Re: None of our business? | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Hans Tilstra (hanstilstra![]() |
|
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 18:49:43 -0600 (MDT) |
I'd like to reiterate my emphasis on #9 as being noteworthily different from the other discussion triggers. Yes, you're damned if you do say something and you're damned if you don't. The pattern that people in child protection find worthy of pointing out though, is that of four common deflections ... - discounting the issue (eg. not everyone sees it as an issue), - discounting the severity (eg. well, he's affectionate but not to the point it makes me feel uncomfortable), - discounting what society can do about (eg. yes, it's a problem, but it's not mine and I really wonder what use it would be to raise the issue, wonder what human services would do with this anyway) - discounting what I can do about it (eg. yes, I'm worried, yes, it's serious, yes, society can do something about it, but no, I can't) Cheers, Hans Tilstra (idea sourced from transactional analysis)
-
None of our business? Catherine Harper, October 25 1999
- Re: None of our business? Hans Tilstra, October 25 1999
- RE: None of our business? Rob Sandelin, October 27 1999
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.