Topic 4 DQ 1 (Obj. 4.1) Assessment Description What communication problems might you expect to see in counseling clients engaged in romantic relationships? TEXTBOOKS Lehmiller, J., Whitbourne, Stacey B., & Whitbourne, Susan K. (2020). Human Sexuality and Issues in Aging for Grand Canyon University (Custom). Wiley ISBN-9781119828099 – Custom. (Available as a custom ebook-includes only Chapters 1, 2 , 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 13, 14, and 15 from Lehmiller, J. (2017). The Psychology of Human Sexuality (2nd ed.). ISBN- 9781119164739; Chapters 1, 2, 5, 11, 12, and 13 from Whitbourne, Stacey B., & Whitbourne, Susan K. (2020). Adult Development and Aging, (7th ed.). ISBN ISBN 9781119607878) Deborah Walsh Posted Date Oct 30, 2021, 1:20 PM Unread There are many different types or styles of relationships, however if a relationship has turned romantic, communication can easily ‘make or break’ the continuation of that romantic partnership. For example, if a couple has begun with a friend with benefits (FWB) type of relationship – each individual could have a different definition of their FWB status (Lehmiller, Whitbourne & Whitbourne, 2020). In fact, there are several different researched FWB stages: true friends, just sex, successful transition, unintentional transition, and failed transition (Lehmiller, Whitbourne & Whitbourne, 2020). Typically, due to low communication between the friends regarding their status, it can be very common that one friend may believe that due to their FWB status, the relationship will ultimately progress into something more, whereas the other friend truly only wants occasional sex (Lehmiller, Whitbourne & Whitbourne, 2020). Due to this type of ‘lack of communication,’ many times the FWB arrangement does not work out (Lehmiller, Whitbourne & Whitbourne, 2020). Additional communication problems that couples may encounter in romantic relationships are withholding information – or even dishonesty in their communication. Also, poor communication patterns that may have developed in their family of origin that are not compatible in a new relationship (Knapp, Sandberg, Novak & Larson, 2015). Complications may arise when bringing family of origin communication responsiveness patterns to a new relationship that do not mesh with the new partner’s communication style (Knapp, Sandberg, Novak & Larson, 2015).  Amy FibelkornPosted Date Oct 30, 2021, 10:36 PM(edited) Unread There is a myriad of communication problems one may see when counseling clients who are in romantic relationships; lack of listening skills, not taking turns speaking/talking over one another, yelling/shouting/cursing at one another, name-calling, stonewalling, etc. Rauer, et. al. (2013), indicate a failure to establish and sustain a committed intimate relationship during early adulthood is thought to not only hinder development, but have serious negative implications for well-being across the life span (p. 2159). I found this article interesting because it discusses adults getting into relationships later in adulthood than they were in previous decades and indicates there is a correlation between the history of family and peer relationships in determining success with romantic relationships (Rauer, et. al., 2013). Similarly, Miga et. al. (2012), reported, “hostility and aggression between mother and father has been linked with negative outcomes in adolescence, such as lower self-esteem, internalizing and externalizing problems, poor social skills, and adolescent partner aggression” (p. 444). If a client has not witnessed healthy communication, they may not know how to communicate effectively with their partner. When counseling clients it would be important to discuss how their childhood and peer relationships may have impacted their communication styles and that positive communication is considered the key to successful relationships (Lehmiller, et. al., 2020). The counselor would educate the client about positive communication skills to replace the unhealthy ways they have been communicating with their partners. Christy Goodwin Posted Date Oct 30, 2021, 4:11 PM Unread Hello everyone, All relationships, no matter what kind, have communication problems from time to time. This especially happens in romantic relationships. One thing that comes to my mind is how different men and women are. Men are more visual creatures and women are more emotional creatures. If a man is silent for an amount of time, the woman often sees this as mistreatment and that they are being given the silent treatment. However, men may just need to be alone. It is very frustrating for either party to not feel heard. Many times feelings of not being heard stem from basic communication issues. Other common problems, besides lack of communication, are physical and mental health issues, misinterpretations of someone else's motivations, unable to understand another person’s point of view, poor listening skills, cultural barriers, and heated arguments with name-calling (GoodTherapy, 2021). Communication problems are bound to happen from time to time no matter what type of relationship it is. However, romantic relationships are likely at the top of the list because emotions are high and couples spend a lot of time together. How would you counsel a couple where both parties have been repeatedly cheating? 

Try to attempt to take the conversation further by examining their claims or arguments in more depth or responding to the posts that they make to you.  Keep the discussion on target and try to analyze things in as much detail as you can. 100 words or more. Hello All,Acting out of a sense of duty can be either wrong or right based on your ethical approach. What one person view as wrong might be seen as right in another person's eyes. A deontological approach will focus on the person acting, their intention in carrying out the act, and especially the rule according to which the act is carried out, rather than the consequences that follow (Mosser, 2013).My example in which someone acted out of a sense of duty will come from the storyline of the movie, “John Q” (2002), starring Denzel Washington as John Q.Washington’s character John Q’s son fell ill and was diagnosed with an enlarged heart. His son was in need of an emergency heart transplant, but due to financial hardship and lack of insurance coverage; John Q could not cover the $250K operation cost, yet alone the $75K down payment to place his son on the donor’s list. All out of options, John Q decides to take a hospital emergency room under arm with hostages and demanded his son be placed on a donor list. John Q decides to commit suicide and donates his heart to his son, but at the very last minute his son received a heart from another individual. John Q eventually faced only kidnapping charges and was sentenced to 3-5 years jail time.It was wrong for John Q to act in this way, despite the fact that it is his moral duty to help his dying child. You can apply various ethical deontological theories to this incident. The rule(s) corresponding to which John Q’s actions are carried out would apply to the categorical imperative. Kant sees categorical imperative as an, “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law" (as quoted in Kemerling, 2011, “The Categorical Imperative,” para. 1). Kermerling (2011) sites this as meaning, “Each individual agent regards itself as determining, by its decision to act in a certain way, that everyone (including itself) will always act according to the same general rule in the future” (“The Categorical Imperative,” para. 1). The categorical imperative would ask John Q the question, “Would he want everyone in the same circumstance as him to take on the same action for results?” (Mosser, 2013). I believe John Q has the moral duty and obligations to help his son; John Q’s heart was in the right place, but his actions were criminal. His actions put citizen’s lives in danger, and those actions could influence others in similar situations. If John Q’s conduct were adopted as universal, it would have damaging repercussions on society. Obviously, we would not want this to be the standard rule for people who can’t afford healthcare. The categorical imperative concludes, “That we have a perfect duty (to which there can never be any exceptions whatsoever not to act in this manner” (Kemerling, 2011, “The Categorical Imperative,” para. 2).According to Mosser (2013), “Deontology has the appeal of being easily explained and develops rules that seem to make sense and are also widely applied” (“Deontology,” para. 7). You can relate deontology and utilitarian theories, whereas utilitarian focuses on the end rather than the means, and deontology focuses on the means rather than the end result, e.g., duty and obligations (Mosser, 2013). Both of these theories can lead to possibly unethical results that are problematic (Mosser, 2013).ReferencesKearns, J. & Cassavetes, N. (2002). John Q. [Motion Picture]. United States: New Line CinemaKemerling, G. (2011). Kant: The Moral Order. Philosophy Pages. Retrieved from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5i.htmMosser, K. (2013). Understanding philosophy [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/