Which of the following statements is true regarding FS and SM's treatment approaches?

The assertion that FS (Fluency-Shaping) allows more flexibility in application is accurate because this treatment approach prioritizes the individualization of therapy techniques based on the client's unique needs and contexts. FS is designed to be adaptable, which means that therapists can modify their strategies to better suit the situation or preferences of the client. This flexibility can enhance client engagement and effectiveness of the treatment since it accommodates personal variations in speaking difficulties and communication styles.

On the other hand, the other approaches do not typically offer the same level of flexibility. For instance, FS is not primarily about emotional handling, which is often emphasized in alternative approaches. Structured environments, as indicated in the other options, are typically associated with other treatment methodologies that require consistency and predictability, not necessarily the more adaptable nature of Fluency-Shaping. The claim that SM (Stuttering Modification) focuses solely on speech outcomes does not encapsulate its comprehensive nature, as it incorporates emotional and psychological dimensions along with speech improvement. The incorporation of flexible techniques in FS makes it a suitable choice for clients with varying degrees of fluency challenges.