Psychosocial Comorbidities in Adolescents With Histories of Childhood Apraxia of Speech

Purpose Adolescent psychosocial outcomes of individuals with histories of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) were compared to outcomes of individuals with histories of speech sound disorders (SSD) only and SSD with language impairment (LI). It was hypothesized that individuals with more severe and persistent disorders such as CAS would report poorer psychosocial outcomes. Method Groups were compared using analyses of variance on a psychosocial assessment battery that included measures of hyperactivity and inattention, anxiety, depression, internalizing and externalizing behaviors, thought problems, and social outcomes. Results Results revealed significant group differences on self-report of social problems and parent report of hyperactivity, thought problems, and social problems at adolescence. Compared to the SSD-only group, the CAS group had significantly higher parental ratings of hyperactivity and social problems in adolescence. The CAS and SSD + LI groups did not differ on psychosocial measures, possibly due to the high rate of comorbid LI in the CAS group. The CAS group also had more individuals who scored in the borderline/clinical range on self-report of social problems than the SSD-only group. The CAS group did not differ from the SSD + LI group in the number of participants scoring in the borderline/clinical range on measures. Conclusions Individuals with histories of CAS demonstrate increased rates of social problems and hyperactivity based on parent ratings compared to adolescents with histories of SSD only; however, most do not score within the clinical range. The persistence of speech sound errors combined with self-reported and parent-reported social difficulties suggests that speech-language pathologists should be sensitive to the social and emotional impact of CAS and make appropriate referrals to mental health professionals when warranted.

What is Poststructuralism?

In this article, I discuss the vitality and the limits of the poststructural archive. I argue against the temptation to essentialise poststructuralism or define its ‘ontology’; instead, I present some of the avenues that can be taken to further its theoretical practice. With Trump and the rise of ‘post-truth’ politics, poststructural political thought has recently come back to the centre of political debate. By using Pierre Macherey and François Châtelet’s perspective on Marxism, I turn to contemporary problems and studies to imagine how to renew the poststructuralist experience of thought. Following Boris Groys, I suggest that by producing theory as form, artists had a more immediate recourse to theoretical practice, by using all sorts of media to perform knowledge. Finally, by mainly referring to the work of Gilles Deleuze and Michel Foucault, I present some elements of a poststructural critique of political economy. I do this not by forcing the application of poststructural theories or concepts onto a supposedly external reality, but by immanently integrating more and more social and political problems into the schemes of thought. A poststructural theoretical practice means integrating into thought problems and events, in order to compose with them, and not simply study discursive strategies.