At a conference where this sort of thing matters, somebody explained that when a person starts crying, you should never hand them the box of tissues, because that’s really telling them to stop crying. Instead, you should take a tissue for your own eyes, and leave the box where they can reach it.
Do you think that’s true?
I think taking a tissue for your own eyes could come across as weird, if you’re not crying also. And, especially, if you’re keeping yourself OK, as part of being there for the other person (in the sense of a psychopomp), grabbing a tissue for yourself undermines things.
I don’t think you should hand someone who is crying a box of tissues, but instead offer them a tissue from a box you are holding if that’s appropriate, meaning they don’t have a tissue and probably want one. They can take a tissue or decline it. It’s their choice. You’re just trying to help, and they aren’t stuck holding a box of tissues they may or may not want.
I think context is going to matter a fair bit, and also your own body language and behaviours. For example:
Offering tissues whilst otherwise acting in a comforting or sympathetic way (an arm around the shoulder if appropriate etc).
vs
Holding out a box of tissues at arms length in their general direction whilst tutting and rolling your eyes at onlookers.
Sort of. This is a meaning popularized by Martha Beck: a psychopomp is a person who walks through Hell with another person, perhaps guiding them, as a service to them. It’s key that the psychopomp is perfectly fine even though being present and compassionate with the suffering person.
[Edit: I quoted Dung_Beetle’s question, but watched on screen as it popped into existence then quickly back out again on saving. Huh.]
If I was in the middle of a crisis and someone said they wanted to be my psychopomp, or offered me the services of a psychopomp, I’d probably freak out then give them a tongue-lashing. No, I do not want to go to the afterlife!
Fair enough. And I do think it would be a bad idea to invoke the afterlife as a way into being helpful.
Here’s the article somebody showed me. I’d been helpful, and she later found this and sent it to me, saying it describes what I had done with her. I offer this with zero knowledge of Martha Beck and little knowledge of Oprah Winfrey, just because this item made sense in the context.
Good point. Now that I think about it, what often happens is holding the box out to them, and they pull a tissue from it, rather than taking the box. Though, they could choose to do do either.
I usually do the bit with holding out/offering a box of tissues and asking if they would like one. Then follow the crying person’s response. After which I ask if they would like company or prefer to be alone, then follow that response. It seems to have worked well so far.
When I’m in grief about something, I interpret someone handing me a box of tissues as “I can’t do much to help, but I’m trying to do what I can”. That’s not a bad thing.
Whoever decided that it is “telling them to stop crying” is completely full of crap and needs to stop being offended at every possible moment of their lives. It’s a small offer of compassion - nothing more, nothing less. Interpreting an act like that so negatively isn’t healthy.
Crying is an occupational hazard for me, I keep some tissues handy for meetings I suspect might be emotionally difficult for some participants. When the crying starts, I move the tissues closer and say, “Here’s some tissues if you need one.” Depending on why we’re meeting, I’ll ask them if they need to take a break if the crying gets to be too much.
That strikes me as nonsense. I always took it as (aside from the practical aspect) telling them it was OK to be crying. People often cry in these circumstances, it’s perfectly normal, that’s why we keep this box of tissues around!
Or, if you’re just in someone’s house, what Chronos said. And again with the implication that it’s fine to be crying. Why else would you need multiple tissues, if not because you’re likely to continue crying? Why would anybody offer you multiple tissues, if they weren’t OK with that? (Unless, I suppose, they toss the box at you and leave the room.)
I’ve had someone hand me a box of tissues, and that’s approximately how i interpreted it. I mean, they didn’t actually shove the box into my hand, they grabbed a box of tissues and handed it towards me, leaving it within reach on the table. Anyway, I appreciated it. I needed a tissue and they helped me.
I agree that taking a tissue for your own eyes, when you aren’t crying, would just be weird. That feels more judgemental, honestly. “Look, i have to tell you it’s allowed to wipe your eyes.”
It was mentioned upthread that this is all highly highly situational and I absolutely agree.
As a very general rule I think handing the box (rather than placing it within reach) creates a very small obligation to respond: to either accept the box or wave it off.
Sometimes it’s best to remain quietly present and to avoid interrupting, even a little bit.
I agree with you both that it’s highly situational, and that holding a box suspended in air near the person’s hand would be a little awkward. But in my vernacular, taking a box and putting it with reach of the person’s hand would be described as “handing them a box of tissues”.
Me too. It would never occur to me, as either the giver or the receiver of a box of tissues, that it meant “stop crying.” If anything, the message it sends is, “Here, use as many tissues as you need,” which is almost the opposite of “Stop crying.”