[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Peter Reitzes
Date: 06 Oct 2010
Time: 09:02:19 -0500
Remote Name: 165.155.192.90
Ashley, thanks for writing. You wrote, “I believe this [the Fluency Challenge] is an easy way for clinicians to explore the underlying ‘goals’ of the client.” Keep in mind that exploring stuttering can be very challenging for people who stutter and for clinicians. When you explore stuttering, you often get close to “the hot stove” (a phrase used by Van Riper and Malcolm Fraser) – and getting close the hot stove is not easy. You ask, “do you think clinicians use the term fluency instead of stuttering because of the emotional stigma the term stuttering carries?” I think some do for sure – although I would probably say emotional weight, not stigma. Others may feel that it sounds more “professional” to say “fluency” instead of stuttering. Many may use the term “fluency” instead of stuttering simply because that is what their professor, mentor or supervisor does. And of course, some feel or believe that using the term stuttering may somehow be harmful. It seems to me that the reverse may be true - that using and relying upon the term fluency may be counterproductive.