A qualitative analysis of women whose husbands reside in nursing homes was conducted to understand the concept of couplehood. Couplehood is defined here as the extent to which one person perceives herself as married to another person (feeling like an “I” or like part of a “We”). An “I”—“We” continuum was presented to each woman, and noticeable patterns emerged. Some women identified themselves as perceiving no couplehood with their institutionalized husbands (“Unmarried Marrieds”). A second group of women perceived a high degree of couplehood (“‘Til Death Do Us Parts”), while a third group perceived low couplehood (“Husbandless Wives”). Differences seem to exist in terms of the degree to which couplehood is perceived (no, low, high). Implications of such a typology are offered for researchers, clinicians, and community-dwelling wives.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WamboldtF. S. and ReissD., Defining a Family Heritage and a New Relationship Identity: Two Central Tasks in the Making of a Marriage, Family Process, 28, pp. 317–335, 1989.
2.
BergerP. and KellnerH., Marriage and the Construction of Reality, in Life as Theater: A Dramaturgical Sourcebook, BrissettD. and EdgleyC. (eds.), Aldine, Chicago, pp. 219–233, 1975.
3.
OlsonD.RussellC. S., and SprenkleD. H., Circumplex Model: Systemic Assessment and Treatment of Families, Haworth, New York, 1989.
4.
OlsonD. H.FournierD. G., and DruckmanJ. M., PREPARE/ENRICH Counselor's Manual, PREPARE/ENRICH, Inc., P.O. Box 190, Minneapolis, MN, 55458, 1983.
5.
WynneL. C.RyckoffI. M.DayJ., and HirschS. I., Pseudo-mutuality in the Family Relations of Schizophrenics, Psychiatry, 21, pp. 205–220, 1958.
6.
RosenblattP. and RussellM., The Social Psychology of Potential Problems in Family Vacation Travel, Family Coordinator, 24, pp. 209–215, 1975.
7.
StierlinH., Separating Parents and Adolescents, Quadrangle, New York, 1974.
8.
MinuchinS., Families and Family Therapy, Harvard University Press, Boston, 1974.
9.
OlsonD., Bridging Research, Theory, and Application: The Triple Threat in Science, in Treating Relationships, OlsonD. (ed.), Graphic Press, Lake Mills, Iowa, pp. 565–579, 1976.
10.
KaplanL., Couplehood Defined: Wives Perceptions of Feeling Married when Their Husbands Reside in Nursing Homes, unpublished master's thesis, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, 1991.
11.
RollinsD.WatermanD., and EsmayD., Married Widowhood, Activities, Adaptation, and Aging, 7:2, pp. 67–71, 1985.
12.
SommersT. and ShieldsL., Women Take Care: The Consequences of Caring in Today's Society, Triad, Gainesville, Florida, 1987.
13.
MeadG., Mind, Self and Society, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1934.
14.
LaRossaR. and ReitzesD. C., Symbolic Interactionism and Family Studies, in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach, BossP.DohertyW.LaRossaR.SchummW., and SteinmetzS. (eds.), Plenum, New York, pp. 135–163, 1993.
15.
KellyG. A., The Psychology of Personal Constructs, Norton, New York, 1955.
16.
KaplanL. and HennonC. B., Remarriage Education: The Personal Reflections Program, Family Relations, 41, pp. 127–134, 1992.
17.
BlumerH., Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1969.
18.
StraussA. and CorbinJ., Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, California, 1990.
19.
NeugartenB., Interpretive Social Science and Research on Aging, in Gender and the Life Course, RossiA. (ed.), Aldine, New York, pp. 291–300, 1985.
20.
BaxterL. A., Symbols of Relationship Identity in Relationship Cultures, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, pp. 261–280, 1987.
21.
FitzpatrickM. A., Between Husbands and Wives: Communication in Marriage, Sage, Newbury Park, California, 1988.
22.
FowersB. J. and OlsonD. H., Four Types of Premarital Couples: An Empirical Typology Based on PREPARE, Journal of Family Psychology, 6, pp. 10–21, 1992.
23.
GilbertS. J., Self Disclosure, Intimacy and Communication in Families, The Family Coordinator, 25, pp. 221–231, 1976.
24.
MaceD. R., Close Companions: The Marriage Enrichment Handbook, The Continuum, New York, 1982.
25.
NollerP., Nonverbal Communication and Marital Interaction, Pergamon, New York, 1984.
26.
GalvinK. M. and BrommelB. J., Family Communication: Cohesion and Change, Scott Foresman, Glenview, Illinois, 1982.
27.
PaolucciB.HallO. A., and AxinnN., Family Decision Making: An Ecosystem Approach, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1977.
28.
BaucomD. H., Attributions in Distressed Relations: How Can We Explain Them? in Intimate Relationships: Development, Dynamics, and Deterioration, PerlmanD. and DuckS. (eds.), Sage, Beverly Hills, pp. 177–206, 1987.
29.
JohnsonC., The Impact of Illness on Late-Life Marriages, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, pp. 165–172, 1985.
30.
WolinS. J. and BennettL. A., Family Rituals, Family Process, 23, pp. 401–420, 1984.
31.
HendrickC. and HendrickS., Liking, Loving, and Relating, Brooks/Cole, Monterey, California, 1983.
32.
TallmerM., Intimacy Issues and the Older Patient, in Intimacy, FisherM. and StriekerG. (eds.), Plenum, New York, pp. 371–382, 1982.
33.
HeinzW. (ed.), The Theoretical Advances in Life Course Research, Deutscher Studienverlag, Weinheim, 1991.
34.
KaplanL. and Ade-RidderL., Impact on the Marriage when One Spouse Moves to a Nursing Home, Journal of Women and Aging, 3:3, pp. 81–101, 1991.
35.
BohnsackR., Rekonstruktive socialforschung: Einfuhrung in methodologie und praxis qualitativer forschung, Leske & Burdrick, Opladen, 1991.
