However, aside from the issue of promising too good results, there is another ethical issue that needs to be addressed. This is the issue of promising that the best realistic outcome of treatment is to become a better and happier communicator who continues to stutter. I have heard many clinicians send out the message to people who stutter that nothing can be done that will enable them to become a normally fluent speaker. In fact, many highly regarded clinicians who are leaders in the field of stuttering say that you should be suspicious of anyone who claims to have high levels of success in the treatment of stuttering.

My experience in treating over 2000 people who stutter, has lead me to believe that there are no quick fixes or magic technique that you can learn about that will suddenly make the stuttering go away. More importantly, however, I have seen over and over again that people who stutter can become normally fluent speakers by going through a process that includes learning, awareness, the right kind of repetitive practice, intention, and conscious mind change. This is not a fanciful claim. It is a fact, according Dr. Joe Dispenza, who explains that when something happens once it’s an incident; when it happens twice it’s a coincidence and when it happens again and again, it’s a fact.

When professionals in the field of stuttering block their minds and their clients’ minds to the possibility of change, they are taking away the individual’s hope for growth and change. They are doing a disservice that I believe borders on being unethical. While it is noble to try to protect clients from disappointment when they do not achieve promised results, it is the highest standard of professionalism to find ways for our clients who want to speak fluently to achieve their desired results.

As I listened to many of the talks, I realized that as research progresses and clinicians share their treatment experiences and observations, the speech-processing model of stuttering is gaining greater validity.

This model, as Dr. Edward Conture suggested, is based on process. It is aligned with Willem Levelt’s model of speech production that is so often mentioned by Dr. Conture, Dr. Luc DeNil and other experts in our field. The speech-processing model considers stuttering in relation to brain functions, attention, neuro-motor programming, neurological functioning, language formulation, working memory, and the automaticity of speaking. All of these topics were subjects that were discussed as possible links to stuttering.

Dynamic Stuttering Therapy, the therapeutic correlate to this theory, seeks to make changes in the neurological functions that relate to speech and language planning and production, as well as the cognitive and behavioral changes that so many of you see as an important component of therapy. It also incorporates Prochaska, DiClemente and Norcross’s Stages of Change model that Dr. Walter Manning mentioned in his keynote speech.

Unfortunately, I only had 5 minutes on Saturday to talk to most of the conference participants about this approach. I think that because of the overlap of Dynamic Stuttering Therapy theory/therapy with what we discussed at the conference, there is a need to investigate this model to see whether it is a worthwhile direction for advancing the effectiveness of the treatment of stuttering.