Why do people make life harder than it already is? - Page 8

dex · ‎03-09-2010

@Isobel Archer I agree that when we have challenges our own coping skills will be a valuable tool.

Leeny · ‎06-24-2011

I feel bad for this woman who obviously was not prepared to go into the bank.

Too many people today are so impatient with people who have disabilities or even being elderly.

Until we walk in someones shoes we really shouldn't judge them. I know we live in a cruel world.

Sweetbay magnolia · ‎04-14-2013

The article helped to raise my awareness. I try not to pigeonhole, though of course it happens.

Thank goodness for a free press. I can learn from others.

We all have stress that seems insurmountable at times. I am glad to know that I am not alone in that. DH is a social worker. There is much hardship out there.

Cogito ergo sum

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@jaxs mom wrote:
@Isobel Archer wrote:
Read a heartbreaking article in this morning's Washington Post written by a woman with a severe stutter (she has tried everything and it is no better).

She describes an incident where she needed to withdraw money from the bank and the ATM was down and she went through the drive through and because she was unable to say her name after many attempts, they asked her to come inside. Instead, she drove off, stopped and cried.

Now I totally get that all of us need to be more understanding - and patient. And I hate that this happened to her.

However, why not just go through the drive through - or inside - and hand them a note saying you have laryingitis and cannot speak and - this is who I am (ID) and this is what I want to do? I know that's "letting them off the hook" in the compassion department, but it's also getting you what you need with a minimum of heartache.

Sometimes it just seems to me that we can be so intent on insisting other people change, that we fail to see what can sometimes be simple work arounds.
She didn't make life harder. Her circumstances are what they are. Sometimes people get overwhelmed with just trying to navigate daily tasks, especially when they have limitations. Acting like it's her fault that she had a frustrating encounter is missing the point.

Yes, you are right @jaxs mom

Sometimes, being disabled, having an extra load to carry, just crashes in on you.

I don’t understand the lack of compassion so many people expose in themselves.

Isobel Archer · ‎04-04-2015

I would think you would need an ID for a withdrawal - if not using an ATM. An ID would have your name on it.

Plaid Pants2 · ‎03-14-2015

After reading the article, all I have to say is, omg!

She expects the world to be mind-readers!

First off, how was the cop to know that she wasn't drunk?

Drunk people stutter, stammer and slur their words.

He was doing his job.

Second, by her own admission, she had been carded before, but assumes that this time is because of her stutter.

The bartender was protecting himself, because they can be held liable for serving someone who is intoxicated.

Again, drunk people stutter, stammer and slur their words.

She expected the bartender to be able to read her mind, and to somehow magically know that she wasn't drunk.

And lastly, the teller.

If someone was trying to rob the bank, by using a name that is not their own, they would, because of nerves and adrenaline, stutter and stammer over the fake name.

Just suppose that someone was trying to fraudulently withdraw money from her account, and stumbled over saying her name.

If the teller had just handed the cash over, no questions asked, you better believe the the author would be hopping mad, plus, most likely the teller would have lost her job.

The teller was doing her job, in making sure that a crime wasn't being committed.

I have compassion and empathy, but rules and laws still have to be followed.

One cannot just ignore those rules and laws simply because they have empathy for someone.

And that's what the author seems to want people to do.

She wants people to walk a mile in her shoes, she also needs to walk a mile in theirs, and understand that people are not mind-readers, and that if they suspect that someone is up to no good, including her, that it is their job, duty and responsibility, to act on it, and that when they do, that it isn't because they are targeting her because of her stammer.

Even in her own article, she said that only 5% of the population stutters.

That means that 95% of the population doesn't, and therefore, most of us don't normally ecounter people on a daily basis who stutter.

So, when we do, we might look at them a bit more closely to make sure that there us nothing hinkey going on.

To not do so would be foolish, and could possibly end up costing jobs, if not lives.

I'm sorry if she does not realize this.

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@Plaid Pants2 wrote:
After reading the article, all I have to say is, omg!

She expects the world to be mind-readers!

First off, how was the cop to know that she wasn't drunk?

Drunk people stutter, stammer and slur their words.

He was doing his job.

Second, by her own admission, she had been carded before, but assumes that this time is because of her stutter.

The bartender was protecting himself, because they can be held liable for serving someone who is intoxicated.

Again, drunk people stutter, stammer and slur their words.

She expected the bartender to be able to read her mind, and to somehow magically know that she wasn't drunk.

And lastly, the teller.

If someone was trying to rob the bank, by using a name that is not their own, they would, because of nerves and adrenaline, stutter and stammer over the fake name.

Just suppose that someone was trying to fraudulently withdraw money from her account, and stumbled over saying her name.

If the teller had just handed the cash over, no questions asked, you better believe the the author would be hopping mad, plus, most likely the teller would have lost her job.

The teller was doing her job, in making sure that a crime wasn't being committed.

I have compassion and empathy, but rules and laws still have to be followed.

One cannot just ignore those rules and laws simply because they have empathy for someone.

And that's what the author seems to want people to do.

She wants people to walk a mile in her shoes, she also needs to walk a mile in theirs, and understand that people are not mind-readers, and that if they suspect that someone is up to no good, including her, that it is their job, duty and responsibility, to act on it, and that when they do, that it isn't because they are targeting her because of her stammer.

Even in her own article, she said that only 5% of the population stutters.

That means that 95% of the population doesn't, and therefore, most of us don't normally ecounter people on a daily basis who stutter.

So, when we do, we might look at them a bit more closely to make sure that there us nothing hinkey going on.

To not do so would be foolish, and could possibly end up costing jobs, if not lives.

I'm sorry if she does not realize this.

@Plaid Pants2

Are you kidding? You think we have to check them (those who stutter) out “to make sure nothing hinkey is going on”? Like what?

Surely you can’t mean that, it’s too vile.

Trinity11 · ‎11-16-2014

@Noel7 wrote:
@jaxs mom wrote:
@Isobel Archer wrote:
Read a heartbreaking article in this morning's Washington Post written by a woman with a severe stutter (she has tried everything and it is no better).

She describes an incident where she needed to withdraw money from the bank and the ATM was down and she went through the drive through and because she was unable to say her name after many attempts, they asked her to come inside. Instead, she drove off, stopped and cried.

Now I totally get that all of us need to be more understanding - and patient. And I hate that this happened to her.

However, why not just go through the drive through - or inside - and hand them a note saying you have laryingitis and cannot speak and - this is who I am (ID) and this is what I want to do? I know that's "letting them off the hook" in the compassion department, but it's also getting you what you need with a minimum of heartache.

Sometimes it just seems to me that we can be so intent on insisting other people change, that we fail to see what can sometimes be simple work arounds.
She didn't make life harder. Her circumstances are what they are. Sometimes people get overwhelmed with just trying to navigate daily tasks, especially when they have limitations. Acting like it's her fault that she had a frustrating encounter is missing the point.

Yes, you are right @jaxs mom

Sometimes, being disabled, having an extra load to carry, just crashes in on you.

I don’t understand the lack of compassion so many people expose in themselves.

I understand it @Noel7. I think empathy is a genetic thing.....you either have it or you don't.

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@Trinity11 wrote:
@Noel7 wrote:
@jaxs mom wrote:
@Isobel Archer wrote:
Read a heartbreaking article in this morning's Washington Post written by a woman with a severe stutter (she has tried everything and it is no better).

She describes an incident where she needed to withdraw money from the bank and the ATM was down and she went through the drive through and because she was unable to say her name after many attempts, they asked her to come inside. Instead, she drove off, stopped and cried.

Now I totally get that all of us need to be more understanding - and patient. And I hate that this happened to her.

However, why not just go through the drive through - or inside - and hand them a note saying you have laryingitis and cannot speak and - this is who I am (ID) and this is what I want to do? I know that's "letting them off the hook" in the compassion department, but it's also getting you what you need with a minimum of heartache.

Sometimes it just seems to me that we can be so intent on insisting other people change, that we fail to see what can sometimes be simple work arounds.
She didn't make life harder. Her circumstances are what they are. Sometimes people get overwhelmed with just trying to navigate daily tasks, especially when they have limitations. Acting like it's her fault that she had a frustrating encounter is missing the point.

Yes, you are right @jaxs mom

Sometimes, being disabled, having an extra load to carry, just crashes in on you.

I don’t understand the lack of compassion so many people expose in themselves.
I understand it @Noel7. I think empathy is a genetic thing.....you either have it or you don't.

@Trinity11 you could be right 🙁

Plaid Pants2 · ‎03-14-2015

@Noel7 wrote:
@Plaid Pants2 wrote:
After reading the article, all I have to say is, omg!

She expects the world to be mind-readers!

First off, how was the cop to know that she wasn't drunk?

Drunk people stutter, stammer and slur their words.

He was doing his job.

Second, by her own admission, she had been carded before, but assumes that this time is because of her stutter.

The bartender was protecting himself, because they can be held liable for serving someone who is intoxicated.

Again, drunk people stutter, stammer and slur their words.

She expected the bartender to be able to read her mind, and to somehow magically know that she wasn't drunk.

And lastly, the teller.

If someone was trying to rob the bank, by using a name that is not their own, they would, because of nerves and adrenaline, stutter and stammer over the fake name.

Just suppose that someone was trying to fraudulently withdraw money from her account, and stumbled over saying her name.

If the teller had just handed the cash over, no questions asked, you better believe the the author would be hopping mad, plus, most likely the teller would have lost her job.

The teller was doing her job, in making sure that a crime wasn't being committed.

I have compassion and empathy, but rules and laws still have to be followed.

One cannot just ignore those rules and laws simply because they have empathy for someone.

And that's what the author seems to want people to do.

She wants people to walk a mile in her shoes, she also needs to walk a mile in theirs, and understand that people are not mind-readers, and that if they suspect that someone is up to no good, including her, that it is their job, duty and responsibility, to act on it, and that when they do, that it isn't because they are targeting her because of her stammer.

Even in her own article, she said that only 5% of the population stutters.

That means that 95% of the population doesn't, and therefore, most of us don't normally ecounter people on a daily basis who stutter.

So, when we do, we might look at them a bit more closely to make sure that there us nothing hinkey going on.

To not do so would be foolish, and could possibly end up costing jobs, if not lives.

I'm sorry if she does not realize this.

@Plaid Pants2

Are you kidding? You think we have to check them (those who stutter) out “to make sure nothing hinkey is going on”? Like what?

Surely you can’t mean that, it’s too vile.

When someone is nervous, there is more adrenaline in their system, and that can cause someone who doesn't normally stutter and stammer, to do so, and this is especially true when someone is trying to do something untoward, if not illegal.

And since most of us do not come across stutterers on a daily basis, there is no way of knowing upon first glance, that when interacting with someone who is stuttering, that they are afflicted with stuttering.

So yes, because of the world that we live in today, one can't be too careful, and just blindly assume that just because someone is stuttering and stammering, that that means that they are just a stutterer, and that nothing hinkey isn't going on.

It is better to err on the side of caution, than to not.

Because to just assume that "oh, this person is just a stutterer" could possibly end up costing lives, especially when the stuttering is part of their nervousness in commiting the crime.