If we are in an environment of open conversation and I say something that brings up an emotional trauma in another person and that person doesn’t have the self-awareness to know why he’s feeling unwell, that’s not a good time to leave him alone.
?! Depends. If you don’t understand that person intimately or aren’t experienced at helping less self-aware (aka neurotypical) people process emotional trauma, it’s probably a very good time to leave him alone. Politely.
You don’t need to understand another person to help them. Even if you do understand another person well enough to know what triggered them, telling them can be invasive and therefore needs some amount of implicit of explicit permission.
Being there and being a stable anchor is often better than trying to interfere with their state. That means if you are mentally flexible about changing your state opening up on your side and allowing the emotions to rise in you to a level that similar to the other person but more calm. If you are not flexible and can meditate, that usually a good state to go to.
For me the only reason to leave is if I’m myself not in a stable emotional place. But I can certainly understand if other people generally don’t see themselves in a position to help.
Is the likelihood of that greater than the likelihood of making them feel uncomfortable by abandoning them in their (recalled) trauma?
(I realize that “abandoning” is a very connotationally loaded term; I choose it here to counterbalance “intruding.” I’m happy to switch to less loaded terms if you prefer.)
Fair enough. I’m not at all sure that’s true—certainly when I’m experiencing recalled trauma I would far prefer that people sit quietly with me than that they politely leave, but of course one data point isn’t especially useful in this case—but certainly if it is true the rest follows. Do you have any data to support that?
?! Depends. If you don’t understand that person intimately or aren’t experienced at helping less self-aware (aka neurotypical) people process emotional trauma, it’s probably a very good time to leave him alone. Politely.
You don’t need to understand another person to help them. Even if you do understand another person well enough to know what triggered them, telling them can be invasive and therefore needs some amount of implicit of explicit permission.
Being there and being a stable anchor is often better than trying to interfere with their state. That means if you are mentally flexible about changing your state opening up on your side and allowing the emotions to rise in you to a level that similar to the other person but more calm. If you are not flexible and can meditate, that usually a good state to go to.
For me the only reason to leave is if I’m myself not in a stable emotional place. But I can certainly understand if other people generally don’t see themselves in a position to help.
Interesting.
My default move would be to sit quietly in their presence and pay attention, rather than leave.
Why would leaving be better?
Because if you don’t know them intimately, you’re likely to make them feel uncomfortable by intruding on their trauma.
Is the likelihood of that greater than the likelihood of making them feel uncomfortable by abandoning them in their (recalled) trauma?
(I realize that “abandoning” is a very connotationally loaded term; I choose it here to counterbalance “intruding.” I’m happy to switch to less loaded terms if you prefer.)
It’s likely to be worse than leaving them politely. Whether it’s worse than just getting up and leaving depends on the person and situation.
Fair enough. I’m not at all sure that’s true—certainly when I’m experiencing recalled trauma I would far prefer that people sit quietly with me than that they politely leave, but of course one data point isn’t especially useful in this case—but certainly if it is true the rest follows. Do you have any data to support that?
No data, just introspection and personal observation. Maybe it’s a variation in people’s preferences.