[ Contents | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Bob Quesal
Date: 10/3/01
Time: 8:51:44 AM
Remote Name: 143.43.201.169
Good points, Joe. Someone else commented that I sounded like I was saying someone else ought to "take over" stuttering and that wasn't what I meant. That's the price I pay for responding to comments before I have my second cup of coffee. ;-)>
What I meant was that if ASHA will not support those of us in the profession who care about stuttering and stutterers, another "umbrella organization" may need to take the leadership role. If SLPs are not properly trained to work with stuttering - and I believe that is a distinct possibility in the not-too-distant future - SOMEONE will have to do it.
I can try an analogy - perhaps a weak one, but it might work. ;-)> Twenty or so years ago, dysphagia was barely a blip on the radar screen of Speech-Language Pathology and ASHA. Because it came to be considered important by ASHA, it gained increased prominence, to the point where swallowing is now a de facto part of our practice (and probably will soon have a place in our association's name). In 1980 or so, if someone had asked "where do you go for swallowing therapy?" most people would not have thought of SLPs (most likely OT, nursing, and maybe PT would have been the more typical answers). Many more now know that ASHA is, in part, a swallowing association.
If some other umbrella organization "takes over" fluency disorders, a similar series of events would have to occur - that organization has to establish itself as the organization whose members are people who know about stuttering, and that there are standards in place to ensure that the members have knowledge and skills in dealing with stuttering. If that occurs (and I hope it doesn't), it will take a lot of time.
What I am primarily trying to point out is that the status quo cannot continue. Fluency disorders is being left to die on the vine because of decisions being made by ASHA (and others). That, in my opinion, is the reality. I may be wrong, but I have yet to see any compelling evidence to convince me that I am wrong. Because of that, I believe we at least need to be looking at POSSIBLE alternatives to the way things are currently being done.
I hope this clarifies things a bit. I appreciate your comments.
Bob Q.