A Sense of Despair - Peter's Post to The DIV4 Email List
A Sense of Despair - Peter's Post to The DIV4 Email List
[Editor's note: The letter reprinted below was sent on May 24, 2010 to the Division 4 , Fluency and Fluency Disorders email list of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association]
I have also seen this “sense of despair” which is one of the reasons I have decided to launch a public, open dialogue on these matters.
In response to recent public letters I have written to ASHA Board Members and candidates, a member of ASHA shared with me the following: "I can't tell you how many times in my 20's I was GUARANTEED fluency. It is upsetting and caused me years of anguish. A few of these people are Board Recognized Fluency Specialists. Without a doubt ASHA as an organization has a duty to monitor their marketing."
In the May 2010 issue of Perspectives on Fluency and Fluency Disorders, James A. McClure and Chamonix Olsen wrote an article titled “Specialty Recognition in Fluency Disorders: Challenges for the Second Decade.” Let me say that I have a deep respect for both Jim and Chamonix. Jim recently appeared on my podcast to discuss a survey he conducted and Chamonix has been a guest speaker in several of my past graduate courses. In their article, they shared:
“The majority of specialists use the BRS-FD title in advertising themselves. More than 70% have found board recognition somewhat helpful or very helpful in attracting new clients and referrals… About half of those surveyed (including 87% of those who were not in the initial cadre) report that the SBFD Web site, www.StutteringSpecialists.org, has helped them attract new clients.”
It is clear that Board Recognition is being used and promoted as a way to attract referrals and to “attract new clients.” But what does the Specialty Board on Fluency Disorders do to protect consumers from misleading marketing statements? Does the Specialty Board on Fluency Disorders review marketing statements made by its members before adding them to the SBFD referral list? Or does the Specialty Board on Fluency Disorders follow ASHA’s lead (or lack of leadership as some may say) by taking a “buyer beware” approach and by shifting responsibility to members and the public?
I agree with what one ASHA member recently wrote on the DIV4 email list - “I would think part of keeping one's BRS-FD would be to provide ethical and accurate advertising.”
In addition, I want to share that on April 29, 2010 I posted to this list that the website of Elaine Stevick, M.A., CCC-SLP and Robin Rossman, M.A., CCC-SLP stated, “You'll no longer fear social functions, avoid ordering food at a drive through, or keep quiet when you really want to speak out." While this language still appears on websites related to other ASHA members, I am pleased to report that this language no longer appears on their website.
Sincerely,
Peter Reitzes, MA CCC-SLP
Co-host, StutterTalk.com podcast
Posted by StutterTalk at 10/25/2007 9:05 PM 
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: SBFD ethics code of ethics stutter marketing Board Recognized Fluency Specialists stutering BRS-FD asha
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: SBFD ethics code of ethics stutter marketing Board Recognized Fluency Specialists stutering BRS-FD asha
Comments