Over-familiarity should breed contempt

In an earlier post ‘What do they think?‘, I highlighted the way that too many people (in enough settings of life to be bothered about) speak to their disabled customers, service users or patients using that SLIGHTLY SLOWER, sing-song, over-enunciated voice style that presents no doubt that they can only think of the person as a sad child requiring every sentence to be almost sung nursery-rhyme like to be understood. Read the post if you’re interested.

 

Here though, I wanted to explore another perhaps less obvious way that disabled people get talked down to which I find at once fascinating and creepy. It is the adoption of a gushing, over-affirming and too positive (to be believable) manner that while generally unconvincing, when applied skilfully,  can catch you unawares if you’re not careful.

 

I guess some people behave in this way benignly because they have some limited understanding of the negative attitudes that others exhibit towards disabled people and don’t want to seem patronising or to be associated with that sing-song voice. So they react and go positive - swinging too far though. It is well-intentioned  albeit misguided and distancing.

 

Others (including too many well-trained/aware care industry professionals at all levels) use it as a manipulative technique that they think makes them appear to be highly skilled in communicating with disabled people and trustworthy. I find it hard to hear it other than masking a deep discomfort simply because real people don’t talk like that to each other.

 

They  use a tone of voice that conveys an over-effusive,  gushing false sincerity  and claim a level of familiarity   and personal interest which is far more than  the nature of the relationship warrants.

 

Its components include gushing over-affirmations of actions, ideas and experience, giving too much praise where it is not due; Jokes are indulged  more than is appropriate, mere wordplays might receive hoots of laughter;  disabled people are always to be agreed with (to their faces). 

 

This reluctance to challenge, argue or  explore further does not afford the respect of understanding more, being tested, challenged or disagreed with. If all you get is  a gushing “thank you”, “that’s really helpful”, or “that’s a really important point” even where it is neither of those things, where do you go with it. 

 

Normal conversation would question, explore, to and fro, challenge, argue, come to an agreement, or agree to disagree, stay embattled or whatever. However disabled people and others , particularly when in ‘service user’ relationships with professionals are not afforded the respect of such conversations.

 

I loathe this behaviour and the people who practice it because  it is dishonest and manipulative, often using professional power to attempt to force the illusion of respect, trust-worthiness and closeness but without any investment in, or desire for  them. over-affirmation is a very hard thing to spot if it is all people receive, or is experienced only in contrast with more obvious patronisation.

 

Disabled people are variously used to being ignored completely, treated like children or told that everything they say is amazing. These are all ways to maintain disabled people’s position at the edges and consequently avoidant of ‘real’ authentic ‘normal’ contact.