Hypothetical scenario of a child who stammers and their parents

The speech-language pathologist is the professional who engages in clinical services, prevention, advocacy, education, administration, and research in the areas of communication and swallowing across the life span from infancy through geriatrics.

— The American Speech And Hearing Association (ASHA) (2007:1)

<hr>



Identity


• Etymological root refers to sameness but often seen as what makes me unique – who I am.
• Medical model/social model.
• Narrative Practice – viewed as “public and social achievement”.
• Co-constructed in “the trafficking of stories about our own and each other’s lives” White (2007, 182).

<hr>

The process of professional identity

• Individual process but co-constructed.
• Multiple identities.
• Fluid, dynamic.
• Therapeutic exchanges.
• Stories told and interpreted.
• Cultural Influences.

<hr>

How are identities constructed?

O’Dwyer and Leahy (2015)

• Postmodernist thinking – multiple identities are available to an individual at any given time.
• Narratives play a large role in how we construct and re-construct these identities for ourselves and for others.
• Narratives are how we make sense of our experiences and this meaning-making in turn leads to a sense of identity. Bruner (1986: 143) explained that ‘narrative structures organise and give meaning to experience’.  Riessman(2008: 8) states that ‘individuals and groups construct identities through storytelling’ and that these identities are fluid.

<hr>

SLTs – multiple identities*

• An individual speech and language therapist has multiple identities available to them at any time.
• More aware of some than others and how conscious/aware they are of any identity at a given time varies.
• Intrapersonal and interpersonal factors influence how these identities are negotiated and renegotiated.
• These identities are negotiated in their interaction with the people they see for therapy and their families/carers.
• “Through clinical interaction clients and clinicians negotiate who they are and the roles they play in the therapy story.” Simmons-Mackie and Damico (2011:44)
• If a particular identity gets validated through these interactions, it takes hold and is performed regularly, If not validated, gets renegotiated.

*O’Dwyer, M.  and Leahy, M.M. (2016). There is no cure for this:  An exploration of the professional identities of speech and language therapists’, Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders, 2, 149-167.

<hr>

Who are speech and language therapists working with children and adults who stutter and their families?
 Possible identities:

My dilemma as an SLT

How best to support speech and language therapists who are working with children and adults who stutter so that they work as allies in the context of evidence which shows that stuttering therapy has an overall positive effect.  No one treatment approach for stuttering demonstrates significantly greater effects over another treatment approach. Herder, Howard, Nye, & Vanryckeghem (2006).

• Need to validate professional identities that support.
• Learning from people who stutter.
• Therapy which focuses on positive outcomes in terms of children and adults living the lives they want  to live and the development of therapy that focuses on education and resistance to normalising discourses.
• Resists focus on fluency and cure in therapy.
• Focus on confidence, fun and delight in finding and validating identities which fit with our dreams, hopes and ambitions.

[the open secret is] a way of imparting knowledge such that it cannot be claimed and acted on.

— François (1999)

<hr>

Homophobia often insists on knowing rather than refusing to know about the sexuality of gay people.

— de Villier (2012)

<hr>

Linking the stutter and the unspeakable are logics of subterfuge, to be sure, but I find that Sedgwick’s construction of the “open secret” more closely relates to the kind of secrets that animate stuttering. The open secret is a form of coded disclosure that Sedgwick links to the closet, and it mobilizes language around the secret in order to disclose only to those in the know and hide from those on the outside. Anne-Lise Francois describes it as “a way of imparting knowledge such that it cannot be claimed and acted on.” The open secret is that which everyone knows but cannot discuss. I select this construction for the stutter because, while some stutterers can and do pass as fluent and come out of the closet by a discursive disclosure like “I stutter,” more often, the stuttered voice betrays her before any such disclosure can be made, and knowledge of the stutter is created without being acted upon or acknowledged. The stutter’s unspeakability is subtended by its audibility and uncontrollability. Sedgwick’s example of the open secret actually comes from a text featuring a stutterer, Herman Melville’s short story, Billy Budd. However, it is not the eponymous character’s stutter that reveals the structure of the open secret for Sedgwick but rather the possibility of mutiny onboard the ship on which Billy is impressed.

Like queerness, certain forms of discrimination against stutterers or unwanted social interactions often express themselves through a desire to know, and to know it as a symptom. Nicholas de Villier in The Opacity of the Closet argues that it is important to pay attention to the ways that “homophobia often insists on knowing rather than refusing to know about the sexuality of gay people.” Similarly, stutterers often encounter the diagnostic desires of others, the desire to know why and from whence. An example from my childhood: I was at summer camp and sitting in the camp nurse’s office for something mild. The nurse asked me questions about myself and I answered. Then we changed topics and I talked to her about my brother. She interrupted me and said, “did you know you only stuttered when you were talking about yourself, not your brother?” The nurse created her own interruption in my speech as if to master my stutter with her own impediment, and sought to psychologize the root of it as a symptom. This diagnostic desire is a practice of what Sedgwick calls, in a different work, paranoid reading, a kind of analytic reading that seeks to treat the text as a puzzle or stratagem to be untangled. Stuttering attracts this desire to know, in part, because it is an exemplary object of non-knowing. No one knows why people stutter. The stutter speaks to a great opacity within us, and that opacity might be productive of a different way of understanding the self and its relations to others.

<hr>

Society will not tolerate… that I should be… nothing, or, more precisely, that the something I am should be openly expressed as provisional, revocable, insignificant, inessential, in a word, irrelevant.    

— Barthes (1981)