Recording the events of a "typical" day Selection of the day in the life of the family was 36 arbitrary, except that care was taken to ensure that the day was not a special occasion. In the next section is the description of the implementation of the strategies used for studying the family. WW3 In this section the researcher's use of the strategies of participant observation and ethnographic interviewing for studying behavior, language and artifacts is described. For the sequencing of the strategies and techniques used, see the Calendar of Daily Activities of Researcher in Appendix E. Participant observation is a strategy of ethnography in which the researcher is actually a research instrument. It enables a holistic view of the group under study. Types of participation range along a continuum from complete to no involvement. This researcher intended to assume the role of moderate to active participation. However in actuality participation was quite full. In this articulate, verbally oriented family the role of passive observer was difficult to assume. They wanted to include the researcher in daily and leisure time activities. She accompanied them (n1 four shopping trips, three restaurant meals, seven church related activities and three visits to other homes. The researcher quickly discovered that some of the richest data emerged as she observed and spontaneously formulated questions in the context of their daily activities. 37 In this busy household with frequent guests, the researcher was concerned that her presence would not create an added burden. She assumed the role of guest for the first three days until she was familiarized with their daily routine. During this time tflua only assistance of any significance accomplished by the researcher for the family was the sewing together of blocks for1a "log cabin" quilt. In a response to the question, "What can I do to help?," Harriet suggested that this would be helpful. The quilt was to be a gift for Alice. If the blocks were sewn together, Alice, who was visiting her parents, could see how it looked before returning to her home. Harriet seemed reluctant to allow the researcher to assume any responsibilities. No doubt she was aware that late hours were being kept while fieldnotes were being expanded and analyzed at night. 'The researcher sensed that Harriet might enjoy a reprieve from preparing the family's main meal each day. This was an easy and enjoyable task for the researcher to assume. Harriet soon relinquished the menu planning also. The open kitchen made an excellent vantage point for observing activities in the family room, living room and the study. These participatory activities had an additional benefit which was the rapid development of rapport. The researcher's high degree of involvement, however, increased the amount of late hours spent clarifying and augmenting many hastily scribbled notes. 38 Initially the researcher intended to observe the spouses as nearly equally in terms of time as possible. However she soon decided that it would not be appropriate behavior to accompany Jack very often on his frequent errands around town unless Harriet went also. Because of this decision, Harriet was observed more than Jack. Since it was the marital dyad that was of prime interest to the researcher, many of her efforts concentrated on observations of the interactions between them. During the first few days of residence the researcher mostly observed. Then another strategy, ethnographic interviewing, was employed. Strategies of observing and interviewing supported and confirmed each other. The researcher noted much congruence between the discourse and actions of both Jack and Harriet. No elements of deception were detected. The researcher was amazed and delighted with the depth in sharing and the openness of family members. They were very articulate. The relationship quickly moved to full cooperation. Probably because informants were so open, the researcher felt extremely responsible to safeguard their rights and sensitivities. Spradley (1979) advises that no matter how unobtrusive the ethnographer tries to be, he or she always pries into the lives of informants. "All informants must have the protection of saying things1'off the record' which never find their way into the ethnographer's fieldnotes" (p. 36). Twice during interviews 39 with Harriet she asked the researcher to "hold her pencil in the air" while she offered an off the record explanation. Only once was any requested information withheld. That incident is described in its context in the presentation of the grounded theory. Informants were typically relaxed. There were two exceptions. Sue had misunderstood and thought that her marriage was under scrutiny. She immediately relaxed when she learned that it was only her parents' marriage that was being studied. Sue explained that her family had made a major move recently and their young son was still experiencing some adjustment problems. Jack's father expressed concern that he might not be able to do what the researcher wanted. She explained that she would ask for him mostly to reminisce (historical recall of events) about the family, and that when questions were asked, he could decline to answer anytime he wished. The informants literally became teachers for the researcher as Spradley (1979) suggests. Much interviewing was carried out casually during friendly conversations while informants were unaware, Philip's finances" (Fieldnotes, April 27). In continuing her description, Harriet reflected that he used to like to hunt and he killed a deer once. The experience was a bit traumatic and he doesn't hunt any more. Sue described her father as "very loving in a very firm, way. It's real hard to get out from underneath that power at times” (Fieldnotes, April 28). On another occasion, Sue explained, "He has a strong sense of responsibility. I would think perhaps too strong. I think even now he would support me fully Lflicame home. He would do it for anybody, really" (Fieldnotes, April 28). Helen recalled that her father, was a very strict disciplinarian. Couldn't handle emotions in us. That was his weakness. He was never around when I was growing up. That part always bothered me because when he wasn't working at work, he was at home sleeping when he worked shift work, or else he was in the study working. [He was] a very strong spiritual head [of the family]. I admired him. He did special things all the time. He was always giving. .. . My Dad's very disciplined, very organ- ized. (Interview, May 5) Harriet concluded, "They [the daughters] have hurt him, disappointed him. But he still loves them. He is a very 56 forgiving personJ' Harriet's voice sounded choked with a few tears. "He is super critical at times and super loving at times" (Fieldnotes, April 27). Alice, 32, is Jack's and Harriet's oldest living child. She iszabeautiful woman, with black hair sprinkled with a lot of gray which she will not let anyone touch. According to her mother she was a difficult child, a tease, and rebellious as a teenager. She was in accelerated classes in school, but grades were not particularly vital to her. In college, she did everything to flaunt the rules. Alice did try to conform to her parents' educational wishes for her, but dropped out of college in her second year. Harriet feels that Alice typically sells herself short and works at tasks "beneath her"(Fieldnotes, April 26%. Alice is very outgoing and talented. In school she played piano and violin and also sang. She is a creative writer, probably capable of writing for publication; loves drama and is a first-rate "ham." Gardening is one of her pleasures and she is proud of her flowers. Harriet said she keeps a very clean and fairly neat home (Fieldnotes, April 26). For Alice, the sun rose and set in Pearl, but she hates Ralph and says she would not let him in the house. Alice was a product of the 19603 and tested the values of her parents before clarifying her own. She is married to Henry who is an ex-Marine and a policeman (Fieldnotes, April 27). He is not openly affectionate, however his deep caring for his family is clearly evident. Baby Hank is a warm, cuddly, 57 affectionate child with a contagious smile (Fieldnotes, April 20). Alice, Henry and Baby Hank live four hours away by car and visit Harriet and Jack infrequently, that is a few times a year. They came for a short visit while the researcher was residing in the parental home. Her parents wish she did not smoke and that she was interested in church. Harriet said of her, "I think Alice went into marriage with her eyes wide open. She is very congruent. What you see is what you get. .. . All in all, Alice is a pretty neat kid" (Fieldnotes, April 26). Sue, 31, is energetic, fun-loving, considerate of others and an easy person with whom to talk. She has the dark coloring of her father and larger than average bone structure. Sue wants to lose some weight. Her husband, Bill, is supportive and tries to help her but does not nag. Sue, Bill and their son, Dennis, live nearby and Sue and Dennis especially, are frequent visitors in Jack's and Harriet's home. Harriet explained that Sue had the most difficult spot in the family. "She got the short end of the deal," her mother commented (Fieldnotes, April 26). School was not as easy for Sue as for her sisters, and she saw herself as a fat, ugly child. Alice ”picked" on her and delighted in making her cry. While Alice was popular in high school, Sue would pass the time telling "dirty" jokes with some of the boys in a music practice room (Fieldnotes, April 26). When 58 Sue was in elementary school, her parents decided she needed something that would be just her "area." She chose the cello. She has become very professional and has a bachelor's degree in music (Fieldnotes, April 26). Sue met Bill in college. When Bill spent his senior year in Europe he sent Sue money to come and see him. Her mother explained that Sue was of age, but she always confessed, even when she wouldn't have had to. No one would have known about the trip. During her college years Sue looked with disdain upon a cousin who "slept around," calling her "Freda the Frog" because she would ”leap from one bed to anotherfl' Kent, Helen's ex-husband, was Bill's college roommate. Sue was very close to him. He was a good, supportive person and like a brother to her. (Fieldnotes, April 26). Harriet said, "I'm not sure that Sue ever really knew I loved her" (Fieldnotes, April 26). Five or six years after Sue and Bill were married he convinced her that she might be a happier person if she had some counseling and he accompanied her for it. Sue is recognized as an excellent homemaker, an expert cook who also manages to watch a lot of television. She takes her parenting responsibilities very seriously. While she was pregnant she abstained not only from wine but even from carbonated beverages. Her son, Dennis, who has beautiful red hair is a friendly, vivacious child. His 59 animated speech is full of inflection (Fieldnotes, April 26). Sue does not want to be strapped into a regular church routine, however she is very willing to play her cello for services whenever asked (Fieldnotes, April 13). Of the three daughters, the researcher had the most interaction with Sue. Helen, 28, was a large, lethargic baby who was content to observe. The other Congers babies had all been active (Fieldnotes, May 5). As an adult she is tall, large boned, has the dark hair of her father and is concerned with physical fitness. According to her mother she eats "weird” food (Fieldnotes, May 5). Her school years were spent in accelerated classes. By the time she entered high school she was excelling in vocal music and today often sings 30103 for church services, responding whenever requested. When Helen was a senior in high school she was chosen as the student representative to the school board. Her presence was appreciated by the board because she was not afraid to ask questions or make suggestions. Harriet felt that during high school Helen developed both a facade and a lot of stage presence and that in a way it was good for her, because she had had a poor self-image (Fieldnotes, May 5). Helen dated very little during her high school years. Harriet explained, "Life had been kind of a fairy tale for Helen. She had not really observed us [parents] as people 60 and didn't have realistic ideas about marriage" (Fieldnotes, May 5). The first couple of years of her marriage to Kent were tolerable but then Helen started getting "liberated" and verbally abusive with Kent. They each frustrated the other» Finally, Kent got physically abusive. After their divorce, Helen worked in Riverview for awhile and then went to law school on the East Coast. While the researcher was residing in the home, Helen completed her exams and returned home to study for her state bar exam (Fieldnotes, May 4). Helen is considered to have a rather "prickly" personality. She is a determined, hard worker. One evidence of this is she entered law school with a liberal arts background. Right now, Helen may be almost consumed with her own concerns, but she also evidenced genuine caring for others. In thinking about Helen's needs, Harriet said, "She is a long ways from being out of the woods. I don't know what I can do for her, I guess just be there" (Fieldnotes, May 5). Helen considered her mother as her best friend and teasingly calls tun" "Mommie Dearest," referring to the book about Joan Crawford, no doubt (Fieldnotes, May 7). Philip, almost 15, is an attractive boy with golden red hair, blue eyes and a fair complexion. He has a sturdy build and is seldom sick. The car-train accident that occurred when Philip was three, left him severely damaged and his mother dead. It has been a long difficult struggle, but.Philirfls condition is very slowly improving. Today he 61 is still brain damaged and cannot walk. Philip is waiting for leg braces that are being especially made for him. It is hoped they will help him to stand. He is now able, without braces, to transfer himself from his wheelchair to another chair. theateeth on the side where he was hit are slowly straightening. Philip's speech is deliberate, but quite intelligible. However, patience and concentrated attention are required by the listener. His favorite activities are playing with his computer, table games and visiting with whomever will take time to listen. Harriet and Jack are very adept in understanding his speech. For the most part, Philip's behavior is very socially acceptable, and he "gets along well with people" (Fieldnotes, April 30). According to Helen, Philip tends to be a little spoiled. It can't go without saying, they [Jack and Harriet] do have some attitudes that well, he shouldn't really even have to be in this position so we don't mind giving him a little extra, because he's had to go through more than a normal little boy would have to go through." (Interview, May 5) Sue explained, Alice thinks that Philip should not be coddled in any sense of the word. I think he maybe needs a little more structure and discipline about what he needs to learn to do, as far as walking or whatever. And I see my Mom and Dad struggling, my Mother especially. This is their grandson and this is what happened as a result of a horrible tragedy. It's hard not to want to just hold him. They want to make it easier for him. But then, too, you know, there is the frustration, because he is a frustrating person. I think at times Mother wishes she had more patience for all of that. And it's related to how she feels about what's happened to him and Pearl. .. . I think she may feel like she should have unlimited patience and affection for him, because 62 he has been through such a horrible thing. (Fieldnotes, April 27) Philip attends special classes in public school near his home and is transported by bus. Harriet and Jack are not pleased with the quality of instruction he is receiving. They supplement by having him tutored at home and also are well equipped with books, games and toys that are stimulating intellectually and help with developing motor control. Philip's responsibilities are mostly related to self care, however he assists the family some. He was glad to see it rain one day because it meant he would not have to water the strawberries (Fieldnotes, April 31). Jack wished that he could teach Philip about the value of money. At this time Philip has little comprehension concerning numbers and concepts of more or less. He understands that money is used to pay for things, but that is all. Jack continued, "He's got the normal [sexual] desires, I think-~which pleases me. It's not always easy to live with, but that's life" (Fieldnotes, May 5). Harriet said that, "Jack is very firm with him but also very fair. The mere mention of a spanking is usually enouth' Jack keeps a stick on top of the bookshelves in the study. It is a piece of wood molding. He says it's for molding character. "When we first got him, he was really hard to handleJ' Philip was growing rapidly and they were concerned that they might soon have a huge tyrant on their 63 hands (Fieldnotes, May 1). Jack would almost cry, but would give him a few swats. Harriet is very patient with Philip and tries in every way possible to treat him as a normal boy. Philip feeds himself, however it isaapainfully slow, halting process. He can accomplish it all except for getting the last few bits from his plate. One Saturday morning, Harriet, Jack, Philip and the researcher were eating breakfast. The researcher commented to Harriet that Philip was a good eater. Harriet responded, "He will eat anything that isn't moving." Then Philip with a twinkle in his eye, stabbed a bit of food with his fork and held it up with his trembling hand. He said, "Quit moving so I can eat you!" For the study, Harriet chose the fictitious name Philip for him "because at this stage in his life he is difficult to fill up" (Fieldnotes, May 6). Papa and Mama Congers are the parents of Jack. Papa is 84 and Mama 82. They are called Papa and Mama by each other, by family members and also by members of their local church community. They were married 67 years ago on Mama's 15th birthday. When Papa told the researcher this, she remarked, ”Those teenage marriages never last, do they?" He chuckled (Fieldnotes, April 24%. Papa had an eighth grade and Mama a third grade formal education; however, both of them have schooled themselves well beyond those few years (Fieldnotes, May 5). 64 Harriet described Papa as being very chauvinistic. She was appalled when she read the book, Thellgtallflnman, but declared that Papa read it also and thought it was wonderful. She said, "He practically thinks that it is the salvation of the world" (Fieldnotes, May 2). Papa also has the reputation, which is affirmed by both Harriet and Jack, of being "very close with the penny" (Fieldnotes, May 2). Harriet recalled an incident when they were living with them for the first few months after they moved to Riverview. Mama said one day, "I need some new underwear, but Papa doesn't think so." In order to have some measure of financial control she would hide money. Harriet explained that she made a point to tell Jack about this and that he has really tried to be unufli more reasonable than Papa (Fieldnotes, May 2). Mama is disoriented most of the time. Some days she doesn't even know Papa. One day she said, "The children were ready for breakfast before we were this morning.“ Moments later Jack asked her to offer a prayer of blessing before the noon meal. Her prayer was beautifully expressed and apparently very meaningful to all who were present. When she finished, the researcher said she wished she had that recorded on tape. "That's what I was thinking," agreed Harriet (Fieldnotes, April 24). Mama is restless and often wanders at night, making it difficult for Papa to keep track of her. Recently he made the decision to put their house up for sale; in April 1983 65 they moved into their motor home. Papa insisted that it is much easier to care for her in the more confined area. The move has been confusing to Mama, however. After Sunday dinner with the Congers, she said, "We must be getting back to the wagon yard." In view of Papa's life-long chauvinism, his family thinks it is quite commendable that he is now doing all of the housekeeping chores and the complete care of Mama. Jack stated to the researcher that Papa is physically strong and able to do this (Fieldnotes, April 24). When the researcher interviewed Papa he looked strained and tired. He also shed a few tears when recalling about Pearl. Because of this, probing was discontinued and the taping was not prolonged (Fieldnotes, May 4). Description of the Home Philip's house (Figure 3) was built with part of his settlement money. The set of keys loaned the researcher were labeled, "Philip's House" (Fieldnotes, May 2). During the first few days until Alice's family left, the researcher resided in "Helen's corner" of the basement (Fieldnotes, April 28). Since Helen is single and has been away at school, she has a storage and bedroom area there. When she arrived home, the researcher moved into the basement television room and shared a bath with Helen. The main floor of Philip's house has a large open area. The kitchen is an excellent vantage point for observing activities in the family room and to some extent the living 66 meson c.3uuuau ma non: woo—u .n owauwu u M H F H Mb L F cud-um manna uncle-on wannabe .88 5:0.— 88 9.13 1 nonoumu 1 nausea :8 93 33.3 fl... henna gun: can quad o.uomuuon vac n.3u-n JIIIIILi _ _ 83. .3223 a: _ 0. mumnh I . 1 noon o.os 67 room and the study. Part of the front yard can be viewed from the kitchen window. Jack and Philip have desks placed back to back in the study. Philip's computer is on his desk. Harriet has a small desk in the kitchen. Jack and Harriet have a large bedroom area and private bath. This is omitted from the plans because the researcher never entered the area. Philip's bedroom and bath are across the hall from his grandparents. In the hall is a large storage area, well equipped with educational toys and games. In the corner of the family room closest to this storage area is the game table where Philip enjoys playing with whomever will join him. The central area for most family activities is the kitchen and family room. The living room houses a piano and organ and is used more for producing music than for formal visiting. In general, Philip's house is attractive and emits a feeling of friendliness and warmth. It is clean and orderly, but not excessively. The floor plans have been altered because Jack expressed concern about the legality of copying them. According to Spradley (1979), a good ethnographic translation shows; a poor one only tells. It is hoped that from the descriptions in this chapter the reader was able to see the lives of the family studied. In the following chapter is the initial description of the emerging theory. First, sources of family strength are identified and described. Secondly, in order to gain deeper insight into 68 the sources of family strength, the researcher will identify and describe the linkages between the marital couple and its informal support systems. CHAPTER V EMERGING THEORY I The emerging theory is presented in two parts. First, sources of family strength will be identified and described. Secondly, in order to gain deeper insight into the sources of family strength, the researcher will identify and describe the linkages between the marital couple and its informal support systems. Part I Sources and Evidence of Family Strength Six sources of family strength emerged and saturated from the analyses of the data. First, all six are summarized. Supporting evidence excerpted from fieldnotes and interviews follows. According to Spradley (1979) Most cultural themes remain at the tacit level of knowledge. People do not express them easily, even though they know the cultural principle and use ittx: organize their behavior and interpret experience.1 Themes come to be taken for granted; they slip into that area of knowledge where people are not quite aware or seldom find the need to express what they know. This means the ethnographer will have to make inferences about principles that exist. (p. 188) The first five sources of strength identified by the researcher were also recognized by the marital couple. In the Congers family the sixth source, continuing commitment to a purpose beyond themselves, remained at the tacit level. The sources of strength identified contribute to high quality high stability in marriage. 69 70 W W In high quality high stability marriage the marital couple and also other family members frequently enjoy each other's company and tn”; humor generated through their interaction. They are usually contented with life and have an optimistic outlook. The marital couple has a buoyancy derived from daily living, spiked with spontaneous humor and relaxing laughter. £3ntinuins.flnnstrustixe_flcmmunicaiicn Wm: Differences In high quality high stability marriage conflicts are dealt with verbally and not with physical violence. Although developing mutually satisfying communication skills takes time and effort, there is continuing improvement. The atmosphere of the home allows for open expression and most communicating is direct and clear. Some differences of opinion and personal idiosyncrasies are accepted or tolerated by each of the spouses. W In high quality high stability marriage the marital couple feels a continuity through the generations of their families. Family identity is extremely important and is considered to be a source of strength. The marital couple feels positive influence from living family members and also from some who are dead. 71 W In high quality high stability marriage common interests are helpful to the relationship, but mutual values and ideals are more important. Belief or faith in a source of strength beyond or greater than themselves is of supreme importance. This source of strength gives meaning and direction to their lives. W In high quality high stability marriage the spouses expect some strong negative emotions from time to time and do not allow these feelings to derail them from their marriage commitment. They recognize that their relationship is never static, but ever changing, and needs their continuing attention. Althoughtfluemarital commitment is strong, the relationship is much more meaningful than an endurance contest. W In high quality high stability marriage the marital couple is not consumed by personal concerns. The couple is continually reaching out to others outside the family. The persons and causes they assist vary from time to time . Response to others is in accordance with whichever acquaintances they see as currently having the greatest need. Each spouse has individual commitments; other commitments are mutually fulfilled. Reaching out to others is an integral part of their lives. They transcend their 72 own circumstances to share encouragement and strength with others. W The researcher is aware that in Part I there are more responses from Alice and Helen than from Sue. An attempt was made to elicit an equal amount of responses from each daughter. However, during interviews, respondents tended to speak about many other related concerns since they were not aware of the full intent of the research. Ethnographic interviewing does not screen questions as does a closed questionnaire. The researcher collected much more data than was used for this study. Alice and Helen provided more responses that related to Part I than did Sue. More richness of detail was in Helen's responses than in her sisters' responses. This was probably because she arrived home during the last few days when questioning was more focused. WW On the day before the researcher concluded her observations she explained the purpose of the study and asked the marital couple to respond to the‘be supportive to kin, but others were also supported. WW N££n_flafi_fi££aiflfii Help was given not only to kin, but where the greatest need, among their associates, arose. Because need changes, persons who received help also changed from time to time. The kinds of help given also varied according to the perceived need. WW In_fi11£_fla§_fi££alfifil Giving by the marital couple was much more than duty. Enjoyment was derived from being helpful and wanting to be helpful was characteristic of them. This desire to be helpful extended to many beyond the kin relationship. 109 W mmwmnmmmmim was“. There was a continuity in feelings of mutual responsibility among the generations of the family. Papa affirmed that helping was "a common purpose in the family. [We] tried to be concerned with each other's interests" (Interview, May 4). When referring to Jack's and Harriet's care of Philip, he stated, "He [Philip] wasn't their child, he was their daughter's child. It was the joh_of the family to take care of [him] (Interview, May 4). Papa also felt responsibility toward his daughter-in-law, Rose. "Especially since Mark passed away. We try to be mindful of her needs.. .. Her parents are gone and Mark is gone and naturally we want to help her as much as possible, helping her with anything she needs" (Interview, May 4). In accounting for her help to Papa and Mama, Rose explained, "I felt like that was something I could do for Mark" (Interview, May 2). Geographic proximity affected the amount of perceived responsibility family members assumed for one another. Whoever of the relatives were available, seemed ready to assist. Papa acknowledged, In a way, he [Jack] means more to me [with Mark gone]. We have other children, but I don't know. I try not to show any difference, but from the standpoint that he is hang and helps me in business matters and knows my particular situation and needs,--why, naturally he means more to me than the others in that sense. Not that he moan: more to me than the others, but he is here 11th us. (Interview, May 4) 110 Papa's and Mama's other children offered physical help from time to time. Papa explained that their son, Orval, and his wife, Maxine, "did a lot of painting for us when they were here, and other things" (Interview, May 4). Although the concept.did not saturate, there was some evidence to support the notion that the closer the kin relationship the greater the perceived responsibility. Evidences of closeness of the kin relationship and degree of perceived responsibility emerged during discussions about the present and future care of Philip. Harriet and Jack assumed responsibility that their daughter Pearl could not assume. Rose emphasized, "But overall he [Philip] is a lucky, lucky kid. ‘They [Harriet and Jack] would do it for Pearl's sake, because he was getting nil care from Ralph, and I mean nll! There are a lot of handicapped children who don't have the advantages that child has. His mother wouldn't be any better to him" (Interview, May 2). In reflecting about her parents' near total commitment to Philip, Alice questioned "Your grandchild I would think you would love one removed from your child, but I don't know. Maybe not" (Interview, April 25). Another evidence to support the notion that strength in feelings of responsibility may lessen with distance in the kin relationship is that all three daughters feel commitment to Philip, but not totally, as Jack and Harriet do. The following excerpt from fieldnotes describing a little family emergency illustrates the importance of 111 geographic proximity and possibly the closeness of the kin relationship. Rose, Jack and the researcher sit in the living room and visit on a Sunday afternoon. It is Rose's birthday and we have just celebrated with a Sunday dinner in her honor. Mama is sitting with us also. She smiles pleasantly, but looks vacantly at us from time to time as she plays with a small decorative pillow. Occasionally she makes comments but they are not in context with the conversation. Jack and Rose fill the researcher in on Mama's mental condition. Jack said one time after Mama had her bath, she refused to put on any clothes. Papa first called Jack and Harriet but no one was home. Next he called Sue who came to help. (Fieldnotes, April 23) Examples of the importance of geographic proximity to amount of perceived responsibility were much clearer than was the importance of closeness of the kin relationship. Responsibility to family was first with responsibility to friends a very close second in terms of priorities. WWW Assn—Ha§_fi££aisfii Harriet and Jack were very aware of and sensitive to the needs of others. Helen attributed this heightened sensitivity as a result of the stresses and pain her parents have endured. "They have been able to empathize with other people. I think they have been more careful about how [things] affect people. I see them being more thoughtful" (Interview, May 5). Assistance was given according to where perceived need was greatest. Jack explained, "I guess somewhere along the line it [being helpful] was inbred in me. Not only toward those who I feel so close, but where the greatest need 112 arises" (Interview, May 2%. Persons who were assisted by Jack and Harriet both, varied from timeeto time. Jack, in explaining the map of his family system, first described the relative closeness to family members and then continued, "These are some of the people in the church I feel have a greater influence in my life at this time. That changes at times" (Interview, May 6). Harriet was spending quite a bit of time with Jackie, a good friend of Helen's. Jackie, who had three small children, was still suffering from the death of her mother last year. One of Jackie's daughters, Elizabeth, might be termed as a very active and rather difficult child who reminded Harriet of her own daughter, Sue, when she was a little girl. Harriet tried to help Jackie to understand and appreciate Elizabeth more, and also baby-sat for Jackie frequently to give her some "blessed relief" (Fieldnotes, May 5). Jack explained his interaction with Mary, a woman he knows at church. "My close association with her is because of the need there, and the need of her childrenJ' He said that she had asked him to help her, consequently he had drawn closer to her (Interview, May 6). Rose also tried to offer help where perceived need was greatest. In explaining the physical help she offered Mama she said, "I try to do things for her that Papa can't do" (Fieldnotes, April 24). 113 W W Supporting kin was more than duty. As Jack explained, "We anion being near our families; helping each other" (Interview, May 2). Rose affirmed that enjoyment was an explanation for the life-long relationship between Mark and Jack. They just seemed to anjoy each other. They tore down buildings in North Riverview together to get lumber and then helped each other build garages. They got half of the lumber in exchange for the work of tearing them down. They just did a lot of things together. They shared their tools. It was almost "What's mine is thine," you know. Rose explained her continuing relationship with her brother-in-law and his family after Mark's death. They are beautiful people. Of course, I'm probably prejudiced a little bit. They have been so good to me. Jack has been so good about the car and things like that. The researcher then commented, Itfls probably nothing that Mark wouldn't have done for Harriet, should circumstances have been reversed. Rose: That's exactly what he [Jack] said. He said, "But that's not why I'm doing it." He just manna to do ilu He wants to do whatever he can. (Interview, May 2) Jack affirmed that he wanted to help Rose. There were marital problems [with one of Mark's children], other problems with onerof the boys that I tried to give some added attention to. Then, of course, Rose's needs became greater, I felt. 13m not trying to imply that Ihn such a benevolent person, but nevertheless, a--I nan}, to do all I can for them. (Interview, May 2) This desire to help extended to others, not just kin. Helen explained that when she was a child her father wanted 114 them to be thoughtful of others. "He wanted us to put others first. When we were at [church family camp] and somebody needed something, he would want us to leave our friends and go do that for some other person" (Interview, May 5). Although Harriet did not verbalize her enjoyment in helping others, her actions would support this. The researcher noted many times when Harriet respondedtn>the needs of others, thoughtfully and with extra care. The following example from fieldnotes occurred on May third. Mama Congers is restless today. Harriet speaks to her kindly, even though Mama's constantly following her could try anyone's patience. She gently guides Mama into the living room to listen to Sue play the cello. A little later Harriet takes Mama for a walk around the garden to see the flowers. (Fieldnotes May 3) In this chapter the emerging theory has been presented in two parts. First were the sources and evidences of family strength. Second were the nature and patterns of the linkages between the marital couple and its informal support systems. In Chapter VI the researcher compares the emerging theory with existing literature. CHAPTER VI INTEGRATION OF EMERGING THEORY WITH LITERATURE In following the method of Glaser (1979) perfection is of no concern when first writing the ideas. "Reworking first draft material in the writing stage straightens out initial writing efforts while leading to more discovery of integration and densification" (p. 22). In writing the emerging theory the researcher is encouraged to write as if no one had ever written on the subject before. Then during the reworking the researcher is encouraged to explore the literature to look for connections and carefully weave the emerging theory into its place in the literature. The researcher, Knows his own categories quite well.and.can be shaken from them or sharpen them only by better ideas, not merely by catchy ones. .. . He can look through the literature quickly for what relates to the emerging theory he has generated. He is astutely relevant. All does not look of the same importance. He can skip and dip, thereby gaining greater coverage, since he now has a clear purpose for covering his field, which is to integrate his generated theory with the other literature in the field to show its contribution. (Glaser, 1979. p. 32) Other theories are neither proven nor disproven. If this researcher discovers that somerof her ideas have been used by others, the proper attitude is to simply recognize that the other researchers discovered them also (Glaser, 1979). The literature suggests1a variety of concepts related to family strengths. Fannjy'sociologists have frequently referred to family strengths as resources (Angell, 1936; Cavan & Ranck, 1938; Koos, 1946; Hill, 1958; Burr, 1973). Others have referred to family strengths as qualities 115 116 helpful to marriage and family relationships (Pollock, 1953; Young, 1953). Otto (1963) described family strengths as abilities, and Stinnett and Sauer (1977) called them characteristics (cited in Olson A McCubbin, 1983). While many writers of family literature have referred to family strengths, only two researchers were found to have defined the concept. Otto (1975) defined family strengths as: "Those forces, and dynamic factors in the relationship matrix, which encourage the development of the personal resources and potential of members of the family, and which make family life deeply satisfying and fulfilling to family members" (p. 16). Stinnett (cited in Stinnett, et. al, 1979) incorporated and expanded Otto's definition. Family strengths are defined as those relationship patterns, interpersonal skills and competencies, and social and psychological characteristics which create a sense of positive family identity, promote satisfying and fulfilling interaction among family members, encourage the development of the potential of the family group and individual family members, and contribute to the family's ability to deal effectively with stress and crises. (p. 2) Olson and McCubbin, et a1. (1983) explained, At present, there is a lack of clarity, both conceptually and empirically, in distinguishing between these two concepts.. .. Are "family strengths" the same as "family resources" or are they :1 smaller constellation of attributes encompassed by the broader term "resources?" Otto (1963) and Stinnett and Sauer (1977) have taken the approach of incorporating a potpourricu‘family attributes, combining behavioral an? attitudinal dimensions interchangeably .. . (p. 95 McCubbin, Jay, et al. (cited in Olson A McCubbin, et al., 1983), delineated four types of resources: (a) 117 personal resources, (b) social support, (c) coping and (d) the family system's internal resources. There is also lack of clarity as to how marital strengths and family strengths differ. It has been difficult for theorists either to integrate or differentiate between the two concepts. Olson and McCubbin (1983) developed a scale to measure family strengths and an inventory to measure marital strengths. The family strengths scale measured family pride and family accord. Family pride consisted of loyalty to and optimism and trust in one's family. Family accord consisted of feelings of being able to accomplish tasks, deal with problems and get along well together. The marital strengths inventory measured eleven content areas, that is, communication, conflict resolution, leisure activities, sexual relationship, children, family and friends, egalitarian roles, financial management, personality issues and religious orientation. No doubt the research of Olson and McCubbin (1983) has produced a wealth of useful data. They did not necessarily intend however to differentiate between marital and family strengths. When predicting high and low stress families they stated, "For the purpose of simplifying this presentation, we will refer to marital strengths, family strengths, coping strategies and resources collectively as family resources" (p. 203). Olson and McCubbin (1983) affirmed that marital and family strengths are very 118 significant, positive characteristics of families and that, "Couples and families possessing these strengths seemed to function more adequately across the life cycle" (p. 238). It was also difficult for this researcher to differentiate between the concepts of marital and family strength. Family strength was considered to be an overall global quality, with one component of a strong family being high quality high stability marriage. The environed unit, for purposes of this research, was defined as the marital couple only. The facets related to family strength of the couple aszaunit were discovered by this researcher» This strength can be developed and contributes to high quality in marriage. Each spouse contributes personal resources to the marriage. These together contribute to the development of the family system's internal resources. The sources or origins of the family's strength are seen as resources, in that they are reserve sources of support for the future. Next, key descriptive sentences from each of the discovered sources of strength are stated. Then they are compared to the existing literature. Sources of Family Strength WW 1. In high quality high stability marriage the marital couple and also other family members frequently enjoy one another's company. Stinnett (cited in Stinnett, et al., 1979) in his study of strong families, identified the expression of 119 appreciation by family members and spending a good deal of quality time together as two separate family strengths. The strong families studied genuinely enjoyed being together. Time together was not specifically mentioned by this researcher. However time together is inferred in the shared enjoyment of each other. Foster (1982) in studying couples in Omaha, Nebraska married continuously for'35 years or longer found that the spouses typically enjoyed each other's presence and desired to do things together. 2. They are generally contented with life and have an optimistic outlook. The strong families identified by Stinnett (cited in Stinnett, et al., 1979), "Managed even in the darkest of situations, to look at the situation and to see some positive element, no matter how tiny and to focus on it" (p. 29). 3. The marital couple has a buoyancy derived from daily living, spiked with spontaneous humor and relaxing laughter. No literature related to humor and quality of marriage was found. Coniinuins_£on§truotixs_aemmunioation WW 1. In high quality high stability marriage conflicts are dealt with verbally and not with physical violence. The 120 atmosphere of the home allows for open expression and most communicating is direct and clear. Stinnett, Chesser and DeFrain (1979) also identified good communication patterns as a family strength. The strong families studied were good listeners. Listening communicated a very important message. That was respect for one another. It was also observed that openness and honesty contributed to good verbal communication patterns. It was reported that the strong families fought. "They get mad at each other, but they get conflict out in the open and they are able to talk it over, to discuss the problem" (p. 27). Happily married couples have better verbal and non- verbal communication patterns than unhappy couples. They keep communication channels open and listen to each other (Navran, 1972L. In keeping with these findings, previous studies identified openness (Lewis, et al., 1976; Montgomery, 1981) and effectiveness of communications (Lewis & Spanier, 1979; Snyder, 1979) to be critical to high quality in marriage. 2. Although developing mutually satisfying communica- tion skills takes time and effort, there is continuing improvement. Stinnett, Chesser and DeFrain (1979) observed that experience contributed to good communication patterns. This was confirmed by Foster (1982) in her study of couples married 35 or more years. As the years passed, spouses felt that their ability to communicate had improved, through 121 arguments, trial and error methods of problem solving and persistence. Spouses were typically comfortable and open with each other and indicated that they had grown closer through the years. It was indicated by Argle and Furnham (1983) that in general there is more conflict with younger spouses, supporting the idea that conflicts need to be worked through. 3. Some differences cn‘ opinion and. personal idiosyncrasies are accepted or tolerated by each of the spouses. No research on the relationship between quality in marriage and the acceptance or tolerance of personal idiosyncrasies was found. A_Stzons_£ositixe.£amilx.£selins 1. In high quality high stability marriage the marital couple feels a continuity through the generations of their families. The marital couple feels positive influence from living family members and also from some who are dead. Satir (1972) believed that anyone who has ever been part of a family leaves a definite impact. "A departed person is often very much alive in the memories of those left behind. Frequently, too, these memories play an important role in what is going on in the present, and much of the time a negative one" (p. 144). 2. Family identity is extremely important and is considered to be a strength. 122 Davis (cited in Olson A McCubbin, et al., 1983) identified family pride as contributing to family strengths. Family pride was defined as a family member's perception that his or her family is a worthy group. Olson and McCubbin, et a1. (1983) stated that, "Davis's work gives support to the idea of narrowing the definition of family strengths to a constellation of attributes that are part of a family system's internal resources" (p. 98). Gunn (1980) thinks that there is a concept which he calls family identity that is analogous to the concept of personal identity formulated by Erikson (1968). In developing a sense of identity, an individual experiences a feeling of well-being with oneself and a feeling of acceptance by the community. Family identity, then, may be interpreted as a necessary developmental task for any family. Some of the content of the family's identity may come from its collective role activity as perceived and reflected by the larger society. Increasingly, families may find such identities insufficient for building a feeling of family self-worth, purpose, and self-esteenh (Gunn, 1980, p. 22) WW Belief or faith in a source of strength beyond or greater than themselves is of supreme importance. This source of strength gives meaning and direction to their lives. The older couples that Olson and McCubbin (1983) called "balancedfl' were typically less stressed than younger couples and relied on spiritual support to cope with 123 problems. Since the sample was mainly of Lutheran families this was not surprising. Stinnett, Chesser and DeFrain (1979) reported that the strong families they studied had a high degree of religious orientation. This quality involved more than participation in religious activities. Stinnett referred tn) the quality as a spiritual life style. What many of these families said was that they had an awareness of God or a higher power that gave them a sense of purpose and gave their family a sense of support and strength. The awareness of this higher power in their lives helped them to be more patient with each other, more forgiving, quicker to get over anger, more positive, and more supportive in their relationships. (p. 28) Stinnett, Sanders and DeFrain (1981) found in studying strong families that religious faith was a: practical, personal rather than theoretical religion. "These families indicated that the awareness of God in their daily lives helped them to be less petty, more forgiving and more patient with each other" (p. 386). In keeping with these findings Pittman, et al. (1983) documented that greater religiosity is associated with less reported hostility from one's spouse. They stated, Current family theory does not provide an explanation for this negative relation. . . . However, classic descriptive studies of marital adjustment (e.g. , Lock, 1951) provide a possible explanation. These studies take religiosity as a form of conventionality supported by a social institution and a reference group. Such involvement may support individuals in attributions that minimize the perception of relationship hostility (and maximize the favorability of one's own marriage compared with others). (p. 529) 124 WM: 1. In high quality high stability marriage the spouses expect some strong negative emotions from time to time and do not allow these feelings to derail them from their marriage commitment. Argle and Furnham (1983) in a study of sources of satisfaction and conflict found that a spouse was the greatest source (MT both satisfaction and conflict and concluded that satisfaction and conflict are apparently compatible with each other. Roberts (1980) in his study of long married couples stated that, "Divorce, no: murder, yes" was said by a few people with a smile. Many volunteered information which indicated that their marriage had "had its ups and downs" and its problems. They regarded this as normal. They had married with the intention of staying together. (p. 275) Troll and Bengtson (1979) stated that, Where affect runs high, it is rarely only positive or negative. . . . Where love is to be found, hate can also be prevalent" Bengtson, et al.(1976) data show high correlations between positive and negative affect, particularly in youth, and similar findings have been reported by Lowenthal, et al., (1975). There are analogous data ix”: husband-wife relationships. (Feldman, 1964, p. 151) Mace (1976) also affirmed from his experience that love and anger were two dynamic emotions in marriage. He stated that it was important to teach spouses to make friends with anger. When anger is not used constructively old conflicts are reactivated. It is when love and anger work together that intimacy is achieved. 125 2. They recognize that their relationship is never static, but is ever changing, and needs continuing attention. In a study of 50 couples married an average of 55.5 years, even though life-satisfaction and marital adjustment scores were mainly positive, few spouses would say that there had not been adjustments over the years. Adapting and changing the relationship continued through the years (Roberts, 1980). 3. Although the marital commitment is strong, the relationship is much more meaningful than an endurance contest. Rubin (cited in Adams, 1979) assumed that achievement of intimacy and a commitment is a developmental process: The development of intimacy and of commitment are closely linked, spiralling processes. When one person reveals himself to another, it has subtle effects on the way each of them defines the relationship. Bit by bit the partners open themselves to one another, and step by step they construct their mutual bond. The process only rarely moves ahead in great leaps . . . and inasmuch as no one can ever disclose himself totally to another person, continuing acts of self— revelation remain an important part of the developmental process. (p. 261) Commitment in the past may have been more to the institution of marriage than to a spouse. Foster (1982) studied self-disclosure and intimacy in long-term marriages. The couples reported that they expected from the beginning that their marriages were for life. Over and over again, these older persons said that divorce never occurred to them. When they got married, it was "for keeps." Divorce was not an alternative even to the couple in the troubled marriage. They had 126 deep feelings of responsibility to the marriage as did all the other couples. (p. 363) Roberts (1980) reported that "years of life experience coupled with commitment to the relationship resulted in wanting what was best for the mutual benefit of both partners" (p. 270). In a study of subjective rewards from spousal interaction in marriages intact from 25 to 62 years, Among the longest married, there was a tendency to view love in a deeper spiritual sense by using such expressions as "faithfulness," "fidelity," "self- fulfillment," and "respect." Among other reasons stated, companionship and commitment increased correspondingly with length of time married. (Rowe, 1981, p. 388) This researcher assumes that the marriages studied by Stinnett, Chesser and DeFrain (1979) were characterized by high quality, not just stability. In these strong families a high degree of commitment was evidenced. Family members were committed to promoting one another's happiness and welfare. W In high quality high stability marriage the marital couple is not consumed by personal concerns. They transcend their own circumstances to share encouragement and strength with others. Erikson (1963) referred to the middle years as a time for nurturing, teaching and serving others. This psychosocial stage he called generativity versus stagnation. Successful accomplishment of generativity brings a sense of fulfillment and of life being worthwhile. 127 Sheehy (1981) in describing her research of those overcoming crises of adult life explained, Although one might have guessed the other qualities vital to pathfinding, would any child of a century that has conceived of God as dead, man as a being in nothingness, and morality as relative to the situation have guessed that one of the chief requisites of a happy life is purpose? Yet the one constant in the lives of people who enjoy high well-being--in every group II studied--was a devotion to some cause or purpose beyond themselves. To put it as simply as possible, my research offered impressive evidence that we feel better when we attempt to make our world better. What do people derive from having a cause or a purpose? People often say, "There's nothing that makes you feel so good as doing something nice for someone else." We need to feel that we are good. Not everybody feels that way, and nobody feels that way all the time, but there is evidence that to believe we are good people, and becoming better, is one of the natural imperatives in our development. tisense of purpose also helps to satisfy the need to believe "I matter," that a single life might "make a difference." Further, to have a purpose beyond oneself lends to existence a meaning and direction--the most important characteristic of high well-being. (pp. 264-265) In high quality high stability marriage generativity of the couple as a unit is both a cause and outcome of mutual commitment. Nature of the Linkages Between the Family and Its Informal Support Systems First, the informal support systems are rank ordered in terms of their observed importance as sources of support to the marital couple» The discussion that follows compares these elements of the emerging theory to the existing literature. 128 The discovered order was: 1. Supports between the spouses of the marital couple. 2. Supports between the marital coupleeand the adult children. i 3. Supports between the marital couple and extended kin. 4. Supports between the marital couple and friends. 5. Supports between the marital couple and neighbors. In the emerging theory spousal support ranked first in terms of frequency of incidents recorded and also in importance to the marital couple. While there was evidence to indicate that reciprocity has been unequal during times of stress, it appeared to be quite equal at the time of the study. The happily married older couples studied by Troll, et a1. (1979) looked to spouses for comfort and support and they anticipated increasing interdependence. Johnson (1983) also found that in couples aged 65 years or older, the marital dyad was the key source of support. Husbands and wives were expected to fulfill instrumental needs and also social and emotional satisfaction. Theorists have long debated about whether or not relationships based on love transcend social exchange. Theorists have speculated about the ability to accurately look at fairness in one's marriage. For example in a warning against "marital scorekeeping," Lobseng and Murstein (1976) warned men and women that if they look for fairness in their marriages, they are in trouble. (Cited in Traupmann A Hatfield, 1983, p. 89) 129 While there was evidence to indicate that reciprocity had been unequal during times of stress, there was no apparent concern about reciprocity or desire on the part of the spouses to keep score. Johnson (1983) stated that, The husband-wife dyad is more likely to be regulated by the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner. 1960), which is by definition based on equivalence. It is non-exploitive and it is dominated by social and emotional factors. Exchanges are calculated not only on services exchanged in the past but also on those that one might need in the future. (p. 382) In the opinion of the researcher, this is inadequate to explain spousal support in high quality high stability marriage. In the three generational study of Hill (1970) it was clearly evident that parents gave much more than their adult children. This was confirmed by the emerging theory. It was discovered that the adult children desired more reciprocity with their parents. However, the adult childrenfls offers of help were frequently thwarted by the parents. No studies considering this phenomenon were found. Hill (1970) reported that strains were introduced among the generations when help moved predominantly one way. The strains introduced by non-reciprocity were more for the recipient than for the giver. This finding is in keeping with the emerging theory that adult children experienced some frustration and bewilderment when their offers of help were thwarted. Apparently this is an area in need of further research. 130 For clarity, the terms used by Hill (1970) are used for the remainder of this discussion. He referred to the marital couple as the parent generation. The aging parents were called the grandparent generation. The fact that the grandparent generation has frequent contact with the parent generation has been repeatedly identified by researchers. No attempt was made to verify that relationship. Stoller and Earl (1983) confirmed that the parents assisted the grandparents when one of the grandparents was not present or when the level of support was insufficient. In keeping with this finding Johnson (1983) stated that when both grandparents were present a parent performed numerous services, but usually not equal to that of a spouse in quantity or quality. In caring for the elderly, two principles have been conceptualized. They are the principles of substitution and the principle cfi‘ a shared-functioning kinship system. Shanas (1979) described the principle of substitution as the availability of family members in serial order. If one person is not available to help, another will step in. Litwak and Szelenyi (1969) described the principle of shared-functioning kinship system where specific needs of the elderly relative are matched to the most appropriate relative as determined by long-term commitment, proximity and degree of intimacy. Johnson (1983) found that the 131 principle of substitution rather than shared functioning was most common. There was much congruence between the emerging theory of this research and the study of mutual aid between the generations (Hill, 1970). The volume of giving was highest for the parent generation, lowest for the grandparent generation, with the adult child generation in between. Hill's (1970) study considered five types of help, that is, economic, emotional gratification, household management, child care and illness. The parent generation quite clearly gives more help than it receives in all five areas of exchange. The grandparents, in sharp contrast, receive substantially more help than they give in all areas except child care where they have, obviously, no need of help. The married child generation gives more than it receives in three areas--emotional gratification, household management and illness. This generation receives more than it gives in the economic assistance and child care areas. (Hill, 1970,1L 68) The four types of help categorized by this researcher were social-emotional, physical, economic and informational. They were really not comparable to those of Hill (1970). If this typology is useful more research using it will be needed. No studies were found that categorized informational help. Even though the types of help given need clarification, it is clear that the mutual helping relationship between parents and children continues throughout life. Early in life the balance is in favor of children. In adulthood it becomes more equal, then in later life shifts in favor of the parents (Cicirelli, 1983). It 132 could be termed a deferred exchange process. Each generation turned to the kin network when it needed help and lacked resources. The success or failure of the kinship network leans heavily on the kinkeeping middle generation which serves as the lineage bridge across the generations, being most involved with its adjacent generations both in intergenerational contacts and in help exchanges. (Hill, 1970, p. 330) In a search of the literature it appeared that friends and neighbors supply intermittent supplementary help, but not on a long-term continuous basis. Litwak and Szelenyi (1969) in a study of Hungarian women in Detroit, found that neighbors and friends provide an important source of help for short-term problems» Confirming this finding, Cantor (1980) found that friends and neighbors assist only when family members are not available (cited in Johnson, 1983). Latinos in Detroit preferred the help of spouses and relatives over formal support systems. Martinez (1977) found that informal support systems provided twice as much help as formal support systems (cited in McCubbin A Patterson, 1981L1Shanas (1979) reported that older people are most likely to turn first to family, then to friends and neighbors, and last of all to social and government agencies. Hill (1970) found that preferred sources for help by the parent generation were to (a) grandparents, (b) married children, (c) peers (also called the friendship network), (d) private specialists and (e) siblings. There is some lack of consensus among researchers as to whether or not the grandparent generation or adult children 133 are preferred sources of help of the parent generation. It is clear that spousal support ranks first, followed in order by other kin, friends and neighbors, and last of all formal support systems. Search of the literature did not clearly differentiate between friends and neighbors. Previous studies have consistently reported that families resort to external supports only when they do not have sufficient internal resources. This was reconfirmed by Olson and McCubbin (1983) who stated, Families at the later stages seem to receive more support from either internal family resources or informal social networks and less frequently rely upon more formal programs and sources offered through various community organizations. (p. 162) The emerging theory concurred with the finding that families rely on internal resources first and also with Stinnett, Sanders and DeFrain (1981) who documented that strong families experienced many crises, but dealt with them in similar ways. First, they were able to be optimistic and see the positive aspects of situations. They also united and provided one another much support. During times of crises they especially recognized how much they meant to one another. Patterns of the Linkages Between the Family and its Informal Support Systems The three patterns that emerged were: 1. Support is given according to where perceived responsibility is greatest. 2. Support is given according to where perceived need 134 is greatest. 3. Support is given according to where desire to give is'greatest. The literature related to patterns of giving was mainly related to filial responsibility. Filial assistance has been associated with a combination of motivational factors that is, affection, gratitude, guilt or a desire for parental approval (Treas, 1977). The strong sense of filial responsibility experienced by many of the parent generation is referred to as filial maturity. This characteristic is an identification of the middle-aged with their aging parents. There is a developing recognition on the part of the parent generation that it is being depended upon by the grandparent generation (Blenkner, 1965). The parent generation internalizes the belief that they are responsible for the grandparent generation and therefore behaves very responsibly (Brody, 1970). As might be expected, some of the parent generation are motivated to help the grandparent generation out of a sense of duty. Others may be motivated by affection (Adams, 1970). Cicirelli (1983) found that when the parent generation perceived the grandparent generation's needs it responded by helping and also, The adult child makes contact with the parent at least partially out of love for the parent and because he or she wants to do so, not just out of a sense of duty or ggfggfe the parent needs help. (Cicirelli, 1983. PP. Horowitz (1980) found that the two strongest predictors of 135 care by the parent generation for the grandparent generation were the grandparents' needs and the parent generation's affection (cited in McCubbin A Patterson, 1981). After informal observations and discussions with parent generation caretakers, LeVande (1980) was convinced that many of the caretakers were motivated out of a deep affection and compassion for their parents. In reflecting on his research Hill (1970) thought, It may be that three prevalent norms run throughout the life cycle. These are the norms of reciprocity, filial responsibility, and "noblesse oblige." To be more explicit, it may be that help given or received is governed first by the norm of reciprocity which places constraints and obligations on both the giver and the receiver, and second by the norm of responsibility of children for their parents (in this case the norm is seen reflected primarily in transfers from parent to grandparent). Thirdly, the helping behavior observed may stem from the desire and sense of obligation of the more advantaged family to aid those perceived to be in less fortunate circumstances. It would seem timely that future research into family helping patterns should examine more closely than has been done to date what combination of norms are associated with the giving and taking of help within the kinship network. (11. 7 ) It is quite clear that filial assistance 131notivated out of perceived responsibility of the parent generation and need of the grandparent generation. Whether or not the parent generation is motivated out of desire is less clear. In the emerging theory it was very clear that in high quality high stability marriage, the couple was motivated to give continually not only to kin, but to others. They were motivated by feelings of responsibility, the needs they observed, and a strong desire to help others. This appears to be an area for further research. 136 In this chapter the emerging theory was compared with existing literature until the researcher was satisfied that no new information was being received. Portions of the emerging theory where research was non-existent or lacking were noted. Now, after further reflection, integration and revision, the emerging theory is restated in Chapter VII. CHAPTER VII EMERGING THEORY II Marital strength is an intangible internal resource of the couple as a unit that can be developed. Each spouse contributes personal resources to the relationship that are exchanged or shared. Family strength is an overall global quality with marital strength being one component of it. In marital strength the core concept is commitment to each other. Commitment to Each Other The continuing commitment in high quality high stability marriage is not to the institution of marriage, but to each other. The relationship, however, is much more meaningful than mere obligation. The marital couple recognizes that the relationship is never static but is ever changing, and needs continuing attention. Support for each other is supreme. Facets that affect development of commitment are appreciation, communication, acceptance, family esteem and purpose. Annmniatinn In high quality high stability marriage the spouses frequently enjoy each other”s company. They are generally contented with life and have an optimistic outlook. The marital couple has a buoyancy derived from daily living, spiked with spontaneous humor and relaxing laughter. Communication In high quality high stability marriage conflicts are dealt with verbally. Although developing mutually 137 138 satisfying communication skills takes time and effort, there is continuing improvement. The atmosphere of the home allows for open expression and most communicating is direct and clear. The spouses expect some strong negative emotions from time to time and do not allow these feelings to derail them from their commitment to each other. Announce In high quality high stability marriage some differences of opinion and personal idiosyncrasies are accepted or tolerated by each of the spouses. They allow each other room for personal development and individuality. Wm In high quality high stability marriage the spouses feel an esteem for the couple as a unit and also have a feeling of esteem for the family as a whole. This esteem gives the marital couple~an awareness that the family is a worthy group with an identity of its own. Pumas In high quality high stability marriage the spouses have shared values and ideals. Belief or faith in a source of strength beyond or greater than themselves is of supreme importance giving meaning and direction to their lives. Commitment to a purpose beyond themselves causes them not to be consumed by personal concerns. They transcend their own circumstances to share encouragement and strength with others. As the years pass the spouses in high quality high stability marriage develop generativity of the couple as a 139 unit. They nurture, teach and help others. This generativity brings a sense of fulfillment and of purpose in life. Help or support is given in accordance with greatest perceived responsibility, need and desire to give. 1. Responsibility Primary responsibility is to kin, but other persons and causes are also supported. 2. Need As needs change, persons receiving help also change. 3. Desire to Give Enjoyment is derived from giving. It is much more meaningful than duty. The marital couple relies on its internal resources and spousal support first. However, when support is received the preferred sources in rank order are (a) other kin, (b) friends and neighbors and (c) last of all formal support services. Commentary It is recognized that the emerging theory of marital strength is partial. The facet called purpose is more developed than the others. More facets could likely emerge from studying families in differing socio-economic or minority groups, or at other stages in the family life cycle. One facet that emerged but did not saturate from the study of this family was an element of adaptability or flexibility in adjusting goals and roles. The couple 140 studied had quite clearly defined traditional roles and were not experiencing unusual change. This facet would probably be easier to detect during times of change. In this chapter the emerging theory has been restated after further reflection and integration with the literature. The researcher recognizes that the theory is partial and is still evolving. The concluding chapter will summarize the process and findings and include implications for practitioners and researchers. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS The focus of this study was on what is going right with families rather than on what is going wrong. One objective was to gain deeper insight into family strength by identifying sources and evidence of family strength, discovering how a marital couple perceived its strength and by describing the linkages between :3 family and its informal support systems. Another objective was to work toward a grounded theory of family strength with emphasis on the marital unit. The family studied was selected from a pool of known families. The couple had been married more than 25 years as an indication of high stability. High quality marriage was evidenced as follows: 1. The couple appeared to enjoy time together. 2. They appeared to have positive regard for each other. 3. They communicated easily. 4. There was no overt evidence of continuing discord or unresolved conflict. In this concluding chapter the research process is summarized. This is followed by a summary of the emerging theory, reflections by the researcher about use of the family ecological framework and implications for practice, theory and research. Summary of the Process In using the grounded theory method of Glaser and Strauss (1967), the researcher first started with a general 141 142 purpose in mind. Four questions guided the researcher: 1. What are the sources of family strength? 2. What are the evidences of family strength? 3. What is the nature of the linkages between the family and its informal support systems? 4. What are the patterns of the linkages between the family and its informal support systems? Before entering the field the researcher made a preliminary but not extensive review of the literature about high quality high stability marriage. Decisions were made regarding techniques to use for data recording, collection and criteria for selection of a family to study. After a family agreed to participate in the study certain facets of the consent agreement were negotiated with them before the researcher entered the field. The family ecological framework was used to focus observations and interviews in analyzing and describing the family's strengths and to examine the interrelatedness between the marital couple and its informal support systems. The family ecosystem has three central organizing commnwnts: the environed unit, environment and the patterning of interactions and transactions between them (Andrews, Bubolz and Paolucci, 1980). For the purpose of this study, the environed unit or family was defined as the marital couple only. The second component, the near environment, includes adult children, extended kin, friends and neighbors. The third component of this family ecosystem 143 was the interaction and reciprocal relationships between the first and second components, that is the marital couple and its near environment. A discovered grounded theory mainly uses concepts that emerge from the data. Some existing ones may be used if they fit the data and are clearly useful. In studying the nature and extent of the linkages between the marital couple and its informal support systems, four existing concepts about types of help were useful. These were social- emotional, physical, economic and informational help (Andrews, Bubolz and Paolucci, 1980). For 17 days, from April 22 through May 8, the researcher was a live-in participant observer in the marital couple's home. During this time many observations were recorded in:fieldnotes. Informal ethnographic interviews were recorded on tape and verbatim transcriptions were also recorded into notebooks. Using the grounded theory method of Glaser and Strauss (1967) all fieldnotes and interviews were analyzed repeatedly for the emergence of categories. As categories became saturated, observations and interviews became more and more focused. Both ethnographic interviews and observations were used to determine the marital strength. Questions about behaviors and artifacts were focused in such a way as not to divulge the full intent of the study. Family members were initially aware that the study was of stable marriage. They were not aware, until the last two days of the researcher"s 144 residence that the full intent was also to study high quality marriage. The nature and patterns of the linkages between the family and its informal support systems were based almost entirely upon observations until after categories and patterns became clear. Then some focused questions were asked. A preliminary statement of the emerging theory was written while the researcher was still in the field. Next, the researcher returned tn) the existing literature. The emerging theory was compared to and integrated with the literature. Then the theory was revised and restated in light of this integration and further reflection. Summary of the Emerging Theory Marital strength is an intangible internal resource of the couple as a unit that can be developed. Each spouse has personal resources that are exchanged, shared and contribute to the strength of the unit. In the development of marital strength the core concept is commitment to each other. Spousal support is extremely critical. Facets that affect development of commitment are (a) appreciation, (b) communication, (c) acceptance, (d) family esteem and (e) purpose. In high quality high stability marriage, the couple develops generativity of the couple as a unit. They support other persons and causes in accordance with their greatest perceived responsibility, need and desire to give. When 145 support is received the preferred sources in rank order are (a) spousal, (b) other kin, (c) friends and neighbors and (d) last of all, formal support services. Reflections About Use of Family Ecological Framework The family ecological framework was useful in studying the couple as a unit and its relationship to its informal support systems. The couple had identity, actions and character of its own, that were more than the sum of these attributes in the individual spouses. Studying the couple as a unit enabled the researcher to see the elements of strength and also to some extent elements that deplete the family. Generally couples who are beyond the launching period and into the retirement years experience a time of more freedom when demands of family life are minimized. The family studied had experienced a tremendous emotional toll and the immense strain of continuous prolonged caregiving to a grandson severely handicapped as a result of an accident. Even though no reluctance on the part of the caregivers was observed, there was evidence of cumulative fatigue. Much support continues to flow out from the couple, not only to kin but to others in the community. Family systems are constantly in the state of change. "Families experience periods of growth and integration, periods of relative balance and stability, as well as periods of disorder and disintegration" (Andrews, Bubolz and Paolucci, 1980, p. 35). This family has demonstrated 146 repeatedly its ability to survive major crises. Even through adversity the marital couple has been able to continue to contribute to society. The family ecological framework was useful in seeing the family's life in its wholeness. Implications for Practitioners This researcher, as well as others, discovered that the preferred order of supports is spousal, other relatives, friends and neighbors and last of all formal support services. More consideration needs to be given as to how services might be designed to supplement, not replace, the family's internal resources and its informal support systems. For example, federal programs cannot be expected to solve all problems of families regarding filial responsibilities. If families were supported by formal service providers, supplemental help could be provided caregivers in cases where total care of the elderly is impossible, but partial responsibility would be feasible and possibly desirable. Self help might be encouraged by providing respite services to prevent depletion, and maintain the physical and emotional health of caregivers. Possibly more tax relief could provide some economic incentive for those financially involved in home filial care. The grandparent generation may not want to become a burden on the parent generation. However, by avoiding 147 planning, tremendous burdens can be created. Practitioners can encourage the generations of families to communicate about tentative plans before filial crises or other crises involving custodial care occur. Professionals involved in formal support services need to consider how to enhance the involvement of informal support networks as a source of family strength. By being sensitive to the workings of these networks, where many essential service exchanges occur, formal and informal support systems might work together more cooperatively. The emerging theory also has implications for family educators and counselors. It1could help in alleviating or preventing problems and help families not only to survive but to be able to thrive despite life's hardships. Marital strength is an intangible internal resource of that couple as a unit, but its development can produce tangible benefits. Couples who develop this strength are likely to be able to be more resilient and less vulnerable in times of stress. The emerging theory indicated several facets that contribute to developing, sustaining and enhancing this resource. More consideration needs to be given to the recognition that developing satisfying communication skills takes time and effort. Each member of the marital pair needs space and understanding for development of individuality. Family esteem promotes feelings of continuity and well-being. Mutual enjoyment promotes bouyancy and relaxation, and a common purpose is essential 148 to development of generativity of the couple as a unit. All of these facets relate to continuing commitment to each other. lkarelation to this the words of the female spouse quoted earlier will be long remembered by this researcher, "So you fall out of love. ,So_Whan! Hang in there and you will fall right back in" (Fieldnotes, April 27). Implications for Research and Theory The primary purpose of grounded theory is to generate ideas for further research. Following is a summary of ideas generated from the emerging theory. In the family studied the parents were giving continually to their adult children. Help given was social- emotional, physical, economic and informational. The adult children desired more reciprocity. However, their offers of help were frequently blocked or thwarted by the parents. The adult children experienced some bewilderment and frustration because of this. The parents were more willing to accept social-emotional, physical and informational help than economic help. Research is needed to understand under what conditions thwarting occurs and the consequences of unequal exchanges. Thwarting was not found in the literature but was the term used by this researcher for the phenomenon. The family ecological framework could be used for this research, and also to study serial reciprocity and deferred exchanges among extended kin. The emerging theory has indicated several other areas where further study could be beneficial. The marital couple 149 studied had a buoyancy derived from daily living spiked with spontaneous humor and relaxing laughter. No literature relating to the presence of humor in daily life and quality of marriage was found. The couple also accepted or tolerated some differences of opinion and personal idiosyncrasies about each other. No existing literature was found relating to this acceptance or tolerance and quality of marriage. The spouses expected some strong negative feelings from time to time, but did not allow these feelings to derail them from their commitment to each other. Some commentary, but no research, was found that discussed the relationship between love and hate. The spouses studied recognized that developing mutually satisfying communication skills takes time and effort. Research is needed to further understand the process. In using the method in another study. different questions could be asked in order to discover the linkages between the family and its nonformal and formal support systems. Borrowing Erikson%3(1963) term of generativity, the researcher described the spouses as having developed generativity of the couple as a unit. There was much evidence of their having reached filial maturity. They also were continually nurturing, teaching and helping those other than kin. They had a common purpose that gave direction to their lives. The phenomenon of generativity of the couple as a unit in high quality high stability marriage could also be a fruitful tapic to study. 150 The emerging theory was developed using one family who apparently had managed its resources effectively through the years and was not especially worried about economic constraints. Before ideas from the emerging theory are included in a large scale study, this researcher thinks that some further testing would be beneficial. It would be helpful to test the emerging theory by studying families in other socio-economic and minority groups and also at other stages in the family life cycle. In continuing to work toward a grounded theory of family strength this researcher suggests that the next logical step is to study high quality parent-child relationships. This study has demonstrated that the process has been useful in providing what Glaser and Strauss (1967) called "one slice of data." They explained that a variety of slices of data would be bewildering if one needed to evaluate them all as accurate evidences for verifications. However, for generating theory this variety is highly beneficial, because it yields more information on categories than any one mode of knowing [technique of collection]. .. . When different slices of data are submitted to comparative analyses the result is not unbounding relativism. Instead, it is a proportioned view of the evidence, since during the comparison biases of particular people and methods tend to reconcile themselves as the analyst discovers the underlying cause of variation. (p. 67) It is hoped that the slice of data in this study will be compared with others and modified or enriched and improved. APPENDICES APPENDIX A Letter to Family November 17, 1982 Dear I would like to choose the two of you for a study of stable marriage of 25 or more years. If you permit your family to be studied, I will need to: 1. Reside in your home for a two to three week period, but not continuously. lX‘I drive, March or April'83 might be good but I can be somewhat flexible at this point. 2. Observe your lives together in the common living areas of your home and in the community, church and maybe school. 3. Sometimes just observe and at other times participate as a family member. 4. Discuss and agree with you about how my presence will be explained to others. 5. Take lots of notes and later ask questions. You always have the right to pass if you prefer not to answer, and can withdraw from the study at any time without recrimination. 6. Use a tape recorder to record interviews, oral histories and possibly some conversations. After the research is complete you may keep the tapes, or they will be destroyed. 7. Interview others selected by me, about their perceptions of your family. Two generations of family members are essential to the study and three generations are desirable. Are your parents and your daughter available to be interviewed? 8. Let you pick your own fictitious names for the written report. 9. Ask both of you to read my written description of your family and add comments or reflections. 10. Ask both of you to sign a permission form if you agree to participate in the study. xi I will be home November 22 through 25. Would you please call collect with your questions and a decision when you are ready? If you need more time to decide, I will be home again December 19. I will look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, xii APPENDIX B Consent Form College of Human Ecology Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan CONSENT FORM We the undersigned freely consent to participate in a research study being conducted by Vivian Campbell under the supervision of Dr. Linda Nelson and Dr. Margaret Bubolz, Professors, Department of Family and Child Ecology, College of Human Ecology, Michigan State University. The purposes of the project have been explained and we understand what our participation will involve. We understand that the results of the study will be treated in strict confidence and that we will remain anonymous. A final report of the study will be made available to us at our request. We understand that our participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to us. We understand that we are free to discontinue participation in the study at any time without recrimination. Husband's Signature Date Wife's Signature Date Address xiii \/ e h c n .1 U. V; b 2 / t 8 a m m C r m o f x F I d D 5 e N e C E t u P 0 d P n e A d R l I\ e 1 F m~m>4_»mmmxm~z—v mmhoz n4m_m m_m>4_hu< muz¢o_u_h¢_> wo