LSHSS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools Vol.30 401-407 October 1999.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duchan, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Duchan, J. F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Views of Facilitated Communication

What's the Point?

Judith F. Duchan 1
1 State University of New York at Buffalo

duchan{at}acsu.buffalo.edu

Facilitated communication (FC) has generated considerable debate, with the main concern being whether the facilitators (often speech-language pathologists) are physically influencing what is being expressed by the communicator. FC has placed speech-language pathologists in an ethical bind, having to weigh the risks of denying their client the right to effective and efficient communication against the risk of using an approach that has not held up under the rigors of controlled scientific studies. The dilemma is further complicated by the different ways FC has been described. Those who describe it in social participation terms are more positive concerning its potential than those who see it in terms of information processing. In this article, views of FC are outlined. A way out of the dilemma is suggested through the development of clinical practice guidelines. Such guidelines should include protections of both clients and clinicians and should be built on both social participation and information processing views of FC.

KEY WORDS: facilitated communication, clinical practice guidelines, ethical practices, theories of communication

Submitted on November 20, 1998
Accepted on June 30, 1999


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1999 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.