In general, I don't see a unified purpose in your paper. Your ideas are a bit scattered and some cohesion would be helpful. One thing that might improve this is developing in your mind what the central problem is and develop an idea to specifically target that plan. If you're interested in increasing public awareness of stuttering you need to address a couple things: (1) why it is good/necessary to develop public awareness? How would the lives of PWS benefit? (2) Once you've established that increasing awareness is a good thing, how are you going to increase it? How will your attempt be different from other attempts (e.g., the recent documentaries about stuttering, the King's Speech, Stuttering Awareness Day) You could talk about how these failed, or didn't reach a wide audience, or their time in the limelight was short. (3) I'd just stay away from reduced access to therapy and those stages of stuttering. It's clouding your argument. Devote that space to fleshing out your ideas. (However, both of those could be potential other topics if you decide public opinion is not where you want to go. Access to therapy is really about increasing insurance payment of stuttering therapy, and stages of stuttering is really about increased developmental research in the cause(s) of stuttering). Hope it helps edit: i hope this doesn't come off as harsh or negative. I'm not trying to be dismissive, I'm just in edit mode on my dissertation and it's hard to break out of that overly critical mode