[ Contents | Search | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Vasu Parameswaran
Date: 18 Oct 2004
Time: 09:23:34 -0500
Remote Name: 151.200.90.2
Hi Rick, I am no researcher and I hope it is not out of line for me to participate in this thread (sorry Judy Kuster :-)). I have read books of both Sheehan and Johnson, and have found them not only enlightening by immensely enjoyable to read. It is unfortunate that the term "Monster Study" has been inextricably linked with Johnson. Johnson had great ideas and judging by his writings, he had a great and honest mind. And so did Sheehan. I don't think the approach avoidance and role-conflict theories have been "disproven" as such (the researchers can correct me). In fact, Sheehan acknowledged the presence of a neurological component of stuttering. In any case, what's important is that these men had ideas - they thought about stuttering in innovative ways (in their time). About your question on whether we should read stuff written 20 years ago, I would say "Absolutely!". Newton's laws held firm for over 200 years and though they are not technically correct, they're accurate enough for practical purposes and are used all over the place to this day. Anyway, that was my 2c. ISAD is great but shortlived. I wish there were a forum where average people who stutter could discuss stuttering research and therapy with researchers throughout the year.