I suppose we could mention something like Stockholm Syndrome... - The way I look at it (personally) is that I want to say what I wanted to say, and this sometimes means facing a stutter head on. In the past, I did a lot of substituting and evasion, but I decided against it eventually. So this idea of holding on to the initial intention, I get it. But it seems your partner does take it a bit too far - into the negative side, we could say. Like, attachment to something that's causing problems doesn't sound like a constructive thing. - As for what you go on to write, it made me think that something else could be the case (not that I'm any sort of therapist): If we consider the original intent as the desire to speak fluently, and the techniques an *admission* that we won't be able to speak fluently (in using them, and thus addressing the problem in performance)... I can see why someone would feel "inauthentic" about it. However, "authenticity" is not just about a sort of singular, original intention. Or at least, with stutter, that's not a very fruitful way of looking at it. If we instead look at what we would like to *achieve* - to speak without suffering, and to be understood - I think we can still be authentic in *choosing* to use techniques that help us navigate our existential challenge. Some people don't like taking pills either. Or applying lip balm if their lips are dry. Sort of the same thing, right? - Perhaps have your partner look around in here. There are many conversations to be had about stutter and the personal sphere. I always try to open up those conversations for people who appear to be all bunched up in their own perspective. Really, we should help all of us approach our world differently.