Saturday, October 31, 2009

Mastering stuttering should master their thinking first.

Let us run through the introduction of Mastering Stuttering to see where they go wrong.
How is it that you can speak fluently in some contexts and not speak fluently in other contexts? That most People Who Stutter (PWS) can speak fluently in certain contexts indicates that they have two primary speaking strategies that they have learned: 1) They can speak fluently which means they know how to talk. 2) Given the right circumstances, they also have a speaking strategy for blocking.
What determines whether or not the PWS speaks freely and fluently or whether they block? We believe that it is the meaning that the PWS gives to the context of where they are speaking. If the context is non-threatening to them, the strategy for speaking freely and fluently will be activated and they will speak fluently. On-the-other-hand, if the context is threatening to the person, then the blocking strategy will be activated and the person will start blocking.
Certainly these factors are influencing how we speak but they do not determine our stuttering behaviours.
The cause: There could be several causes for blocking including genetic predispositions and/or developmental problems. However, our concern is not primarily about the first cause of blocking.
I have said this a millions times, and they still do not get it. How can they seriously believe that genes or developmental issues are just the first cause of stuttering and then it is all learned behaviour from there onwards. Hurray! Do the genes suddenly disappear? NO! Does the messed up neural network magically morph into a normal network? NO! (Unless it is just a delay in development and not an abnormal development). If genes and developmental issues cause stuttering in a child, why should they not cause stuttering in adults WITH ALL THE LEARNED BEHAVIOURS ON TOP OF THE NEUROBIOLOGICAL CAUSES:, too? Why do we find structual abnormalities in stutterers' brain? Even if they are all a consequences, they exist and influence our brain functioning!
Our concern is with what has continued the behavior. We believe that it is the meanings placed around those early experiences of struggling to speak that have become well learned which continues the behavior. This explains how most children grow out of stuttering while some don't - it is about the meanings that the child placed around the behavior. The question then becomes: was it "OK" for the child to stutter some or was it pointed out as unacceptable behavior?
Their God is learned behaviours and cognitive schemes. But there are still the neurobiological Gods. They didn't vanish after the first cause of stuttering. And they commit a tautology: You continue stuttering because you place meaning to stuttering. And then they conclude that kids who do not recover placed meaning to stuttering!!! And they commit a very common logical fallacy: If you find an explanation for a phenomena, it DOES MEAN THAT THAT EXPLANATION IS THE CORRECT ONE BECAUSE THEY MIGHT BE OTHER EQUALLY GOOD EXPLANATIONS! So which one is the correct one?

Their fallacy is that they put all stuttering behaviours to learned or cognitive causes after this magic first cause of childhood stuttering. I agree with them that their Gods play a role in shaping and triggering stuttering behaviour but it is only one part. And ironically their Gods are essential for treatment, because the neurobio side cannot be fixed easily.


Anonymous said...

Taken directly from one of Bob Bodenhamer's posts on his discussion group today...

""Stuttering" is just a symptom of underlying unconscious un-resolved hurt, pain, anxiety, fear, guilt, sadness, anger, etc."

Anonymous said...

And your point is???