[ Contents | Search | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Ken St. Louis
Date: 12 Oct 2006
Time: 09:53:04 -0500
Remote Name: 157.182.15.42
Hello again Paul, You ask some very good questions. I don't claim to have the answers, but here are some thoughts: "1) to what extent do the labels I use shape my perceptions of stuttering? " I would suggest the Peter Reitzes' paper best deals with this issue. He talks about the use of a "bad stutter," a "severe stutter," and so on and how those terms affect our views of the behavior itself. In therapy, we can turn the tables and talk about a "good" stutter, and that can be therapeutic. Yet, I don't think most people would argue that stuttering is a desirable characteristic, anymore than having diabetes is desirable. Therefore, the negative aspects associated with being unable to speak normally will almost inevitably be transferred to the term "stuttering" and will probably affect one's perception of the problem, whether as the individual who stutters or individual who has never stuttered. I agree with Bob Kroll who once said it would be wonderful if stuttering was considered as part of the normal human condition. Until or unless that happens, I don't think we can eliminate the negative valence of the term, and thereby ones perception of the problem. "2) to what extent do my perceptions of stuttering shape my stuttering?" If the above is at least partly correct, then I would assume that, ON THE AVERAGE, the more negatively one views the problem of stuttering, the more severe or involved the problem. Of course, that will not happen in every case. " And, perhaps, also a third question… to what extent might an understanding of general semantics (or Kelly’s construct theory) help people who stutter develop the capacity to see beyond the labels?" Paul, I think you answered this as well as I can. You wrote, "Perhaps lessons in these should be part of the therapy." Thanks again, Ken