What is not (morally) expected regarding stuttering? What do you consider supererogatory in relation to stuttering?

What is not (morally) expected regarding stuttering? What do you consider supererogatory in relation to stuttering? This post is linked to [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVl5kMXz1vA) YT video. **Supererogation** is the performance of more than is asked for. It is the action of doing more than duty requires. In ethics, an act is supererogatory if it is good but not morally required to be done. For example, we consider '*giving money to charity to reduce famine*' **supererogatory**. When we give money to charity people would call us a saint. Peter Singer (philosopher), however, believes that these acts of kindness are not supererogatory, rather obligatory. **Making a connection between supererogation and stuttering**: What do you consider **supererogatory** in relation to **stuttering**? Why do you or don't you believe that the supererogatory activities (that you answered in the previous question), are not considered obligatory? Often *people who stutter* feel ashamed or guilty when they **stutter**, shouldn't we rather feel ashamed or guilty if we are not doing the supererogatory activities? Shouldn't we at least consider the alternative? What argument do you have to justify supererogation? Is it sufficient justification, if we are scared of making our hands dirty, fear the truth or fear the unknown? If it is within our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of moral significance, mustn't we then morally do it? Shouldn't we consider the attention and time that we spend outside of supererogatory activities as not of moral significance? **These questions are open for interpretation. Let us know in the comments how you interpret it. Sharing knowledge is the most fundamental act of friendship** **to create learning processes.** "*Disseminating knowledge is the human duty, sharing it about so that all can benefit.*" **\~** tracy rees, Amy Snow