course material

1. Family Life Education Programs
Family Life Education ProgramsPaper instructions:Topic of choice:Internal Dynamics of
Families – An understanding of family strengths and weaknesses and how family members
relate to each other. e.g., Internal Social Processes (including cooperation & conflict);
Communication (patterns & problems in husband-wife relationships and in parent-child
relationships, including stress & conflict management); Conflict Management; Decision-
making and Goal-setting; Normal Family Stresses (transition periods in the family life cycle,
three-generation households, caring for the elderly, & dual careers); Family Stress & Crises
(divorce, remarriage, death, economic uncertainty and hardship, violence, substance
abuse); Special Needs in Families (including adoptive, foster, migrant, low income, military,
and blended families as well as those with disabled members).Further instructions from the
Instructor plus Text from the book to include along with the citation:Below are the
expectations for the course content. Much of the background information required for this
research paper can be found in Part II of the course textbook. (copied and pasted
below)APA format, should be 5-7 pages not including cover page and references7. The
topic of the paper should be selected from the 10 Family Life Education Content Areas.
(TOPIC CHOICE BELOW)8. The content of your paper should demonstrate a
comprehensive program design. You will need to provide a description of program format
such as target audience, length of entire program, frequency and location of meeting(s),
session lengths and topics and other administrative components as desired (i.e.
refreshments).9. The content of your paper should also demonstrate an overview of the
program content including a justification of why the topic was selected. It is recommended
you break down the larger topic selected from the 10 Family Life Education Content Areas
into an appropriate number of smaller subtopics/sessions identified by you as the author.
For example if you select Conflict Management within the Category of Internal Dynamics of
a Family, what are some subtopic areas that would fall under Conflict
Management?10. The content of your paper should also include how you will deliver this
information in the training program. Your paper should include at least 3 different teaching
formats. It is not sufficient to indicate you will show a video/film or bring in a guest
speaker.11. The content of your paper should also include how you will address needs of
the individuals served. In addition the paper should include content on how you will
evaluate the program.12. This paper should read as a proposal to a company or funding
source. The reader should get both a general sense of the FLE program and an idea of the
specific implementation of the program.Topic of choice:Internal Dynamics of Families – An

2. understanding of family strengths and weaknesses and how family members relate to each
other. e.g., Internal Social Processes (including cooperation & conflict); Communication
(patterns & problems in husband-wife relationships and in parent-child relationships,
including stress & conflict management); Conflict Management; Decision-making and Goal-
setting; Normal Family Stresses (transition periods in the family life cycle, three-generation
households, caring for the elderly, & dual careers); Family Stress & Crises (divorce,
remarriage, death, economic uncertainty and hardship, violence, substance abuse); Special
Needs in Families (including adoptive, foster, migrant, low income, military, and blended
families as well as those with disabled members).Also include:General Sexual Development
Theory – proposes that experiencing one’ s own sexuality is appropriate at every age and
stage of life. This helps to build a positive attitude toward sexuality. A positive attitude in
turn then allows an individual to experience non-coercive, non-exploitive, risk free and
mutually satisfying. This theory may be used as a basis for all sexuality education programs.
One quick example of the general sexual development theory may be the use of
anatomically correct words when teaching a toddler about “ potty training” . The correct
term, such as penis, is used instead of a nickname.I want everyone to leave this class
understanding the importance of using a theory to help develop a sex education (or any
Family Life Education topic) program. Remember Forum #2 discussion on theories used to
frame FLE services? A program can change based on the theory being used.On a slightly
different note – I would also like to see a theory addressed in your final paper. Go back and
review all the theories that were discussed in Forum 2. Be sure to indicate which theory
helped to frame your FLE program proposal.THEORIES FROM PART IIUSING THEORY TO
DESIGN PROGRAMSIn order to understand how growth and change in an individual or a
family occurs, it is important to be familiar with several major theoretical models related to
families. The process of change does not easily fit into any single model (Winton, 1995).
Human beings and families are truly unique in their experiences and makeup. Most family
counselors conclude that no two children have the same parents, because each child is born
into a different time and context of relationships. Every person is unique and reacts
somewhat differently to the same set of circumstances because of other variables in her or
his environment. So it is that family scientists must always expect a certain degree of error
in their conclusions and discuss “ probabilities” of cause and effect. With that qualification,
we now discuss the basic tenets of family systems theory, human ecology theory, exchange
theory, and family developmental theory.Family Systems TheoryEarlier in this chapter, the
Yale Child Welfare Research Program design (Ziglar & Gilman, 1990) and the model for
community human services (Kilpatrick & Holland, 1995) were mentioned as programs that
stress the important role that the family plays in program success. Family systems theory
helps us to understand why this is so. Basically, family systems theory views the family as a
living organism operating within certain boundaries, rules, expectations, and interaction
patterns between its members. These patterns have been passed down and adapted
through many generations. They may be helpful or destructive to family members, but
regardless, they are very powerful in determining the behavior of each individual. The
family system exerts such a strong influence on the individual because the system depends
on certain patterns of interaction to maintain its familiar and comfortable “ shape.” Like the

3. carefully balanced mobile that Virginia Satir (1972) used to describe the family, the system
works to keep everything in balance. When change occurs in any part of the system, the
whole system is affected and becomes unbalanced. The system then must either support
and accommodate the change or resist it. Often it is easier to maintain the status quo
(homeostasis) by resisting the change than to exert the energy it takes from every part of
the system to accommodate a change. Furthermore, the family system is part of several
larger systems, including the community, the culture, and peer networks. These also exert a
strong influence on the shape of the family and may have to be confronted or altered if the
family system changes.Let us apply the family system concept to the topic of teen pregnancy
prevention. Usually, programs of sex education and pregnancy prevention are designed by
educators to involve the child or teen only. Little input from parents or program
participants is sought in planning the program, and seldom is follow-up or long-term
reinforcement included in the program design. The end result is scant family reinforcement
of the ideas or skills presented in the program. The system remains uninvolved and
unaffected. Furthermore, the teen functions within a peer system that emphasizes
conformity and short-term gratification. Attempts to “ buck the system” are quickly
squelched through ridicule, intimidation, or isolation from the group. Is it any wonder that
many of our programs show few positive changes, either short or long term?On the other
hand, if a family system functions in a healthy manner, it can reinforce and influence
positive growth for the individual as well as the system. A classic and extensive study of
psychological health in family systems by Lewis, Beavers, Gossett, and Phillips (1976)
determined that families need to have access to preventive programs that are based on
sound research about the types of interactions that build “ healthy,” well-functioning
families. But “ What is meant by ‘ health’ ? What is meant by ‘ normal’ ?” (p. 12). The
authors proceed to discuss four perspectives of health that are used by behavioral and
medical research: (1) health as absence of overt pathology, (2) health as “ optimal
functioning,” (3) health as average or normal functioning, and (4) health as process,
recognizing the ability of a system to change over time. Whether or not one chooses to
define “ health” from any of these four perspectives, the particular system’ s characteristics
can serve as a basic reference point.Lewis et al. (1976) also strongly stress that health
cannot be studied independently of time, place, and cultural or ethnic context and values.
Epstein, Bishop, and Baldwin (1984) give an example of this as it relates to understanding
and evaluating certain family responses:[When] we describe how a healthy, or, in our view,
a normal family should look on each of the dimensions, often such a description involves a
value judgment. For instance, we would say that family members ought to be able to show
sadness at the appropriate times and to the degree called for by the situation. The
judgement of appropriateness with respect to sadness is not clear-cut and varies among
cultures. We take the position that knowledge of the culture to which a family belongs is
necessary for understanding a family and that judgements of health or normality are
relative to the culture of the family. (p. 117)Unfortunately for persons outside of the
mainstream cultural group in America (i.e., the White middle class), many family life
education programs or texts in the 1970s did not address differences in class, cultural
values, or lifestyles (Rodman, 1970). The research of Scott-Jones and Peebles-Wilson (1986)

4. uncovered a gender bias as well. They determined that many parent education programs
were aimed at the middle-class, White female parent and that the scheduled times (plus fees
charged and level of English-language competency needed to complete learning materials)
automatically excluded those of a certain socioeconomic status and most males. Hopefully,
increasing awareness of cultural and gender diversity—
and its impact on program design
and effectiveness—
has addressed these earlier deficits.The timing of educational
intervention is another critical factor. Lewis et al. (1976) call this an “ urgent need” for
program design and stress the importance of focusing on the young family:In a useful
analogy, young families may be likened to an infant. The family as an organism undergoes a
series of developmental sequences. Over time a family’ s characteristic style of reacting may
become increasingly “ fixed.” Young families, therefore, are reasonably unencumbered by
family developmental events and may represent organisms unusually responsive to
education. (pp. 4– 5)Because the new pair is forming a new family system, the probability of
incorporating healthier patterns is much more likely than in a long-established system,
provided new skills and options are presented effectively and reinforced through practice
by the pair.To summarize, the influence of the family system and external systems on an
individual’ s behavior and choices is very powerful and should be considered and utilized in
the design of family life education programs.Human Ecology TheoryThe external systems
already mentioned (cultural context, time, place, gender, lifestyle) emphasize the
interdependence of human communities and their various environments. This emphasis
forms the basis of human ecology theory.Families do not exist as isolated systems. They are
constantly interacting with their environment and the resources (or lack thereof) it
provides. These resources include useful goods and services that families must have for
their own needs and also what they can give back, such as productive work and family and
community support. Andrews, Bubolz, and Paolucci (1980) explain:The flow of energy to
and through the family system activates the decision-making and decision-implementation
processes. Internally, the energy is transformed to support the production, consumption,
and socialization functions of the family. The outputs to the environment are used by other
systems, activating reciprocal exchanges and bonds of interdependence. (p. 35)For example,
in planning a grief support group for widows, the family life educator must consider not
only the group’ s emotional and social needs but also such factors as time, transportation,
and health constraints. Cost of materials and supplies, reading levels, and child care are
other typical ecological factors that must be considered when planning programs. On the
“ output” side of the ledger, it is important to remember that self-esteem is bolstered when
persons feel that they have something to give back to the community and have power to
make(Powell 60-63)Powell, Lane H., Dawn Cassidy. Family Life Education: Working with
Families across the Life Span, 2nd Edition. Waveland Press, 08/2006. VitalBook file.The
citation provided is a guideline. Please check each citation for accuracy before use.ORDER
TODAY YOUR PAPER WITH SIMILAR INSTRUCTIONS AND WE WILL WRITE YOUR PAPER
FROM SCRATCH