National Stuttering Association (NSA)
conventions inspire me to rethink speech therapy. That’s why I love to attend.
This year’s convention, held in Tampa, Florida, left me pondering how to place greater
emphasis on advocacy as an essential communication skill. Advocacy goals could
easily dovetail with America’s growing concern over bullying (1). New local laws
in many states require school districts address this problem.
Skill at personal advocacy is a
valid therapy objective. It used to be that speech-language pathologists (SLPs)
focused on fluency. But success with speech change varies one person to the
next and science has not yet figured out why. In the meantime, therapy outcomes have broadened
to include multiple aspects of communication. Some SLPs take advantage of this trend to justify
special education for children who stutter (CWS)(2).Others do not. I have watched this process over the past 30 years.
I witnessed and I read heated arguments between university professors over
exactly what the role of the SLP should be. While this divisive dialogue drags
on, what can a parent do right now to help the child who stutters?
I propose parents find out if their
state has enacted a law regarding bullying. I expect that when a parent provides the
school with brochures from the Stuttering Foundation (3) AND a printout
of their district’s legally mandated Bullying
Prevention and Intervention Plan, we may see more CWS receive greater
attention. Laws to promote a “healthy school climate” benefit all children.
This means that when CWS are denied special legal protections because they are
denied special education, their parents may have a legal alternative.
The 187th General Court
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on May 3, 2010, approved “An Act Relative
to Bullying in Schools.” (4) The Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education responded with Bullying and
Prevention Resources (5) and a Model
Bullying and Intervention Plan (6). My own school district copied this plan,
adding details about specific programs (7) and the administrative hierarchy
responsible for their implementation. My
district also has a District Improvement
Plan that includes “Safe Learning Environment” as a target. I believe presenting
this kind of information to school personnel adds weight and credibility to parents’
pleas for support for their children.
“The finding that the
risk of being bullied in adolescents who stutter is high when compared to their
fluent peers should be of considerable concern. Speech-language pathologists
need to be aware of this information as they often serve as the strongest
advocates for students who stutter in the school setting.” (8) Research indicates that children who stutter
“are mimicked, made fun of, called names, physically bullied, and sometimes
subjected to threats… It is clear that stuttering is an identifiable difference
that invites bullying.” (9) This information is vital because mandatory
professional development for school personnel must include “research findings
on bullying, including information about specific categories of students who
have been shown to be particularly at risk for bullying in the school
environment…[with] a particular focus on the needs of students…whose disability
affects social skills development.” (10)
Social skills development in adolescents includes
“initiating interactions, self-disclosure, and intimacy in conversations and
activities…assertiveness, responsiveness, and versatility. These skills allow
speakers to make requests, actively disagree, express their feelings, initiate,
maintain, and disengage in conversations…in multiple settings and with
different conversational partners…” (11) Some school age children who stutter
are at risk of falling behind in the development of these social/communicative
skills because they avoid situations in which speech is difficult and in which
they risk ridicule.
“For adolescents who stutter, changing motor speech behaviors may not
result in accompanying attitudinal and cognitive changes. Programs that
reinforce assertiveness skills, positive communication models, acceptance of
stuttering, and ways of dealing with stuttering may actually assist in dealing
with potential co-occurring issues like bullying.” (12)
Again and again my students avoid
advocating for themselves. How many times have I heard children say that teachers
and friends understand stuttering already so there is no need to discuss
it?! Everybody
knows I stutter and it’s no big deal, they say. Yet these same children
report avoidance and negative attitudes on written checklists. They cry about
school assignments, allow others to speak for them, ‘forget’ to talk with teachers,
limit class participation and/or avoid after school activities because they are
experiencing so much stress over their speech. I respond by accepting the
client in the moment. But maybe a little confrontation wouldn’t hurt. Exactly
how could they handle some of these problems proactively?
Has speech therapy flaunted fluency
in a variety of disguises? My lesson plans involve fluency enhancing
techniques, voluntary stuttering, desensitization, situation hierarchies,
English Language Arts, DAF, Audacity ®, and even concepts of cognitive
behavioral therapy. Do all of these perpetuate a promise that the end-goal is greater
fluency? When can a CWS share personal experiences, hopes and dreams, thoughts
and feelings in a friendly conversational way that would shed light on social skills
competency? How can speech therapy allocate time to the complementary goals of
speech change and social skills development?
Activities which blend social skills training
with speech therapy could draw from resources approved by the school district, pragmatic
language therapy materials already on the SLP’s bookshelf (14), or
reader-friendly publications for the layperson (15). For example, scripts and
role plays [Model Plan, IV. A. p. 6] could be about a stuttering-related
problem. A program specifically for stuttering is available for grades 3-6 from
the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. (16) The point is to be proactive. A person who
stutters has the responsibility to “be conscious that he or she has the power
to promote awareness about stuttering and its ramifications.” (17) An SLP can
facilitate the development of advocacy skills by making it a greater priority
and interfacing with bullying prevention programs.
My friend, Marybeth Allen, ran a
workshop at the NSA convention for elementary school age children. It was
called “What Bugs You?” Marybeth is a Clinical Supervisor at the University of
Maine, the sweetest person ever, and my roommate. As I managed a craft hot glue gun,
Marybeth charmed the children into making bugs out of styrofoam containers,
fuzzy sticks, pompoms, colored paper and markers. Then she gave them a small
piece of paper on which to write what bugs them about stuttering. They put their
hand-written complaints into the bug. Topping of the list of complaints was
teasing and bullying.
New bullying prevention and
intervention laws may offer CWS some well-deserved special consideration. These
laws may not qualify CWS for special education services, but, hopefully they
will enlighten school personnel. Sadly, a publication by National Stuttering
Association written specifically for SLPs, parents, teachers, administrators,
and CWS is out of print. (18) It explained issues unique to CWS. I get the feeling that many of these children
are “below the radar,” keeping their stuttering and their suffering to
themselves. Let’s hope that bullying prevention and intervention programs will
improve the lives of our children as depicted in this video shared on the a google group not now available.
Thank you,
Judy
(5) Bullying
Prevention and Intervention Resources, broken link
(6) Model Bullying Prevention and Intervention
Plan, broken link
(8) Blood,
G. & Blood, I. (2004) Bullying in Adolescents Who Stutter: Communicative
Competence and Self-Esteem. Contemporary
Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 31, p.76.
(9) Langevin,
M & Prasad, N.G.N. (2012) A Stuttering Education and Bullying Awareness and
Prevention Resource: A Feasibility Study. Language,
Speech, Hearing Services in Schools, 43, p. 345.
(10)
Model Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan,
p. 4, II.B.(iv), broken link
(11)
Blood G. & Blood, I p. 70.
(12)
Ibid. p. 76
(13)
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Guidelines on Implementing Social and Emotional Learning
(SEL) Curricula, broken link
(14)
I happen to own Kelly, A. (2002) Talkabout. UK:
Speechmark Publishing Ltd.
(15)
Cooper, S. (2005) Speak Up and Get Along!
Minneapolis, MN: free spirit publishing.
(16)
Institute for Stuttering Treatment and Research.
Teasing and Bullying: Unacceptable Behavior (TAB) http://www.tab.ualberta.ca/
(17)
International Stuttering Association, Rights and
Responsibilities of People Who Stutter http://www.isastutter.org/what-we-do/bill-of-rights-and-responsibilities
No comments:
Post a Comment