Being a Speech and Language Therapist: Between Support and Oppression

  • Anat Greenstein


  • Speech and language therapy can support disabled children and their families in developing better communication.

  • Sometimes the process of diagnosis focuses on deficits and difficulties and may lead to people feeling disempowered.

  • Speech and language therapy sometimes focuses on getting disabled children to satisfy developmental norms instead of looking at what the children themselves want to achieve.

  • This chapter explores why these things happen and how therapy can be made more supportive and less oppressive.


  1. Amir, D. (2008). On the Lyricism of the Mind. Jerusalem: Magnes Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bion, W. R. (1966). Catastrophic Change. Scientific Bulletin of the British Psychoanalytical Society, 5, 12–24.Google Scholar
  3. Booth, T., & Booth, W. (1990). Making Connections: A Narrative Study of Adult Children of Parents with Learning Difficulties, 8.Google Scholar
  4. Burman, E. (2008). Deconstructing Developmental Psychology (2nd ed.). l: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Davis, L. J. (1995). Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness and the Body. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  6. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1980). A Thousand Plateaus. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  7. Dense, P. B., & Pinson, E. N. (1993). The Speech Chain: Physics and Biology of Spoken Language (2nd ed.). New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  8. Easthope, A. (1990). “I Got to Use Words When I Talk to You”: Deconstructing the Theory of Communication. In I. Parker & J. Shotter (Eds.), Deconstructing Social Psychology (pp. 76–87). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: Birth of the Prison. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  10. Goodley, D. (2007). Towards Socially Just Pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian Critical Disability Studies. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(3), 317–334. doi: 10.1080/13603110701238769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodley, D. (2011). Disability Studies: An Interdisciplinary Introduction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Goodley, D., & Runswick-Cole, K. (2010). Emancipating Play: Dis/Abled Children, Development and Deconstruction. Disability & Society, 25(4), 499–512. doi: 10.1080/09687591003755914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenstein, A. (2015). Radical Inclusive Education: Disability, Teaching, and Struggles for Liberation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Grosz, E. (1999). An Introduction. In E. Grosz (Ed.), Becomings: Explorations on Time, Memory and Futures (pp. 1–11). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kittay, E. F., Jennings, B., & Wasunna, A. (2005). Dependency, Difference and the Global Ethic of Longterm Care*. Journal of Political Philosophy, 13(4), 443–469. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2005.00232.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Masschelein, J., & Simons, M. (2005). The Strategy of the Inclusive Education Apparatus. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 24(2), 117–138. doi: 10.1007/s11217-004-6527-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oliver, M. (1990). The Individual and Social Models of Disability. Paper Presented at Joint Workshop of the Living Options Group and the Research Unit of the Royal College of Physicians. Retrieved December 10, 2009, from soc dis.pdf
  18. Overboe, J. (2009). Affirming an Impersonal Life : A Different Register for Disability Studies. Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies, 3(3), 241–256. doi: 10.3828/jlcds.2009.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shelly, S., & Golubock, S. (2007). If Not a Cure, Then What? Parenting Autistic Children. In Autreat Conference (pp. 1–20). Retrieved from
  20. Shildrick, M., & Price, J. (2006). Deleuzian Connections and Queer Corporealities: Shrinking Global Disability. Rhizomes, 11/12. Retrieved from
  21. Skrtic, T. M. (1995). Disability and Democracy: Reconstructing (Special) Education for Postmodernity. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  22. Slater, J. (2012). Self-Advocacy and Socially Just Pedagogy. Disability Studies Quarterly, 32(1). Retrieved from
  23. Turner, B. (2008). The Body and Society (3rd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Venn, C. (1984). The Subject of Psychology. In J. Henriques, W. Hollway, C. Urwin, C. Venn, & W. Walkerdine (Eds.), Changing the Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation and Subjectivity (pp. 115–147). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  25. Wieder, S., & Greenspan, S. I. (2003). Climbing the Symbolic Ladder in the DIR Model Through Floor Time/Interactive Play. Autism, 7(4), 425–435. doi: 10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and Reality. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anat Greenstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Manchester Metropolitan UniversityManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations