8 ms·

Instead of making space, what are your thoughts on OP leveraging these perceptions to find common ground? E.g., "We understand that we need you to be the man o

• jacobolus 8y ago
  This is speculatively projecting a lot of thoughts and feelings on the brother-in-law, which is quite patronizing. It also awkwardly uses overcomplicated words and overcomplicated passive grammar. Try reading the linked blog post again, and hold up your proposed question against each of Dave Bailey’s suggestions.
  • elhudy 8y ago
    >This is speculatively projecting a lot of thoughts and feelings on the brother-in-law, which is quite patronizing. Isn't that what negotiation is about, when dealing with someone who won't effectively communicate their thoughts? Speculating the wants/needs of that person and addressing them directly? This isn't something I'm making up, I've just read it in "Never Split the Difference". The book was written to address situations just like OPs. The example sentence structure was meant to be paraphrased. I was hoping for critique on the subject matter not the grammar. I feel uncomfortable turning OP's anecdote into a hypothetical anyway so I'll back off.
    • jacobolus 8y ago
      If someone asked me your proposed question, I would think they were trying to passive-aggressively manipulate me, and I would feel resentful and angry. YMMV.
    • munchbunny 8y ago
      The key is not to speculate, but to figure out how to ask so that you can have a discussion about what they feel and need. You have a theory, but even if you are a good people reader, and even if you are mostly right, you are very likely to be wrong in many small but important ways. I'm sure you can recall instances where someone was right about you in general but wrong in small ways that really mattered to you. Even if you have a guess, ask instead.
    • johnchristopher 8y ago
      > "We understand that we need you to be the man of the family, and appreciate that you have stepped up to be strong for all of us. We would like to support you in doing so and feel that our greatest assistance would be in helping to facilitate communications for you. Is this something you're able to allow?" That's corpo-marketing style. The angle is to coerce the other in a corner and he'll see it coming from a thousand mile and react badly to it. > "We understand that we need you to be the man of the family, That's exactly the problem and what OP don't want/need. They want to communicate with the medical and legal staff. They don't need him to be the man of the family, they need him to approach this as a family. They need him to let them be family and they need him to be family.
    • woodandsteel 8y ago
      >Isn't that what negotiation is about, when dealing with someone who won't effectively communicate their thoughts? No, negotiation is the process that happens when you and the other party have decided you want to work out a mutually acceptable agreement. The other person in this situation has not decided to do that, and so the trick is how to get the him to that point. I think Zelphyr's approach would be a lot more likely than yours to have that effect.
  • fourthark 8y ago
    It's not covered in the post, but NVC also stresses figuring out what motivates other people and asking them about it in a non-threatening way (similar template), so I think this is very apropos. I'd say this part is even more difficult than the stuff in the post, and requires serious empathy.
  • yomly 8y ago
    >This is speculatively projecting a lot of thoughts and feelings on the brother-in-law, which is quite patronizing. The most powerful and influential communicators/connectors I've encountered in my life essentially only ever do this. I suppose the nuance is that they treat every person as an individual, so (on a semi-subconscious level) spend their first interactions profiling the individual so they understand their motives. I liken it to boxers learning their opponent's range and rhythm (only less combative). I suppose what might be patronizing though is projecting thoughts onto a stranger from afar (like on this thread) though presenting some projections as an example of one possible thought pattern that may need to be handled can be useful IMO.
    • deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
• threatofrain 8y ago
  But it sounds fake. For one thing, am I wrong to assume that relatives don't actually appreciate the son [in law] being the man of the family? At this point aren't they really suspicious of his psychology? And another thing, do we even know the son perceives masculinity that way? It seems like an odd mistake to make if you're wrong.
  • elhudy 8y ago
    >For one thing, am I wrong to assume that relatives don't actually appreciate the son in law being the man of the family? OP is the son-in-law. The man who has power of attorney over OP's father-in-law is the son. Unless I am misunderstanding your post. It would absolutely be an odd mistake to make if wrong though.
    • deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
• fouc 8y ago
  Sounds super patronizing. Especially using "We" article in that context. Directly saying "I appreciate that you have stepped up to be strong for all of us. Can we help?" seems better.
• Zelphyr 8y ago
  I think it can be done in a much simpler way: "What do you need?" If he says, "nothing" then you reply "Ok. Let me know if that changes. I'll help in whatever way you want." and then move on. He's not going to budge right now, but he might in the future. You've planted a seed with him that you're available. He might never reach out. There's nothing else you can do that is productive but accept that.