A dichotmous role arises when it comes to helping someone with this deficit. You have to both push them to make decisions for themselves and you also have to enforce the consequences if and when things don't work. In the end, this is about the person learning, for themselves, how to predict the future. You can tell them but, in very few instances, will they actually learn in those scenarios. That's because we learn by doing. And we definitely learn a lot when, after the doing, we experience pain.
Now I'm not talking about letting people enter into risks situations where they may get hurt. Most of the time we are talking about emotional pain anyway. Of course, you want to protect others when the ramifications are severe. So keep two things in mind. There are instances when you will need to argue what the results of an action or inaction may be. But, in the vast majority of cases, the stakes are not that high nor is the time pressing. You have the ability to push them into making decisions and even asking them to tell you the logic of why they feel a certain way. In those instances, you are welcome to correct them, especially if they downplay what their responsibility is. If a person orders a meal in a restaurant and says they can send it back if they don't like it, yes, they are within their right to do that. However, there is a chasm of difference between the rare instance when a chef messes up and the common occurrence of a picky eating not liking some nuance of a dish they could plainly know ahead of time. Make them eat the food and learn.
|Do I have Discretion?|
|Am I Good?|