The presenter of this paper, A Speech Processing Approach for the Treatment of Stuttering has consented to have a personal email address posted here if you wish raise further questions and/or comments. Barbara Dahm - dahm@netvision.net.il A Speech Processing Approach for the Treatment of Stuttering From: Jean O'Conor Date: 10/2/98 Time: 2:05:56 PM Remote Name: 205.188.196.29 Comments Please comment on how this approach is used with young children. Re: A Speech Processing Approach for the Treatment of Stuttering From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/3/98 Time: 2:13:43 PM Remote Name: 62.0.178.43 Comments The exact procedures used with children depend greatly on the age, attention span, etc of the child. However, the basic principle applies. We don't focus on fluency or stuttering. The child is aware that we are going to show him/her how to make it easier and more comfortable to talk. The focus is on producing a voice in order to talk. We play lots of vocal games and help the child to enjoy vocalizing. We want the child to be able to produce a voice that contains lots of intonational variation and enjoy it. Conceptually we take the focus away from words. We teach the child that s/he can say anything as long as the "speech motor" (voice) is working. We do start with shorter utterances, but once the child gets the idea of how to produce speech in this way, they quickly move into utterances that are within the child's ability to produce linguistically. We also do a language eval, and if necessary simultaneously work at strengthening language skills. All the work is done at a normal rate of speaking. Parents are also involved in the therapy so that they can support the therapy goals at home. Dahm's article ..stuttering processing From: ggriffslp@aol.com Date: 10/2/98 Time: 5:48:18 PM Remote Name: 205.188.192.178 Comments Please tell me about the meat of your therapy procedure, as specifically as possible. Do you work with vowel stretches, easy onset, breath control, etc. from sound levels to conversation? Please respond. Thank you. Re: Dahm's article ..stuttering processing From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/3/98 Time: 2:55:10 PM Remote Name: 62.0.178.93 Comments We don't work on the fluency shaping targets of full breath, easy onset and stretched syllables. With most older children and adults there is a stage of therapy in which syllables are lenthened but this only to help them to see in slow motion how the speech production system works. We get to a normal rate of speaking as soon as they are cognitively ready and understand functionally the different ways of producing speech. I do have all the exercises written down step by step. It's very long, however, and couldn't be posted here in full. One example of a motor level activity is for the clients to first learn to produce a voice without any effort and without pushing out air. This is not gentle onset as any vocal intensity is okay as long as the voice is produced without contracting muscles that inhibit phonation. Then they produce various syllables using this kind of voicing. They do this while focusing on producing the voice. There is no effort to produce speech sounds. They see that articulation becomes secondary. Once they can do this they begin to produce multisyllabic utterances and move into spontaneous speech. A lot of work is down developing spontaneous ideas. Linguistiaclly, one exercise is to speak without phonating at all, not even whispering. Just developing ideas continuously and letting the articulators move automaticly. This is not always easy for some people who stutter to do without having stops in the movement of the articulators. When they are able to do this they add the phonation that they have learned to produce without changing the other processes. We also use an exercise where they produce voicing without articulation then do it the same way while articulating automatically. I hope this is understandable. It's really hard to explain without going through it step by step. Re: Dahm's article ..stuttering processing From: Judy Kuster Date: 10/4/98 Time: 8:17:40 AM Remote Name: 134.29.1.2 Comments I need to mention here that Barbara Dahm's entire therapy program is also available commercially, although her approach does not require purchasing the commercial program. It is called Generating Fluent Speech and is available through Thinking Publications (their website may have more information about it). Both of the therapy presenters agreed they were going to focus on their approach and not on a product in this online conference so we can learn first-hand about two very different approaches to stuttering therapy. Signal-to-noise ratio From: Ed Feuer Date: 10/3/98 Time: 12:25:15 AM Remote Name: 207.161.119.14 Comments Barbara, If I understand your article, you seem to perceive the "speech generating system" as a closed one. However, that is not the case, and people who stutter know that all too well. Stuttering involves the body, the mind, and other people. There is something in our "wiring" which gives us an adverse signal-to-noise ratio. Effective stuttering therapy should have the effect of providing a filter to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. Van Riper spoke of the "noise" as fluency disruptors. Those of us who stutter have a lower threshold to speech breakdown caused by the stress of the these fluency disruptors. Memories of past stuttering-related consequences have created highly conditioned maladaptive struggle behaviors. Fluent speakers are not immune from perceived outside inputs. That is why fluency students display such great resistance to going out to do pseudo-stuttering. I would suggest to anyone who wants to understand the real-world realities of the problem to go out into the streets and stores and do some comprehensive pseudo-stuttering. It will help them understand that an intensive in vivo desensization program as well as activities that promote healing and strengthening are essential if working on inappropriate speech mechanics is to be successful. Re: Signal-to-noise ratio From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/3/98 Time: 3:33:29 PM Remote Name: 62.0.178.18 Comments Ed, you are absolutely correct and are agreeing with what I said in the paragraph before the last under the heading "Deviations in an Interactive System". Also paragraphs 5 and 6 in the same section refer to the influence that others have on the person who stutters. Where I think we don't agree is that you seem to be saying that people who stutter produce speech like everyone else but stress causes the breakdown. I think that people who stutter have a tendency to produce speech in a different way than non-stuttering speakers. I think they speak this way much of the time whether or not the speech is perceptually stuttered. Therefore, if they don't change the way they produce speech, it will be very difficult to cope with stress. Producing speech incorrectly is stressful. I know this because I have learned how to do this and immediately feel the stress. I have also taught other non-stuttering speakers to do this and they also say it stressful. While people who stutter are becoming desensitized and learning to deal with their past experiences,they also have to learn how to rewire the system. The brian, the mind, feelings, attitudes, the speech muscles are all part of the system. We have to treat all areas simultaneously, not as separate entities. Understanding ones speech production system and how it works does counterbalance the fear of stuttering. Developing a positive approach counterbalances the feelings of shame and guilt. Re: Signal-to-noise ratio From: Ed Feuer Date: 10/3/98 Time: 10:14:28 PM Remote Name: 207.161.63.115 Comments Barbara, I would say there are fluent speakers out there who donŐt meet your high standards in speech mechanics Ń and yet they donŐt stutter. I would also say that we who stutter also know how to breathe, and believe it or not, we even know how to talk. Some of the time, even most of the time we speak with very high mechanical standards. But it is that very knowledge that produces the fragmented self. Reintegrating the fragmented self must accompany acquiring any new speech mechanics if the latter is to have any chance of lasting. From what I have read about your method, it seems to me there is too much emphasis on the mechanics. You are in effect trying to cure combat veteran shell-shocked soldiers by sending them back to boot camp. Once again, I suggest you go out into the streets and stores and do some pseudo-stuttering, an activity which I think would help you and other gain empathy and insight into the real dynamics of the stuttering problem. Ń Ed Feuer Re: Signal-to-noise ratio From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/4/98 Time: 9:03:53 AM Remote Name: 62.0.178.26 Comments Ed, If you look in the research you will see many studies that show differences between people who stutter and people who do not both in speech mechanics and brain processing . I don't know why this is so, but it has been shown to be true. This does not necessarily mean that there are diffeerences in anatomy and physiology, but there are differences in functioning. I most certainly agree that attitudes, feelings and past experiences play a role. Noting differences is not in any way meant to be an insult. We are all concerned in finding solutions to the stuttering enigma, so I don't think we should hesitate to note differences when we see them. Concerning breathing, I have also found that my clients know how to breath, but often when they go to speak they try to take control of their breathing to make the words come out. This makes it very difficult to produce voicing that supports continued speech. By the way in most cases we hardly even relate to breathing. The idea is to speak while breathing, not to breath for getting words out. Ed, therapy is not boot camp. It is a co-operative process in which both the clinician and client are interested in seeing what makes stuttering happen and what we can do to make speaking less stressful and more enjoyable. What I have written in my paper is what my clients have taught me. After having seen so many different people who stutter I simply put it all together and what came out was a diffeerent approach to stuttering. Within a short period of time most of my clients experience the two ways of producing speech. They confirm that there are different ways of producing speech. One way is less stressful and the speech is fluent. One way is stressful and results in speech that is often disfluent. Concerning pseudo-stuttering, I have done that, but I will never be able to experience what it feels like to have no alternative. I do prefer to have the alternative and that is what I want people who stutter to have as well. concepts of achieving fluency skills From: Willem Snijders, the Netherlands Date: 10/9/98 Time: 1:25:42 PM Remote Name: 195.121.88.224 Comments I'm very lucky to have the opportunity to be in your course at this very moment. You've added some new concepts to understanding fluent and non-fluent speech. Still I believe there has to be more; for instance temperament and the motive's stutterers sometimes have to speak. I remember from my early days that I wanted to speak to demonstrate my fluency. These motives are contraproductive in your program, however, can they be shaped into more appropiate motives, because they have maintained for so long. Kindest regards, Willem Snijders Re: concepts of achieving fluency skills From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/17/98 Time: 9:51:53 AM Remote Name: 62.0.178.37 Comments Willem, it was a great pleasure to have you as a participant in my workshop. I do understand that some people who stutter do like to show others the progress they have made. Although, I do believe that it is counter-productive to focus on fluency, such a person could demonstrate the different way he has learned to produce speech. In this case, the speech would be fluent, but that would be secondary to the process being used to produce the speech. Speech Processing Approach to Stuttering From: Roxie Flicek Date: 10/12/98 Time: 1:24:32 PM Remote Name: 208.201.123.10 Comments I found this idea for therapy to be most interesting. Can you provide specifics for achieving the short-term goals? Thank you! Re: Speech Processing Approach to Stuttering From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/17/98 Time: 9:34:02 AM Remote Name: 62.0.178.85 Comments The short-term goals are achieved carrying out various exercises that have the speakers focus more on vibrating the vocal folds as the major activity rather than trying to control word formation. They learn to vibrate the vocal folds as an isolated activity. Then they see that by doing this they can actually produce all words and speech sounds without paying consciouss attention to the internal speech. I have briefly mentioned in an earlier post on this thread a few of the exercises that they do. Although I can't go into all the details here, I will summarize by saying that we look at the speech production system in a rational and logical way and see what the person who stutters can do to make it easier to produce speech. If you would like to see all the exercises, they are described in the therapy kit. Speech Process Approach to Stuttering From: charlet.sperbeck@mnsu.edu Date: 10/22/98 Time: 7:44:17 AM Remote Name: 134.29.22.20 Comments I recall a model developed by Dodd (sorry I don't the reference at my disposal at the moment) that was used to explain the processing components in developmental apraxia of speech. There are many similarities between your model and Dodds. This prompts me to wonder if the same processing difficulties could lead to suttering in one individual and developmental apraxia of speech in another. Recently, I met a young man who suspects a neurological basis for his stuttering. He notes the same type of hesitancies in his writing. Has it been your experience that clients have success with a speech processing approach to treatment if they believe that their stuttering is due to neurological differences? Re: Speech Process Approach to Stuttering From: Barbara Dahm Date: 10/22/98 Time: 4:51:53 PM Remote Name: 62.0.178.70 Comments My belief is that there are differences in neurological functioning in all people who stutter. Recent Pet Scan research has also shown that there are differences. However, it is not known if these differences are the result of physiological or cognitive factors. If this man is already focused on the neurological process involved in speech production, he would probably be a good candidate for speech processing therapy as he would be willing to explore internally what he is doing when generating speech. workshop in Generating Fluent Speech From: Mariette Embrechts Date: 10/22/98 Time: 3:29:45 PM Remote Name: 131.174.160.73 Comments At te latest moment possible by this post I want to say that you, Barbara, did a wonderful job in presenting two workshops in Rotterdam and Nijmegen in the Netherlands. You made us think about a lot of things which are not yet clear... And till we know more we have to seek.... Good luck with the working on your program! Mariette