[ Contents | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Gunars Neiders, Psychology Doctorate Student
Date: 10/4/03
Time: 1:49:57 AM
Remote Name: 12.211.116.92
Dr. Schwartz,
I refer to you the more helpful of the two of Schwartz’es. Existentially, and also didactically (as evidenced in your “A Primer for Stuttering Therapy”) you appear to be a close kin to my thinking.
I have always read and re-read pages 68 to 78. Last week I had the opportunity to celebrate my mentor’s Albert Ellis 90th birthday. I even talked to Windy Dryden who you quote on page 76 and 77. Did you know that he is a person who stutters? I have always known that. Now that he is the editor of Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, I am sure he would appreciate a paper of yours on stuttering and REBT. As for me, I and another young intern (who does not stutter) will submit our own paper to the journal.
As you might have heard I have taken the content of those pages 68 -78 as the basis to formulate my stuttering therapy. I really do insist that we arrived at the ideas independently. However, two independent sources of an idea only strengthen its claim to possible utility.
The only dimension in which we really differ is my singular (I hope not fanatical ) dedication to the Stoic ideal. To wit: a) Joe Sheehan was right, “stuttering is what we do to avoid stuttering” b) Being born with genetic predisposition to stutter and then have it evoked by the environment is tough, real tough. But people can teach themselves to be tougher than though. c) Easy repetitions (the inborn effect) IS really nothing to be ashamed of or even avoided. d) In fact, we should go back to our initial starting of stuttering, innocent, easy re-repetitions and e) the ability to find help, friends, and lovers who accept us with or without or stuttering. d) the only crap we have to divest ourselves us is guilt, shame, fear, and anxiety concerning our stuttering.
What you are doing is commendable on two accounts. It may people who stutter, but more importantly some intelligent people will visit www.rebt.org to understand that it is very mentally healthy to not rate yourself, your existential self, because of what you do, what you own, or what characteristics you have. Ultimately, in the post-modernistic philosophical tradition and especially in the social constructivist philosophy, as well as Ellis formulation of the same, no two people can be rated. Everything depends on the frame of reference. And more over, Ellis favorite stance, we are too complex to be compared i.e. rated. We have past, present, and future potential. And pragmatically, it really does not make sense.
Gunars
p.s. Now I can put back your excellent “A Primer for Stuttering Therapy” on my bookshelf.