Do you consider a Stammer to be a disability?

Stephen P

First poll on this forum...

Do you consider a Stammer in general to be a disability? Should it be a recognised disability in Ireland?

BigPhil

I voted ‘Yes’, not that I actually think that my stutter is an actual real disability (in the same context as blindness etc) but I do think that is has disabled some opportunities that would have been much easier to achieve if I didn’t stutter.

leahcim

I voted no because my stammer has not held me back in any major way.
A persons opinion on whether it is a disability or not probably depends on how bad their stammer is.

Jumbo156

Hi
I voted yes because although i am quite successful in life, there is no doubt that my stammer has held me back in some ways.
Having said that i am note sure if it is my stammer that held me back or was it just me holding myself back because i have a stammer.
Does that make sense?

PS: I have one of those stammers that when I think I am going to stammer I change the words i want to say.

ParkRunner

It's an interesting question. I voted yes because it does have a big impact on my work and social life. I am going for a promotion on the basis that I have a disability so will see what happens if I get called for interview if they accept that I have a disability or not

SimpleSam06

EF wrote: »

It's an interesting question. I voted yes because it does have a big impact on my work and social life. I am going for a promotion on the basis that I have a disability so will see what happens if I get called for interview if they accept that I have a disability or not

Eh what sort of promotion do you get for having a disability? I thought these things were usually based on ability!

A disability is a condition or function judged to be significantly impaired relative to the usual standard of an individual of their group, dictionary definition. So yes, a stammer is a disability. I'm divided as to whether or not this should entitle sufferers to any particular special benefits or treatment.

In my opinion and experience, as I mentioned in a different thread, the key to beating a stammer is to completely ignore it, so special treatment might be very counterproductive by building in differential treatment into the system, permanently underlining the fact of a speech impediment.

On the other hand it definetely is debilitating, and does make it much harder to get and keep work. So I guess the facts do come down on the side of assistance, although I can't imagine a sufferer that would not gladly forgo assistance to get rid of it, like most disabilities really.

However unlike almost any other disability, it is trivial to fake it. So we'll probably never see any legislation on this.

ParkRunner

It's one of those civil service promotions that are only open to people who have a disability. They have to have a certain quota of people who have a disability and all the things that come under the equality legislation like gender, sexual orientation, ethnic background etc..id be a shoe in if I was homosexual and a member of some minority group too

SimpleSam06

EF wrote: »

It's one of those civil service promotions that are only open to people who have a disability. They have to have a certain quota of people who have a disability and all the things that come under the equality legislation like gender, sexual orientation, ethnic background etc..id be a shoe in if I was homosexual and a member of some minority group too

I never got that, surely if they were trying to enforce equality they would simply ignore all factors not directly related to the job, quotas are just enforcing inequality. Its not giving an equal opportunity to the "majority", whatever that is. Sigh. Our tax euros at work.

Stephen P

I voted yes, because although it doesn't disable me to carry out normal everyday functions it does inhibit me to have full confidence in myself. I don't know if that makes sense??
A couple of examples would be if I have a fear of ordering cinema tickets face to face then I would be more inclined to book online. Perhaps also having a fear of ordering food at a drive thru.

Am I making sense??

ParkRunner

I think its a mix between a phobia and a disability after reading the above comments, pretty unique eh

darkestlord

I voted yes.
I have been treated like a freak by alot of people and when i explain i have a stamar, then they think if they speak loud and slowly i can speak normall.
To be totally honest i am very bitter towards this and most of the time i get pretty aggressive(not fighting but very sarcastic).
But i dont think i have a phobia towards it i just now dont give a fluff anymore.
But i was happy to see this on boards.:D

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

well, if it adversely affects your life then it prob would be a disability.. but with me, I can generally talk fine most of the time.. it's just on occasion, I'll be speaking.. I'll know I have to say a word later on in the sentence, and I can feel it building on my tongue.. but when I get to say that word... it just won't come out and I'll be stuck halfway through the sentence unable to finish.


not sure if it's a proper stammer or anything, and it doesn't happen very often.. usually just when I'm stressed, or feel I'm not being listened to.

Jumbo156

Mordeth wrote: »

well, if it adversely affects your life then it prob would be a disability.. but with me, I can generally talk fine most of the time.. it's just on occasion, I'll be speaking.. I'll know I have to say a word later on in the sentence, and I can feel it building on my tongue.. but when I get to say that word... it just won't come out and I'll be stuck halfway through the sentence unable to finish.


not sure if it's a proper stammer or anything, and it doesn't happen very often.. usually just when I'm stressed, or feel I'm not being listened to.

I am exactly the same, is there a name for this type of stammer?

rubadub

Jumbo156 wrote: »

Hi
I voted yes because although i am quite successful in life, there is no doubt that my stammer has held me back in some ways.
Having said that i am note sure if it is my stammer that held me back or was it just me holding myself back because i have a stammer.
Does that make sense?

Yes, I feel the same.

Jumbo156 wrote: »

PS: I have one of those stammers that when I think I am going to stammer I change the words i want to say.

Same here, I have heard the term for it is "covert"

Mine is not so bad anymore, and many people do not know I do stammer at all, it might be only when having to say words, which is not often. In school you had to read a book word for word, while in work you can write your own words if making a presenation etc.

I'll know I have to say a word later on in the sentence, and I can feel it building on my tongue.. but when I get to say that word... it just won't come out and I'll be stuck halfway through the sentence unable to finish

Longer it goes the worse it is. you can usually blurt out the word. i.e. if you had a screen flashing words and you had to say them right off you would be fine, if it was a list you would see it ahead of time and it would build up like you say. In school we had to say "here" or "present" on roll calls. I had no real problem with the words otherwise, even reading aloud, it is knowing you HAVE to say it that is the problem.

And if people say the words in unison there is no problem for most. I think there was some device that had a mic and earpiece and you listen to yourself as you talk and it is supposed to help.

People can usually sing Ok too, like that x-factor lad a while back could sing fine. Also Carly Simon (youre so vain) had a bad stammer and used to sing everything!, as in hold conversations but add a tune to it so she doesnt stammer.

I do think of it as a disability, but not really "recognised" as in by law. Unless it was so bad it is almost equivalent to being mute, i.e. job choice is severly restricted. I could not be a news reader, no big deal, a ugly bloke is not disabled if he cannot be a model.

Like a person with a permanent bad ankle is not disabled in the same way as a wheelchair bound person.

Jumbo156

rubadub wrote: »

Yes, I feel the same.


I had no real problem with the words otherwise, even reading aloud, it is knowing you HAVE to say it that is the problem.

.

To give you a laugh, once I was on Jury duty and the Judge was calling out names and everyone had to answer "present".
If you don't turn up you get some sort of fine. So I am sitting there waiting for him to get my number, and it is slowly getting to my name and sweat is starting. Then bingo he calls my name and number and for the life of me I couldn't get word out.
Then at the end he says" we'll go through the list again " in case of any late comers.
So it's now or never, I am sitting there, saying present over and over in my head, no problem. Then he calls my name, catches me on the hop as he is only calling out names that he didn't get an answer to the first time.
Then I shout at the top of my voice "PRESENT".(don't know where it came from)
The judge stops looks down at me and breaks his heart laughing, looks at the registrar and says " I think he's here." I was mortified
Then I was called to be on a jury and the swearing in , in front of a full court is another day's story

Charlie_Boswell

I originally voted no, partly because I guess I still carry my stammer as a bit of a chip on my shoulder! I remember growing up and if anyone mocked me they'd get a whack of whatever I could lay my hands on. Even nowadays every so often I'd meet an Arsehole in work (usually consultants:D) that would give a snigger or try talk over me, but at least now I can put them in their place with words instead of a hurley!

I suppose if I'm honest with myself I would see it as a disabilty, not that you could claim for or be classed as disabled but something that holds you back (if you let it) in every facit of daily life.

Talking of funny situations, I remember going to school when the christian brothers were around - ANSEO!! mother of F*&k that word used get me in so much trouble!!:D I can laugh know but at the time I used dread school, The Brother used call the roll without raising his head, I'd be in a bog of sweat waiting for my name to be called, I used stand up, cough, drop a book, yawn - anything to get noticed. and If I said "Here" boy oh boy...

Charlie.

DeVore

I never understood people who mocked those with a stammer. I also think people who butt in or finish the sentence are just so feckin' rude. I don't have family who have it (nor do I) but I've always felt strongly about that.

Funnily enough, I don't find something like Michael Palin in a Fish called Wanda offensive as its more situational comedy but consultants sniggering?? Do they think they are back in junior school or something??

As for a disability or not, I think it would depend on the severity of it myself.

DeV.

BigPhil

DeVore wrote: »

I never understood people who mocked those with a stammer. I also think people who butt in or finish the sentence are just so feckin' rude. I don't have family who have it (nor do I) but I've always felt strongly about that.

People that try to finish your sentence are extremely rude, and from a personal point of view, I find it very frustrating & totally disheartening. My mother actually does this to me all the time. I stutter the worst in front of my parents for some reason, but my dad has always been cool about it and is very patient and never butts in, but my mother is a nightmare. I even think that the older she gets the less patient she has become about my stammer, she butt's in on nearly every block so if I say something like: "I'm going to the ci-ci-ci........" she will butt in with "city?? sitting room???" then I will force out: ".....ci-ci-cinema" :rolleyes: I thought after nearly 34 years she would be more exceptant and encouraging. Phfft, who am I kidding!

SimpleSam06

DeVore wrote: »

I never understood people who mocked those with a stammer. I also think people who butt in or finish the sentence are just so feckin' rude. I don't have family who have it (nor do I) but I've always felt strongly about that.

Ah its hard to hold it against some people though, who might not know anything about it, and are just trying to help. It can be meant well.

rubadub wrote: »

I do think of it as a disability, but not really "recognised" as in by law. Unless it was so bad it is almost equivalent to being mute, i.e. job choice is severly restricted. I could not be a news reader, no big deal, a ugly bloke is not disabled if he cannot be a model.

Like a person with a permanent bad ankle is not disabled in the same way as a wheelchair bound person.

If everyone applying for the job had a stammer, that would be true. However there are very very few jobs where verbal communication doesn't exist or is unimportant. If an employer has a choice between a well qualified person who has difficulty communicating and a borderline case who has great verbal communication skills, he'll pick the one who can easily talk to his workmates. Poor qualifications can always be improved on the job.

Rev Hellfire

I personally think a stammer should not be classified as a disability unless it is so severe as to make speech and communication practically impossible.
That said certainly having a stammer can make things more awkward and embarrassing when communicating with people, but in many ways so can having a particular accent such as an intercity one and the social stigma associated with that, but I don't think people would consider that a disability.

It seems to me that people are too quick these days to play the disability card.

SimpleSam06

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

That said certainly having a stammer can make things more awkward and embarrassing when communicating with people, but in many ways so can having a particular accent such as an intercity one and the social stigma associated with that, but I don't think people would consider that a disability.

Ah now thats completely wrong, comparing a stammer to having an accent is like comparing an open window to having a wall of your house missing. Its fairly difficult to describe what its like to non-sufferers, who mostly have a tangential experience and contact with stammerers; maybe a few minutes a day, if they work with someone who has it.

It is also fairly trivial to change an accent- I can rattle off any accent you want at the drop of a hat, convincingly too. By contrast, it is very very difficult to mask or change a stammer.

As regards getting and keeping work at least, it is a significant problem. Smooth communication is vital in any organisation, from bus driver to accountant to construction worker. Employers are aware of this and it does count against people applying for work.

Rev Hellfire

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Ah now thats completely wrong, comparing a stammer to having an accent is like comparing an open window to having a wall of your house missing. Its fairly difficult to describe what its like to non-sufferers, who mostly have a tangential experience and contact with stammerers; maybe a few minutes a day, if they work with someone who has it.

I believe unless you unable to actually communicate you are not disabled, you might be inconvenienced but that is not the same in my view.

It is also fairly trivial to change an accent- I can rattle off any accent you want at the drop of a hat, convincingly too. By contrast, it is very very difficult to mask or change a stammer.

I respectfully suggest that your statement is misleading. Its one thing to put on an accent and another to totally change the one you have and to change it completely so that it is no longer a conscious decision. I suggest you try it for a week see how you fair.

As regards getting and keeping work at least, it is a significant problem. Smooth communication is vital in any organisation, from bus driver to accountant to construction worker. Employers are aware of this and it does count against people applying for work.

Again I don't believe that it is unless you are talking about an area where the actual delivery of speech is paramount for example news reader or radio presenter. I stammer might count against someone there.

SimpleSam06

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I believe unless you unable to actually communicate you are not disabled, you might be inconvenienced but that is not the same in my view.

As I already mentioned, a disability is a condition or function judged to be significantly impaired relative to the usual standard of an individual of their group. A stammer definetely qualifies. You don't need to be a quadraplegic to be disabled. Note the definition says impaired, not different (such as an ugly person or someone with a strong accent). You're coming at it from the angle of social perception, not the ability to physically do things.

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I respectfully suggest that your statement is misleading. Its one thing to put on an accent and another to totally change the one you have and to change it completely so that it is no longer a conscious decision. I suggest you try it for a week see how you fair.

Well lets put the shoe on the other foot; I'm working on the assumption that you have no stammer. Why don't you try it for a week and then come back to us? Try it for a day, an hour even. You might find it a bit of an eye opener.

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Again I don't believe that it is unless you are talking about an area where the actual delivery of speech is paramount for example news reader or radio presenter. I stammer might count against someone there.

Effective communication is paramount in every walk of life. People are social creatures, no man is an island and all that. A speech impediment which causes a great deal of discomfort every time you try to communicate effectively cuts off an enormous part of a person's ability to function. Its taken for granted by those who never had to do without it, but the ramifications are broad and wide ranging.

Rev Hellfire

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Well lets put the shoe on the other foot; I'm working on the assumption that you have no stammer. Why don't you try it for a week and then come back to us? Try it for a day, an hour even. You might find it a bit of an eye opener.

You assume wrong.

SimpleSam06

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

You assume wrong.

Well the point still stands, by any reasonable definition of disability (given above), a stammer could very well qualify. I'm as against wanton nanny state handouts as the next man, but real social issues should be dealt with realistically.

Rev Hellfire

Well I guess it comes down to definitions then. To me a disability is defined by the inability of the person to perform the task.

A stammer in my view doesn’t prevent communication but merely hinters and slows it, but communication still remains achievable and therefore it is not a disabled merely impeded.

SimpleSam06

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Well I guess it comes down to definitions then. To me a disability is defined by the inability of the person to perform the task.

A stammer in my view doesn’t prevent communication but merely hinters and slows it, but communication still remains achievable and therefore it is not a disabled merely impeded.

Yes, but hindered and slowed also counts as "significantly impaired". A person in a wheelchair isn't completely unable to drive a car, they are merely significantly impaired in that respect. With modifications, they can drive a car. They can also climb stairs, albeit much more slowly and awkwardly than most others. They are still disabled, however.

cazzy

I voted no. There is jobs that I cant do cause I have bad eyesight but its still not seen as a disabaility and I dont think it should be - and I dont even get tax relief on contact lenses, glasses etc. There is people out there who can't speak in public, wont go to social events etc becasue of extreme shyness but thats not seen as a disability.

Giving different definitions of disability eveyone could claim it in some way or other. Kinda makes it more difficult for those who are more severly disabled with say a diability that could stop them doing almost any job.

There is lots of jobs that one can do with a stammer and if companies were to fill in all their "disability" places with people like this it would make it even harder for those with severe disabilities to get a job. My company takes on blind people and those in wheelchairs under their disability allocation. There is even a manager that is quite high up in the organisiation I work for that has been totally deaf from birth and he has managed a successful team for years due to the company giving him a chance. It would have been easier for my company to employ people with slight disabilities but they didnt do this.

Of course there i s people with stammers working in the place and they are treated just like nyone else - they get promoted just like everyone else based on merit (usually whether they have passed a professional qualification, their skills, and their work to date - which in my job doesn't usually involve much speaking).

The OP asked if we though it was a disability in general -and in general I'd say no. Ony for specif jobs as would be bad eyesight, severe shyness, etc etc

ParkRunner

I sometimes break out laughing when people try to finish my sentences because 99% of the time they get it wrong and I still have to finish what Im trying to say.
This evening one of my friends was going out to meet one of her friends and I went to say "tell her I said hi", it took me so long to say it that I had to sit down and take a break for a while. Wore me out trying to get those 5 words out.
Similarly when Im ordering a pint i sometimes repeat the a and the barman thinks Im saying a half pint, very frustrating just getting half pints all night cos I have to ask for it twice as much then haha.
As for school one of my teachers used to insist we say here miss when answering the roll call. Saying here is bad enough but miss as well?? Asking a bit too much there so I ended up mitching off an awful lot of those classes. It's pretty irrational when I think about it how far I would go to avoid speaking situations.

ParkRunner

http://apt.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/12/1/63


The above research suggests that as one grows older the continued negative effect of a chronic speech disorder such as stammering can be debilitating socially and psychologically.

This is why I voted yes.

batalos

This is an issue I have pondered at length on two occasions when I have had to reply to surveys at work. This relates to s.47 of the Disabillity Act, 2005, which list of the obligations of public bodies with regard to the employment of people with disabillities, and any compliance targets set under subsection 3.

The act defines disability as:

“disability”, in relation to a person, means a substantial restracity of the person to carry on a profession, business or occupation in the State or to participate in social or cultural life in the State by reason of an enduring physical, sensory, mental health or intellectual impairment;

On both occasions I have had to fill out the survey, I have answered that I do not consider myself to have a disability.In both cases, this has been after much soul searching.I last completed the survey a month or so ago and I am still happy with my decision.

It has been in many ways a personal decision. I have felt both times that I was involved in a process of working on my speech and to acknowledge my stutter as a disability would in some way be counterproductive. I felt then, and still feel now, that the detrimental effect that stuttering has had on me to date can be alleviated eventually whether speaking in terms of a cure or otherwise. Meeting other people who have undergone similar processes and seeing the stage they have reached has been critical in this regard. I understand now that the process is slow and sometimes painful but I still believe that there is light at the end of the tunnel. This is another reason why I wouldn't classify stuttering as a disabililty: if you are blind, you aren't going to regain your sight no matter how hard you work at it; I believe stuttering is different in that a recovery process is possible. The fact that it tends to be intermittent rather than consistent is another difference.

There is still no definitive causation model for stuttering. Some recent research has indicated a neurological cause. I used to get very annoyed whenever this was raised but no longer do and believe there may be something in this. However, this does not necessarily classify stuttering as a disability.

With regard to the accent analogy raised in previous post, I do in fact believe there is something in this. Not on a class based theory where deciphering is not an issue, but for particulary harsh and strong regional accents (say Cork or Kerry but not picking on them in particular); this can be exacerbated when regional dialects and terminology is also used. A person with such an accent can have communication difficulties say trying to buy something in a shop up in Dublin. Another analogy could be someone for whom English is not their first language in similar circumstances, especially if their accent or pronounciation is unusual.They may need to repeat themselves, etc. The one difference I have noticed is that while such people may be a little bit sensitive about their speech (especially those for whom English is not their first language), they are not any way as sensitive as most people who stutter would be in similar situation (or so I think )