Search

Marital conflict is associated with multiple negative outcomes for couples, including marital dissatisfaction and divorce. Little research, however, has examined conflict in Hispanic/Latino couples or its association with marital satisfaction, which creates an unfortunate knowledge gap for clinicians working with diverse client groups. The present study sought to examine both marital conflict and satisfaction using a sample of 231 European American (EA; n = 108) and Hispanic/Latino (H/L; n = 123) couples. Through observational coding, couples were placed into four groups based on their type of conflict management strategies: Harmonious, Withdrawn, Conflictual-Expressive, or Conflictual-Hostile. For both ethnic groups, couples in the Harmonious group were nondistressed and couples in the Conflictual-Hostile group were in the distressed range of marital satisfaction. Cross-ethnic differences emerged. EA couples experienced distress when both hostile (Conflictual-Hostile) and nonhostile conflict (Conflictual-Expressive) communication types were observed, while only hostile conflict was associated with distress for the H/L group. H/L couples reported similar levels of satisfaction in both the Harmonious and Conflictual-Expressive groups. H/L couples also fell within the distressed range when withdrawn communication patterns were observed; however, this was not the case for EA couples. These differences suggest that both types of conflict are associated with marital distress for EA couples, whereas hostile conflict and withdrawn behavior appear to be more negatively associated with marital satisfaction in H/L couples. Results provide support for the use of an observational coding system with H/L and EA couples and also suggest the importance of understanding how differences in expressions of conflict across ethnicities may relate to marital satisfaction., (© 2019 Family Process Institute.)

Few studies have examined parental variables in relation to GLB youth outcomes. This study aimed to establish the reliability and validity of observational codes that examined parental acceptance, emotional support, and ambivalence, and to examine the impact of these parental variables on GLB youth internalizing and externalizing problems, substance use problem severity, and GLB negative identity. Participants included 36 GLB parent-youth dyads at baseline, and out of those, 27 completed the two year follow-up. Results provided support for the reliability and validity of the observational codes. Parental ambivalence was positively correlated to youth-report of parental rejection, but was unrelated to parents' self-reports of rejection. Additionally, parental acceptance of sexual orientation at baseline was inversely related to GLB youth externalizing symptoms two years later, and parental emotional support was inversely related to GLB youth internalizing symptoms and substance use problem severity; however, there were no associations with GLB negative identity. Parental ambivalence was not related to longitudinal outcomes. The results of this study have implications for interventions targeting GLB youth and their parents.

Previous research has not conclusively determined whether traditional femininity increases women's risk for sexual assault. Certain femininity beliefs, such as valuing deference, may increase risk for sexual assault by discouraging sexual refusal assertiveness (SRA). Other femininity beliefs, such as valuing purity, may promote self-protective behaviors. College women (N = 254) provided self-report data on these beliefs, risk and protective behaviors, and sexual assault experiences. Traditional femininity was not directly associated with experiencing sexual assault. However, specific traditional beliefs were related to behaviors directly associated with risk. High SRA and sexual abstinence simultaneously reduced the odds for sexual assault., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: This Stage II trial builds on a Stage I trial comparing the single-gender Women's Recovery Group (WRG) to mixed-gender Group Drug Counseling (GDC) that demonstrated preliminary support for the WRG in treating women with substance use disorders. The Stage II trial aims were to (1) investigate effectiveness of the WRG relative to GDC in a sample of women heterogeneous with respect to substance of abuse and co-occurring psychiatric disorders, and (2) demonstrate the feasibility of implementing WRG in an open-enrollment group format at two sites., Method: In this randomized clinical trial, participants were included if they were substance dependent and had used substances within the past 60 days (n=158). Women were randomized to WRG (n=52) or GDC (n=48); men were assigned to GDC (n=58). Substance use outcomes were assessed at months 1-6 and 9., Results: Women in both the WRG and GDC had reductions in mean number of substance use days during treatment (12.7 vs 13.7 day reductions for WRG and GDC, respectively) and 6 months post-treatment (10.3 vs 12.7 day reductions); however, there were no significant differences between groups., Conclusions: The WRG demonstrated comparable effectiveness to standard mixed-gender treatment (i.e., GDC) and is feasibly delivered in an open-group format typical of community treatment. It provides a manual-based group therapy with women-focused content that can be implemented in a variety of clinical settings for women who are heterogeneous with respect to their substance of abuse, other co-occurring psychiatric disorders, and life-stage., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A significant number of women of reproductive age in the United States use addictive substances. In 2012 more than 50% reported current use of alcohol, 20% used tobacco products, and approximately 13% used other drugs. Among women, use of these substances is associated with several significant medical, psychiatric, and social consequences, and the course of illness may progress more rapidly in women than in men. The prevalence of substance use and evidence of accelerated illness progression in women highlight the importance of universal substance use screening in women in primary care settings., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)