Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Lesbian Couples (lesbian + couple)
Selected AbstractsGAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES IN THERAPY: PERSPECTIVES FOR THE CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPISTJOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY, Issue 4 2000Claudia Bepko This paper outlines the major concerns of gay and lesbian couples who seek therapy. Presenting problems are classified as either internal to the relationship or as external (contextual) ones that reflect the influence of oppressive cultural and gender biases. Throughout the article, distinctive therapy methods are described that address the unique concerns of lesbian and gay couples, with special sensitivity to heterosexist and homophobic bias. [source] Attractions and constraints as determinants of relationship commitment: Longitudinal evidence from gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couplesPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, Issue 3 2000LAWRENCE A. KURDEK The proposition that commitment to a relationship is uniquely determined by forces that draw one to the relationship (attractions) and forces that prevent one from leaving the relationship (constraints) was tested with five annual waves of longitudinal data from two samples: both partners from 155 married couples and both partners from 57 gay couples and 50 lesbian couples. Growth curve analyses that controlled for the interdependence of partners' scores indicated that, for both heterosexual and gay/lesbian couples, variability in one's own commitment was uniquely predicted by one's own attractions and one's own constraints, interactions involving one's own attractions and one's own constraints, and one's partner's attractions. It is concluded that attractions and constraints exert unique dynamic effects on maintaining a close relationship. [source] "It wasn't ,let's get pregnant and go do it':" Decision Making in Lesbian Couples Planning Motherhood via Donor InseminationFAMILY RELATIONS, Issue 4 2004Jennifer M. Chabot The process that lesbian couples experienced in using donor insemination (DI) to become parents was examined in this study through interviews of 10 lesbians. Using a decision-making framework embedded in feminist theory, results identified the major decisions involved that conceptualized the transition to parenthood and describe how these decisions were experienced. [source] An Examination of Established Antecedents of Power in Purchase Decision Making: Married and Nontraditional CouplesJOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 9 2004Michelle C. Reiss This research examined the extent that resource theory, sex-role orientation, least interested partner hypothesis, and involvement apply to cohabiting heterosexual, gay, and lesbian couples. Findings revealed that (a) resources significantly affected only married partners' relative influence and strategy usage; (b) sex-role orientation significantly affected relative influence for married partners and strategy selection for partners in both types of heterosexual couples; (c) least interest significantly affected relative influence for partners in both types of heterosexual couples and influence strategy selection for cohabi-tors; and (d) involvement significantly affected relative influence and strategy usage for all couple types. Overall, the effect of the antecedents on relative influence and strategy usage depends on the extent that partners within any couple type are similar on various antecedents. [source] GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES IN THERAPY: PERSPECTIVES FOR THE CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPISTJOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY, Issue 4 2000Claudia Bepko This paper outlines the major concerns of gay and lesbian couples who seek therapy. Presenting problems are classified as either internal to the relationship or as external (contextual) ones that reflect the influence of oppressive cultural and gender biases. Throughout the article, distinctive therapy methods are described that address the unique concerns of lesbian and gay couples, with special sensitivity to heterosexist and homophobic bias. [source] Attractions and constraints as determinants of relationship commitment: Longitudinal evidence from gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couplesPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, Issue 3 2000LAWRENCE A. KURDEK The proposition that commitment to a relationship is uniquely determined by forces that draw one to the relationship (attractions) and forces that prevent one from leaving the relationship (constraints) was tested with five annual waves of longitudinal data from two samples: both partners from 155 married couples and both partners from 57 gay couples and 50 lesbian couples. Growth curve analyses that controlled for the interdependence of partners' scores indicated that, for both heterosexual and gay/lesbian couples, variability in one's own commitment was uniquely predicted by one's own attractions and one's own constraints, interactions involving one's own attractions and one's own constraints, and one's partner's attractions. It is concluded that attractions and constraints exert unique dynamic effects on maintaining a close relationship. [source] The link between sociotropy/autonomy and dimensions of relationship commitment: Evidence from gay and lesbian couplesPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, Issue 2 2000LAWRENCE A. KURDEK The tendency to be excessively concerned about either interpersonal relationships (sociotropy) or self-reliance (autonomy) has been regarded as increasing one's susceptibility to experience symptoms of depression. In this study, both one's own and one's partner's scores for each tendency were linked to two dimensions of one's own appraisal of relationship commitment (attractions to the relationship and constraints against leaving the relationship) in a sample of both partners from 29 gay and 35 lesbian cohabiting couples. One's own high autonomy was linked to perceiving few attractions to the relationship, whereas one's own high sociotropy was linked to perceiving many constraints to leaving the relationship under two conditions: when one's partner's sociotropy was low or when one regarded the partner as highly dependable. Findings support the view that individual differences variables may serve as either risk factors for or protective factors against difficulties in maintaining a close relationship and underscore the need to examine cross-partner effects and moderating effects in identifying the individual differences variables linked to relationship functioning. [source] | |||||||||||||