Person with Cluttering

The International Cluttering Association represents consumer voice, and as such, needs to be sensitive to consumer feelings about terminology. Kathy Scaler Scott conducted an informal survey among consumers to determine their opinions regarding the wording used when discussing cluttering. Use of person-first terminology (for example “person who clutters” rather than “clutterer”) is frequently advocated among professionals; however, opinions differ regarding the rational for and appropriateness of such terminology (Brockelhurst, 2005; Dietrich, 2001; St. Louis, 1999, 2006) . Below is a summary of the opinions expressed by consumers, both within the ICA and the cluttering yahoo group.

I. OPINIONS REGARDING PERSON-FIRST TERMINOLOGY

Reasons for preferring: person-first terminology  Cluttering is then just a part of me rather than defining me as a person

Reasons against person-first terminology in general:  Person-first terminology calls more attention to the disorder  Person first is non-personal and feels stilted  This is “specialized jargon” that will become confusing to the public  Sounds “long-winded”  Fails to elevate the person above the disability as intended  Is redundant, because everyone clutters at one time or another  Sounds like people have a choice to do so or not

II. OPINIONS REGARDING: “CLUTTER” VS. “CLUTTERING” VS. “CLUTTERER”

Reasons against: “clutterer”  Doesn’t convey much information about the disorder

Reasons against “People who clutter”  Borrows too strongly from stuttering literature and will lead to confusion of the different issues of these disorders

Reasons for preferring: “cluttering”  Spell check does not recognize clutterer  Term can be applied by the public to the fact that a person’s speech is disorganized, as disorganization is more widely associated with the more general term of “cluttering”

Reasons for “people with cluttering”  Emphasizes that cluttering is an actual speech disorder III. OPINIONS REGARDING USING TERM “SPEECH DISORDER” IN THE NAME

Reasons for: “People with the speech disorder of cluttering”  Those with the speech disorder of cluttering can more easily recognize that they have a speech disorder than they can recognize specific instances of cluttering, so this term provides a more accurate description of cluttering  Will help that with awareness that cluttering is a speech disorder

Reasons against: “People with the speech disorder of cluttering”  Feels a bit awkward and long  Feels it is a bit too long  Doesn’t see a difference between this and “people who clutter”: “We can’t suffer from a disorder if we don’t show the symptoms”  Cluttering, unlike stuttering, is a communication disorder rather than just a speech disorder  Is cluttering really a disorder rather than a condition?

IV. OPINIONS REGARDING USE OF PWC ACRONYM OR NOT:

Reasons for acronym “PWC”:  Use of an acronym helps in the writing process  Use of an acronym helps the reader focus on the content of the rest of the message  In research/writing should follow standards of the World Health Organization

Reasons against acronym “PWC”:  Represents “jargon” which will be too confusing among the general public  To use an acronym is even more impersonal than clutterer

Neutral feedback and suggestions:  Nothing against the term “clutterer”  No strong opinions about PWC vs. “person with the speech disorder of cluttering”  PWC okay if it refers to “people with cluttering” rather than “people who clutter”  Suggestion made to use “Those who clutter” and TWC (for the acronym for research purposes) as a compromise: short like PWC and a different enough acronym to be kept separate from stuttering  None of the terminology changes affect the condition itself  Choose what you feel best using and realize others may disagree  Person-first terminology may be okay for research  Suggest “person with cluttered speech” as a shorter alternative to “person with the speech disorder of cluttering” References

Brocklehurst, P. (2005). "Stammerer" or "person who stammers"? A comparison of the impact of two labels on the general public. Unpublished sociolinguistics project. De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.

Dietrich, S., Jensen, K. H., & Williams, D. E. (2001). Effects of the label "stuttering" on student perceptions. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 26, 55-66.

St. Louis, K. O. (1999). Person-first labeling and stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 24, 1-24.

St. Louis, K. O. (2006). What’s in a Name?. Ninth Annual International Stuttering Awareness Day (ISAD) On-line Conference.

Please address any feedback to Kathy Scaler Scott at: [email protected]