This is probably one of the biggest points of discussion in the stuttering community. The traditional school of thought and associated therapy strategies have largely focused on achieving fluency. Speaking fluently (or always striving to) and fitting in with societal norms is the only goal for many Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) and People Who Stutter (PWS). I belong to the camp that rejects this notion and will give my reasons as to why:

  • There isn’t conclusive evidence to suggest that adults who stutter can achieve long-lasting fluency. In fact, many adults who stutter report that they have tried numerous fluency techniques and therapies over the years, only to find that they still stutter outside of the therapy room or resumed stuttering once the therapy was over. Statistics1 show that 80% of children who stutter outgrow it by adulthood—which leaves about 20% of people who continue to stutter into adulthood. Studies have shown 2 that early intervention during childhood can have lasting therapy outcomes due to neuroplasticity and the brain’s ability to adapt. But for the rest of us (the lucky 20%), stuttering will be here to stay.

  • With scientific studies out of the way I want to implore you- the reader, to take a moment and think about what the worry is with stuttering. Why is stuttered speech even a problem in our society? Communication, in its very basic sense, is about the exchange of information. So as the speaker, if you can convey your message (whether fluently or not) to the listener, then you have successfully communicated. Then why the obsession with fluency? It is a very valid point to consider intelligibility and efficiency (efficiency - only to a certain degree as fluent people also aren’t always efficient). But as long as the speech lies within those bounds, I don’t see a reason why fluency should be the goal. By complying with the societal norms of fluency, we are essentially saying that we as a society are not okay with hearing a different speech pattern; and that we are not okay with the fact that some people may take longer to get their words out. When we readily accept differences in accents and dialects, why not accept the difference of stuttering? I am reminded of this quote from Dr. Vivian Sisskin 3:

I believe that problems from stuttering would be fewer if society (and stutterers themselves) had greater tolerance for variations in speech fluency.

  • Lastly, I want to point out what we lose out on by giving into the obsession of fluency and what the cost of chasing fluency is. Story Time: One popular fluency shaping technique is called “prolongation” where the speaker is taught to stretch out syllables and words. This is usually accompanied by a slow rate of speech. When I was taught this in therapy, I was able to achieve a high level of fluency but my speech sounded very robotic, monotonous, and unnatural. I felt like an impostor and didn’t find spontaneity in communication. Chasing fluency often leads to such experiences where the speaker is forced to suppress their natural speech patterns. This can lead to a loss of identity and authenticity in communication. For me— having joy, confidence, comfort, spontaneity, and efficiency (the five outcomes of ARTS 4) in communication is far more important than fluency.

References

  1. Facts About Stuttering - https://www.westutter.org/post/facts-about-stuttering ↩︎

  2. Chang, Soo-Eun. “Research updates in neuroimaging studies of children who stutter.” Seminars in speech and language vol. 35,2 (2014): 67-79. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1382151 ↩︎

  3. Sisskin, Vivian. “Disfluency-Affirming Therapy for Young People Who Stutter: Unpacking Ableism in the Therapy Room.” Language, speech, and hearing services in schools vol. 54,1 (2023): 114-119. doi:10.1044/2022_LSHSS-22-00015 ↩︎

  4. Outcomes and Recovery - Avoidance Reduction Therapy for Stuttering (ARTS®) ↩︎