
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


What happens when a profession outgrows the structures designed to represent it?
Megan traces the evolution of ASHA’s governance from its 150-member Legislative Council to today’s smaller Board of Directors, and compares that history with APTA’s still-active House of Delegates. She talks with former ASHA Legislative Council member Sherry Sancibrian and APTA House Speaker Bill McGeehy about the messy reality of trying to govern a large profession.
The episode also examines grassroots organizing and social media, including Megan’s own experience becoming an informal voice for thousands of SLPs. If large representative bodies can become painfully slow, but small governing bodies can’t possibly hold the full complexity of a profession, what might representative governance look like now?
Thank you to this episode's guests:
Sources:
Connect:
What does it actually mean to “work within the system”? Megan traces the history of member voice and decision-making within ASHA, from Richard Adler’s 1990 address to the Legislative Council to the governance changes that eventually eliminated it. Along the way, she asks what happens when a profession gets better at questioning authority without necessarily building better ways to disagree, deliberate, and act together. What would it take to build a profession that can hear disagreement without needing to eliminate it?
Sources:
Connect:
In this episode of Inside SLP, Megan looks beyond speech-language pathology to ask how professions decide where authority should live. From AOTA’s decision to separate certification from its professional association to decades of antitrust challenges involving ASHA and other professions, this episode explores what happens when certification, advocacy, accreditation, and professional representation overlap. Who gets to speak for a profession? What makes that authority legitimate? And what mechanisms exist to challenge it when practitioners want something different?
Sources:
Connect:
For the first 20 episodes of Inside SLP, we explored the history of speech-language pathology and the systems that shape our profession today. We looked at how licensure, certification, clinical training, and professional identity evolved over time, and how decisions made decades ago continue to influence clinicians, students, employers, and patients.
As we begin this next chapter of the podcast, we're turning our attention to a recent controversy in Oregon that sparked questions far beyond a single state licensing board.
At first glance, it looked like a debate about the CFY.
But as I dug deeper, it became clear that the conversation was really about something much larger: Where clinical training happens, who is responsible for it, and what assumptions we've inherited about how new clinicians become competent practitioners.
This isn't a call to action, and it isn't an attempt to tell you what to think.
It's an invitation to better understand the systems we're all participating in, and to consider what role each of us plays in what comes next.
We explore:
Guests:
Connect:
For twenty episodes, we’ve been examining the architecture of a profession under strain, including its history, its blind spots, and the pressures it was never designed to hold. In this final episode, we step back from diagnosis and turn toward orientation. Not a to-do list, and not a call to fix what’s broken, but an invitation to understand where we’re standing, and what it means to be a stakeholder in what comes next.
We explore:
Connect:
Anger can feel clarifying, but without context, it rarely leads anywhere new. In this episode, we step back from the outrage cycle to examine what’s sitting underneath it: systemic grief, misaligned training models, and the shame many clinicians carry inside a profession that was never fully built to hold them.
We explore:
Sources:
Connect:
The intensity in SLP spaces right now isn’t a sign of collapse. It’s the friction of a profession that has grown faster than the structures built to support it. In this episode, we slow the noise down to examine what’s actually underneath the debates, through data, psychology, and the real set of options the field keeps circling.
We explore:
Connect:
In 1968, the ASHA Convention became a moment of rupture. Not because of disorder, but because long-standing tensions were finally named. This episode examines what happened when Black clinicians challenged the limits of a profession that defined itself as “neutral,” and what that moment revealed about power, voice, and professional growth.
We explore:
Sources:
Connect:
Many SLPs experience ASHA membership as essential to survival even when, structurally, it is designed to be optional. This episode examines why that tension exists, and what it reveals about how professions stay healthy as they grow.
Rather than framing optional membership as a threat, we look at how it functions as a stabilizing feature in mature professional systems and why the fear of “splintering” often signals growth, not collapse.
We explore:
Sources:
Connect:
How did ASHA come to link membership and certification? And what happened when that structure was challenged? In the 1970s, one SLP brought that question into federal court. While Bogus v. ASHA didn’t end with a dramatic verdict, it quietly reshaped the professional architecture we still live inside today.
We explore:
Sources:
Connect:
From the publisher's feed