Journal of fluency disorders · 2025
Stuttering and neurodiversity: A question of ableism or anti-ableism? One central premise: The person who stutters.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vanryckeghem Martine
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this position statement is to lay the foundation for an open-minded discourse by embracing neurodiversity in assessment and treatment of the person who stutters and to bring attention to the central premise: the person who stutters.
METHOD: A reflection on recent publications and conference presentations that discuss an unnuanced and narrow-minded ableist versus anti-ableist approach to the assessment and treatment of people who stutter. Many of those are not data-bound and lead to confusion and a perception of professional failure, certainly among junior speech-language pathologists.
CONCLUSIONS: This is an appeal for a discussion of what is being portrayed as opposing approaches to the clinical management of people who stutter. Starting with a solid operational definition, an open-minded discourse needs to take place aiming for a balanced, client-centered approach that respects the aspiration of the individual who stutters and supports their self-defined goals. This is an appeal to reclaim the middle ground where acceptance and change are not mutually exclusive, and therapeutic practice is guided by autonomy, inclusivity, and shared decision-making.
METHOD: A reflection on recent publications and conference presentations that discuss an unnuanced and narrow-minded ableist versus anti-ableist approach to the assessment and treatment of people who stutter. Many of those are not data-bound and lead to confusion and a perception of professional failure, certainly among junior speech-language pathologists.
CONCLUSIONS: This is an appeal for a discussion of what is being portrayed as opposing approaches to the clinical management of people who stutter. Starting with a solid operational definition, an open-minded discourse needs to take place aiming for a balanced, client-centered approach that respects the aspiration of the individual who stutters and supports their self-defined goals. This is an appeal to reclaim the middle ground where acceptance and change are not mutually exclusive, and therapeutic practice is guided by autonomy, inclusivity, and shared decision-making.