[ Contents]
From: Caroline Bowen
Date: 10/4/02
Time: 2:53:10 AM
Remote Name: 203.173.144.247
Bob,
As a speech-language pathologist I have used the Lidcombe Program, and ("impure") variations of it, throughout its development here in Sydney, Australia.
Mostly, I have used it with children 3-5 years, who stutter AND who have phonological impairments and / or SLI as well as fluency issues.
Although the diagnosis and treatment of stuttering in pre-school aged children is within my clinical orbit, I must admit I am not very well acquainted with the current INTERNATIONAL research in the area (of fluency generally).
With the growing necessity for clinicians to adhere to, and demonstrate, the principles of evidence based practice, and the emphasis worldwide on outcome measures, practioners are increasingly interested in demonstrating that their therapies WORK.
It was in this connection that your words, "And even the Lidcombe folks admit that they are not sure exactly why the treatment works." captured my interest.
With regard to "therapy that WORKS": there are many approaches, procedures and techniques in speech pathology intervention ("speech therapy") for a range of delays and disorders that clinicians believe in because they "work", and their faith in these things is supported by experimental evidence.
But as every schoolboy knows, knowing that a therapy works (or is efficient and effective) is a different thing from knowing WHY it works.
In the area of stuttering treatment for young children (the population the Lidcombe Program was designed for) are there "successful" therapies that have been evaluated, where the evaluators have been able to determine WHAT was doing the trick?
This is SUCH an excellent conference!
All the best, Caroline