Personally, I think it's important to draw a distinction between two stages: \---(1) Stuttering onset: Genetics likely played a strong role in why we began stuttering in childhood. \---(2) Stuttering remission: Genetics, however, may have very little to do with why we continue to stutter as adults (so here I can resonate a lot with SLPs like Brocklehurst, O'Malley etc). At this stage, I believe what holds us back isn’t our genes, but more likely a failure to effectively de-condition—or even re-condition—the "conditioned stimuli" that elicit a conditioned response, that have built up over time (as visualized in the image). I say it's time we take a closer, more compassionate look at this question: **Is conditioning "hindering" stuttering remission in Adults who stutter?** *My opinion*: The idea that stuttering is primarily caused by genetics has shaped much of how the world—and even the stuttering community—views this experience. But I feel this perspective is somewhat lopsided. In the absence of a cure, the focus has largely shifted toward embracing open, comfortable stuttering. While this shift is absolutely valuable, it sometimes feels like it comes at the cost of closing the door on any real conversation around stuttering remission—around the idea that meaningful change is still possible. I really resonate with how an SLP and researcher[^(1)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GOlTnPcXLhMaCh51-5iMt84CdXvbzk44/view?usp=sharing) explains it: that the **neurological differences** may have contributed to our stuttering early on, but they may often mostly fade by age 8 or 10. After that, what we're left with is more of a conditioned cycle—a loop we unintentionally keep alive as our subconscious is continually reinforcing it using "reinforcers", mostly without realizing it. In this light, I don't think we can fully rely on traditional speech-language pathologists (SLPs) when it comes to *stuttering remission*. As I think, most SLPs haven't been trained in the principles of behavioral psychology (ABA)—especially not in areas like extinction or de-conditioning. And truth be told, that's also completely understandable. Their training tends to focus elsewhere. I believe that, even if SLPs do study behavioral psychology. Then what? They would likely still end up prioritizing controlled fluency strategies (to prevent drawing criticism from fellow SLPs for stepping outside conventional methods)—rather than exploring how we might actually de-condition the conditioned stimuli that keep the stutter cycle alive. And maybe… just maybe… that’s where a new path could begin 😊