Discuss arguments in favor of and against using this model as a national perspective on preventing divorce.
One of the arguments in favor of the prevention model is that it can help couples save their marriage by reducing the levels of stress in their marriage. For instance, couples who are having financial problems as a result of a spouse being unemployed, can seek help from community organizations. According to the prevention model, community organizations can help people find jobs by offering them job training programs.
The couples that are in need of a job can benefit from this component of the model because it can help couples prevent or reduce the duration of their crisis. Another reason why this model is helpful is that it can help new couples find resources that will help them grow and have a much more fulfilling life together. For instance, newlyweds can benefit from the education component because they can be informed early in the relationship about healthy ways of approaching conflict, communication, and decision making in the relationship.
On the other hand, there are those who disagree with the model’s concept of cause and effect. For instance, many people do not believe that education is an important factor for determining the duration and satisfaction in a marriage. Although, those who support the primary prevention model argue that studies do show how social factors do matter in the results of a relationship. For instance, studies have shown that teenagers who get married as a means to escape from their parents’ household may result in divorce.
The social factor in this example is age. The primary prevention model suggests the age of the couple will determine the results of their marriage. Those who oppose efforts of the primary prevention model often choose to ignore the correlations between social factors and causation because they believe these correlations are not enough proof to indicate what the future of the relationship will be like (Handout 44).
Are you saying that the ONLY thing the preventiion model does is to help people find jobs?? I don't think that's what you mean.
I hope that there's a section in your paper -- undoubtedly before these sections you've posted -- in which you outline all the facets of a prevention program. Yes?
These read okay, but I still think you're not explaining in enough detail. It seems you expect the reader to already know exactly what you're referring to. Primary Prevention Model? Includes what?
yes, I'm actually doing this by sections. I'm posting the paragraphs that I feel need proofreading. Since its hard to post all of my paper on this website. Thanks for helping me again.
No problem.
When you get it all together, the first and best thing to do is to read it aloud to someone - or even to no one! Simply hearing yourself read it aloud will help you catch stange wording, choppy sections, and outright errors.
=)
Using a centralized model as a national perspective on preventing divorce can have both arguments in favor as well as against. Let's discuss each side:
Arguments in favor of using a centralized model for preventing divorce:
1. Uniformity and consistency: By implementing a national perspective, all states or regions within the country can adopt a consistent approach to preventing divorce. This can ensure that all citizens are equally informed about the available resources and support systems.
2. Efficiency and cost-effectiveness: A centralized model can streamline resources and reduce duplication of efforts. It can allow for the pooling of funding, research, and expertise, resulting in more efficient and cost-effective preventive measures against divorce.
3. Standardized education and counseling: A national perspective on preventing divorce can promote standardized education and counseling programs. This can ensure that individuals across the country have access to quality services, regardless of their location, social status, or financial resources.
Arguments against using a centralized model for preventing divorce:
1. Lack of local context: A national perspective may not adequately address the unique cultural, societal, or legal aspects of different regions or states within the country. It may overlook local variations in marriage practices, cultural norms, and individual circumstances that impact divorce rates.
2. Limited autonomy: A centralized model could lead to a reduction in individual autonomy and decision-making power in personal matters such as marriage and divorce. Critics argue that individuals should have the freedom to make choices and seek support systems based on their own needs and preferences.
3. Potential for bureaucracy and inefficiency: Centralization may introduce bureaucracy and administrative complexities, potentially slowing down the decision-making process and hindering the implementation of effective preventive measures. It could impede the ability to respond promptly to changing societal dynamics and emerging needs.
In conclusion, the decision to adopt a national perspective on preventing divorce depends on various factors, including cultural diversity, legal frameworks, and societal dynamics within a country. It is essential to consider both the advantages and disadvantages and strike a balance between centralization and localized approaches to ensure an effective and comprehensive strategy.