|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1939
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 25, 2004 - 5:59 pm: |       |
Hi Leanne
It's interesting stuff, but even if Barnett did stutter at the inquest owing to stress of whatever kind, how will you prove that he stuttered throughout his life, as you want to do?
Robert |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1089
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 25, 2004 - 7:12 pm: | |
G'day Robert,
That would be difficult, so I'm not. Barnett's stuttering doesn't play a big part in this book. Nor does schizophrenia, or autism. That's why I don't appear to be 'flogging that particular horse'. Diagnosis of schizophrenia, autism, Tourettes syndrome, wasn't around in 1888.
Barnett's parents were Irish immigrants, his father died and his mother vanished, so I think that's enough to suggest a traumatic childhood.
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1940
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 4:28 am: | |
Hi Leanne
Of course, if the relevant genes have been, or ever are, identified, exhumation of Barnett's remains might settle the issue.
By the way, do you have a photo of Barnett's grave?
Robert |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1090
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 5:13 am: | |
G'day Robert,
well it would serve no real purpose to exhume Barnett's remains, would it?
A few newspapers said he stuttered and one said he repeated the last words of EVERY question, so I reckon it was something like:
CORONER: "When and where did you meet her?"
BARNETT: "Whhhhere did we MMMeet? We met in CCCommercial street."
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1942
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 5:21 am: | |
Hi Leanne
I'm a bit confused now. I thought that someone displaying the condition you're interested in would have gone :
"Where did you meet her?"
"Did you meet her? In Commercial St."
Robert |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 531
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 5:36 am: | |
About this speech thing. I always believed, as I've heard some people do in the past, it would have been more like:-
"Where did you meet her?"
"Meet her? In Commercial Street."
With a bit of stuttering thrown in too though.
Robert, I don't like it is how you suggest. Leanne's may be a bit long however as I don't think he would have repeated the whole of the previous question, just the last bit of it as I had read somewhere before.
Sarah |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1092
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 26, 2004 - 7:10 am: | |
G'day Robert and Sarah,
Yes, the reason I mixed the repetition of the question with a bit of a stutter is to show why these newspapers reported it differently. One chose to report that he stuttered, while another chose to report that he echoed the question. It would have been recorded as clear speech, and many newspapers copied it as clear speech.
LEANNE |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 12:10 am: | |
Leanne quoted some AOL member's website:
"'Stress may aggravate stuttering just as it may aggravate diabetes and high blood pressure, but stress doesn't cause any of these conditions.'"
I think you should be able to find something more authoritative than what somebody put up on AOL... especially since if you go to the home page it's clear that he is trying to sell people something. Much like you can't expect actual health advice from a snake oil salesman, you can't trust what some person who can't afford a real website to sell his unlicensed psychological advice says about stuttering.
But for an actual example of what happens in the real world, I don't stutter, but have done so under instances of high stress, such as the death of my mother and death of a college friend when I was the one who had to break the news to other people. And this high stress stuttering was really serious, not something minor. Off the scale Elmer Fudd kind of stuff.
And I've seen the exact same thing (in varying degrees) in a number of other people at high stress periods in their lives. I also was a psych major in college and we most certainly did get taught that, yes, stress can cause this. People who say otherwise don't know what they are talking about.
Because stress can and does cause individual instances of stuttering, Barnett stumbling over his tongue in this instance is a complete nonissue. |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 215
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 2:55 pm: | |
In addition to what Dan has posted, I can only restate that in my years of lecturing, and watching student presentations in class or at conferences, stress does cause a disruption in one's speech.
Does it "induce a chronic stutter"? No, once the stress is removed, the person's speech returns to normal. What it does do is induce a temporary, or "acute", speech disruption.
Furthermore, the words "stutter" and "stammer" are commonly used to refer to the same thing, which technically they are not. A trained speech therapist would be careful to differentiate the two, but a newspaper reporter wouldn't have a clue. Typically, stress will cause more of a "stammer" (hesitations in speech) than a true "stutter" (J-J-J-Joe). A newspaper report, however, would not differentiate these. (i.e., is just as likely to call a stammer a stutter rather than a stammer, or to call a stutter a stammer, etc).
Also, a clinical "stutter" or a clinical "stammer", must be a speech impediment that is long lasting, and not limited to stress only situations. So technically, no, stress does not induce a stutter because the stuttering/stammering does not continue for ever afterwards.
Speech therapy can help some people overcome their stutter/stammer, although in times of stress it may return (and then they often have a worse time than people who never had a stutter/stammer).
Anyway, the important point is to keep in mind that the "clinical use" and the "common use" are not the same thing. In terms of speech impediments, a clinical site is going to use a definition that does not include normal "nervous speech interruptions". So again, when they say "does not induce a stutter" they do not mean nervous people's speech is perfectly fine.
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 216
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 3:05 pm: | |
Hi Sara,
Robert's presentation of the long repitition is an example of how someone with echolalia would respond. The shorter versions like "meet her", etc, which reflect a nervous person thinking aloud, are not echolalia. However, Leanne has suggested in the past that Barnett had echolalia, and that leads to her suggesting he was schizophenic. Robert is just pointing out that if he spoke with the condition he's supposed to have had (echolalia), then his speech pattern would have to be similar to echolalic speech. The suggested "quote" is not echolalic, and moreover, since Barnett goes on to give very lucid, clear, on topic, responses to questions posed him, his speech and language use does not suggest he's an unmedicated schizophrenic.
However, as Leanne has indicated, she isn't pushing this suggestion anymore.
-Jeff |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2795
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 08, 2004 - 2:40 pm: | |
Re speech impediments, the TV news today reported an online audio library of stammering available at
www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/home
This link doesn't seem to work, though leaving off the"/home" does get you through to the UCL site, but there seems to be no mention of an audio library there. However, maybe it's worth keeping an eye on it.
Robert |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page