To wonder why people are so scared

[MattCauthon]

I've noticed recently, in RL and on here and in other SM, that there are a lot of people who get very upset/scared about things that I think are just not rational. I'm not talking about people who have anxiety issues or even who have been endlessly abused/controlled by a partner/parent etc which has led to them being unable to see the wood for the trees.

But a few examples:

complicated boring backstory but woman was being harassed and threatened by the father of a child in her kid's class, and she works at the school. She is now terrified that she will be fired becaus of this other dad (very very clear that she has done nothing wrong, and this other dad has been in public arguments with other people in the past so has a long history at the school of poor behaviour).

The endless hysteria about children being kidnapped when it's actually extraordinarily rare.

Passport photo signing or witnessing legal documents - I've lost count of the people who can't seem to find anyone to do this because people are scard to put their name to these sorts of things. I've done about 20 passport photos for various friends/school parent families because I am fully aware that there's no personal risk to me when I say, "yes, that's the child I've known for five years as John Smith who has been in the same class as my child since reception" or "yes, I have witnessed these two people signing this document."

A friend who is too scared to tell the school about her DH's anxiety issues, even though it directly impacts their child and he's been playing up a little in class and frankly, needs a bit more support. She is scared the school will "do something". But I can't work out what? She's a great parent who is doing her best to support her DC and her DH, her DH is seeking appropriate medical treatment etc.

When did we lose so much trust in each other and every organisation in the world?

Some people have lost their sense of proportion as evident during Covid.

However Covid’s also demonstrated that many many of us most certainly had not lost their sense of proportion.

They can be no sweeping statements on this issje

What a silly overblown thread

Lots of people have refused to witness a document for the OP

Now that sounds like a thread I’d like to hear more about!

Look, OP, this is Mn, which is frequented by a disproportionate number of peiole who struggle socially, and often in other areas of life, too. These are the people who comment on a particularly batshit AIBU ‘And this is why I will never bother with friends’, who prefer never to leave the house, who see ‘cliques’ and ‘exclusion’ and ‘drama’ everywhere, and who regard a wedding invitation as an act of war.

So of course they think everyone’s out to get them/scam them/bully them/remove their children. (And in fact, as in some cases they sound incredibly vulnerable, unused to relationships etc , they are possibly not wrong.)

I've read some stuff which suggests that being chronically online can exacerbate anxiety disorders and OCD - I don't think it's far-fetched to think that at least some of the things you see online aren't the result of quite a healthy mindset.

As far as I can see this is an OP who has lost count of the number of times that people in her life have refused to witness her document

so I’d say the issue lies with the Op!

And it may well be a sort of effect where a high proportion of the posts made online (70%? More?) are being made by a small number of posters (10-20%?) and then compunded by the fact that 10-20% of the people who use mumsnet or FB will themselves be an even smaller proportion of the population because not every person in the world actually posts on social media or internet forums.

This gives a skewed sense of what the "norm" is because it could be that 5% of the world population is making 70% of the posts online - and those 5% could be vastly more anxious/asocial than average.

No, you’ve misread. She only mentions one neighbour who refused to witness a document of hers.

I think I said something like "lost count of number of times I've heard of someone refusing..." (which I admitted was a bit of hyperbole, also, frankly, I didn't carry on counting past about 3)!

It's only happened once to me, but I've read a lot of people on MN saying it. Or posters who are trying to get passport photos signed but even when they ask people they say no. And I've signed a few passport photos for people where the mum has mentioned they've struggled to find someone able/willing to do it.

I think @BertieBotts is right on the online stuff - both proportionately and also exacerbating. I know that SIL's naturally poor risk assessment processes are made worse by what she reads online and local facebook community groups are the worst as of course, that punch up in the town centre on a saturday night was ALWAYS happening but now we all know about it, followed by endless comments like, "our town is being destroyed" and "it's too dangerous to go for an ice cream" wherease really, it's just a bog standard commuter town outside of London!

The OP I've lost count of the people who can't seem to find anyone to do this because people are scard to put their name to these sorts of things.

also The OP Perhaps a little hyperbole in terms of quite how frequent! 🤣🤣.
But its frequently yes, nonetheless.

and now the OP it’s happened to me once

🤭

So it’s happened to you once
but you’ve been aware countless times of others refusing

weird

but I've read a lot of people on MN saying it.

lemme guess

once?

Totally reasonable. You are clearly signing just to witness another's signature.
our neighbours and us do it for each other regularly.

I've lost count was referring to people I've HEARD of having this issue. I never said I'd lost count of how many times it's happened to me personally.

And on MN, many times. On this thread alone there are at least 2 or 3 people who have said they wouldn't sign unless they'd read the entire document and were 100% happy with it!

You must go around pursuing this on mumsnet to have “lost count”

😆

Me neither

2-3 on this thread?

The only one I can see says that IF asked, not that it had happened and prefaces it very reasonably with If my NDN then asks me and another neighbour to sign as witnesses (even including watching her Mum sign), then I wouldn't want to sign something that could cause contention and/or possibly be fraudulent.

This isn't a far fetched scenario either, it happened in my family.

On this thread:

RecordBreakers: I wouldn't sign a legal document without knowing what was in it either. Sounds very sensible to me, not 'fearful' at all.

Sterlingrose: How the fuck is that unreasonable? Do you routinely go around signing legal documents you haven't read?

Didkyle: I don’t wish to put my name to anything, even if there’s no onus on me to have read said document, unless I read through it very carefully.

Pincklop: It would be very irresponsible of you to sign anything without proper information. It might be nothing but if it’s nothing then why do you need to sign. I like that you take your profession seriously!

Lemonandoragecheesecake: If anything, it's using common sense to want to do this first. I'd never sign anything without checking the contents, as I could be signing something that could be potentially fraudulent.

That's actually 5 people. On this relatively short thread. I haven't had to go "pursuing" this at all.

yes - but you said people that had actually been refused by someone or who had refused

These are people saying what they would do!

What? My OP said I think people are weird about risk assessments and refusign to do simple things like witness legal documents - the example I used was people saying they'd been rejected when theyd' asked people to sign as witnesses.

Lots of people on my own thread have said they won't witness legal documents, even as others have pointed out that they are not legally tied to the contents of that document. So frankly, I think my point is proven - lots of people don't understand where certain risks sit. Including this particular example.

I never understand on MN when a poster asks a general question and other posters start getting very worked up about specific elements of the question or the comment. Just say if you agree/disagree and move on.

The examples are posters say what they would do in theory

you were making out you’d lost count of times when people had refused or been refused!

So frankly, I think my point is proven - lots of people don't understand where certain risks sit.

I am senior in financial services and registered as a Key Person. I know there wouldn’t be any fall out upon me re something I’d witnessed but I simply don’t want to put my name against anything that, for example I might not agree with or indeed - I don’t like or trust the person asking me.

It is not fear. It is ingrained in me as someone signing off reports and decisions on behalf of the business that my name means something to me.

You think your point is “proven” by a handful of mumsnetters, such as myself, saying that we would not witness without reading NOTHING because of fear but because of professionalism or just a desire to know they weren’t aiding something that they didn’t actually want to happen!

There was another post on this thread with the same attitude and reasoning. I didn't inlcude that one in my list earlier becuase that person is making a decision for their own ethical reasons and that's their right and I have no problem with that.

Let's just agree that you don't think people are scared or you think they have the right to feel nervous, and I don't. I'm okay with that. I can disagree with peopel I know in real life and actually care about, so I can definitely happily agree to disagree with people on the internet.

Some people do
Some people don’t

but you went along the lines of “everyone ” and “every organisation”, which is patently daft 😆