|
|
Post by disorganizeddragon on Dec 3, 2009 9:03:47 GMT -5
I've read very carefully back thru all of the postings on this thread. I can't find one in which I believe someone is purposely trying to be hurtful about this woman personally. In fact, many of them discuss how upsetting it is to watch this woman and her children not get the help she--and they--so desperately need. This episode was very disturbing to many different people for many different reasons. It was extremely polarizing--just as A&E intended it to be--and I think people often either felt for the mom or for the kids, depending on who you most closely related to. My heart went out to the kids: the oldest daughter, who so obviously loved her mother and wanted to take care of her, but who was also near the end of her rope due to her mom's behavior (which, unfortunately, is probably the result of some type of untreated mental illness, brain injury, etc.), and the younger son who had learned to deal with the situation in the way that was best for him--by literally moving to the other side of the country. It was heartbreaking to see these children in such pain, even though they expressed it in very different ways. When people are disturbed or moved by a powerful situation such as this one, they express their feelings in different ways. As long as no one is intentionally trying to hurt another, those differences in expression should be encouraged. We often learn the most from those who have different views on the same standpoint. That's why our forefathers were brilliant enough to protect freedom of speech in the First Amendment. How different would our society be if those with opposing opinions or a different way of expressing themselves had never been allowed to speak at all? Heck, over 90% of this board would probably still not be able to vote  . Again, as long as no one is intentionally being hurtful, all contributions to a discussion should be welcomed. I believe all of us are wise enough to know the difference between someone simply speaking their mind and expressing strong feelings and someone who's trying to be hurtful and mean-spirited. And I don't believe anyone on this thread intends to be hurtful to anyone. Augustine and her children are definitely in my prayers. I hope the aftercare provides some of the emotional healing this shattered family so desperately needs. |
|
|
|
Post by serenitynow on Dec 3, 2009 10:00:48 GMT -5
Oh no..here it comes..another "discussion"
I hear what you're saying, Lioness. I agree I did push the limit with the faces and for that reason I will see if I can remove them.
As for using the word disgust, I was talking about her displayed behavior - as shown towards her children and the crew. As far as I could see, she was effectively slamming them with passive aggressive behavior and was very ungrateful to those who went beyond the call of duty to help her..more than once. It's one thing not to be grateful but another entirely to sit back comfortably munching on food and complain afterward! From subsequent posts by her son, it appears to be an embedded part of her character.
When someone refuses to take any responsibility whatsoever for their actions..indeed going so far as to fake an ailment(as actually admitted to her son) when confronted if she can't snap back a reply such as " He stayed at sisters because of lack of air conditioning" and is self aware enough to zap her daughter with "being angry" and shows no horror at crushed cats in her home..first she didn't know she had them, then they must have gone under something (it's THEIR fault!) -then yes I am disgusted. Not at her mess. As I'm disgusted with sociopaths and other abusers regardless of why they became that way. I'm unhappy when someone showed self care but didn't extend it outside herself. To me these are choices. My response is in direct reaction to HER responses- not one but all of them.
The crew, her son and the therapist were amazingly even tempered I thought.They almost treated her in a bemused tsk tsk way.
I'm very sensitive towards others, more so to them then myself as I've been told many times. But I don't mollycoddle those who, though severely depressed, still see fit to bite the hands that feed them.
This is my opinion only and I respectfully disagree with some on this. This board is a safe place to those who come seeking help.
serenitynow
|
|
|
|
Post by sporadic on Dec 3, 2009 10:35:06 GMT -5
Although we are seeing the same person's story on TV, we have completely different viewpoints. Yes, she lives in horrid squalor - we agree on that. I do not blame this lady for it or blame her for being layzee and uncaring - I blame her mental condition. I sincerely believe this woman is incapable of caring for herself and does not have the ability to show proper, normal appreciation or emotion. I find her disease disgusting, not her. I'm sure if she had a choice, she would not choose to live with squalor and/or a mental illness. It's obvious that although her children care what happens to her, they are at the end of their ropes. Perhaps her disabling mental issues are too difficult for proper understanding without more thorough psychiatric intervention. I am sad that A&E chose to highlight this woman on their show. If, in fact, Augustine is a true hoarder that was not edited in an appropriate way to show her reactions, then I feel A&E has done nothing but chase ratings & advertising dollars. It was interesting to read Jasons (Augustines son) comments on the situation. He said that his Mom was living with his father, who dumped her when she found out she was pregnant. His mom was very careful about her appearance well into her 50s. She was a hard worker, working 7 days a week mowing lawns. She admitted that her "groaning sounds were an affectation" and consistently blames others for her problems. She apparently was always like that and had really come down very hard on his sister about a lost paper which his sister later found in the bathroom. Susan was furious and wanted to confront her mom then and there but the crew made her wait until they got the cameras! Her mom then went so far as to say there must have been 2 copies of this paper! People are very sympathetic to him and his sister. The show is paying to fix her home and to get her help. He gives it about a 30% chance. I guess my point is that Augustine is not the kind of person to write to this board about help and support. And what was said here is consistent with his views of his mom. He also addresses the issue of hoarding, insisting that his mom is indeed a hoarder. I can see your point about treating people with dignity, however this mother showed minimal appreciation for all done for her (her son raves about the helpers, saying he still tears up thinking about them) and I don't feel it's remiss to comment about what was blatantly and repetitively apparent on the show. Hoarders come in all shapes and sizes and our board has been very caring to those who open up here and share their stories. I wonder,though, how we would respond if someone wrote ," My place is stage 5 squalor and recently a crew of workers shoveled it out. I let them do it and sat on the porch eating and watching while they worked their butts off. My son was removed from the house and was raised by my daughter. They have helped clean and the state has been called in. Flattened dead cats have been discovered. None of this is my doing. The men from Got Junk pitched in their own money to buy me a new chair but it wasn't a recliner. I wish the organizer would quit telling me to express my thanks." Misc, what do you think? serenitynow, respecting others opinions |
|
|
|
Post by serenitynow on Dec 3, 2009 10:51:05 GMT -5
Hi sporatic,
I don't blame this poor woman for being a hoarder, lazee, or uncaring (severely depressed) either. But I do take exception to how she CONSISTENTLY treats others and the long term ramifications on her family, surrounding neighbors, authorities, and poor trapped creatures.
I agree that no one would choose squalor or mental illness and that she is incapable of showing normal emotion. But she is self aware to the point of being able to deflect criticism onto others. There is choice THERE as her children who've dealt with her for decades attest. That's all I meant.
And I do think A&E deliberately played this, as DD said, to get a reaction from viewers and hence more ratings.
serenitynow
|
|
|
|
Post by howardsgirlfriend on Dec 3, 2009 10:51:20 GMT -5
Regarding the discussion on word choice: I always appreciate reminders that not everyone will interpret what I say in exactly the same way, so to be considerate of others while still making my point, I need to choose my words carefully. I expect that many of us have been hurt by remarks from others, even remarks uttered with good intentions.
There's a big difference between "I was disgusted by her behavior," "Her behavior disgusted me," "Her behavior is disgusting," and "She is disgusting." If I were saying any of these phrases, I would understand this distinction, but if someone were describing ME with these phrases, I'm not sure I could keep my emotions under control long enough to hear it.
I'm presently trying to watch my language with my sensitive DH, because I learned that some of my benign choice of pronouns hurts him on a visceral level. Should he be that sensitive? No. But he is, and I possess the skills necessary to accommodate this Achille's heel.
|
|
|
|
Post by disorganizeddragon on Dec 3, 2009 11:32:04 GMT -5
To be honest, no matter what you say or how politically correct your wording may be, you may either hurt someone's feelings or make someone angry. That's life. If I have done my best to be diplomatic and express my thoughts in a kind and caring way, that's all I can do.
Here's an example: I live in a neighborhood with a lot of drug addicts, many of whom are homeless. One man lives in an abandoned house behind my apartment complex and whenever I see him, we always speak. Since he refuses to get clean and go to a shelter, I have bought him food on numerous occasions and last winter, several of us chipped in to buy him a coat.
However, how he reacts to you on any given day is a complete unknown. I always say the same thing: "How are you doing today, Mr. _________?" Some days, he's lucid and we'll have a nice conversation. Some days the exact same sentence will bring on an angry tirade about the CIA and the FBI or some cryptic comment about how aliens are trying to steal his eyebrows. I never know how he will think or feel at any given moment. And that's the point.
We are only responsible for our own thoughts and actions. This idea that we can--or should--be responsible for the thoughts and actions of others is ridiculous. I don't need or want that kind of control over another person. All I can do is express myself and my opinions in civil and honest manner and allow other people to do the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by paperpiler on Dec 3, 2009 13:39:07 GMT -5
Thank you, Lioness. You know my feelings on this. I was horrified by some of the comments I read here about last season's participants. WE are THEM. If we dissect anyone else's problems, especially based upon what we see in snippets in a one-hour show which is geared toward gaining viewers through compelling programming, then we shouldn't be angry at all when people make rude, arrogant comments about any of us.
We're all in the same boat, regardless of whether it's a canoe or a yacht. None of us is a "better" hoarder than anyone else. WE are THEM--like it or not. If we're analyzing anybody, that somebody we're analyzing should be ourselves, what makes us this way, and how we as individuals can remedy our own problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by CourageouslyLion SeeksSerenity on Dec 3, 2009 14:48:44 GMT -5
- Serenitynow, I appreciate that you voluntarily edited your post at the top of page three of this thread. The sting is less now. I feel thankful for your efforts.  - |
|
|
|
Post by moonglow on Dec 3, 2009 14:52:41 GMT -5
Have lost posts here twice  will try again. I am not as good as others at sounding non-confrontational so if my words offend - please accept my apology. This is not directed at any person or persons specifically, just a general observation. My comments are not meant to try to censor or shut down discussion as I believe the things that make this community work are discussion, self-introspection, support and action. As Lioness stated, we are looking at one hour heavily edited from many hours of shooting. The very nature of it is misleading, and it is easy to create assumptions about what we are seeing that don't necessarily extend to anyone's reality. I think Lioness also alluded to the idea that, in this and future episodes of this series, it is quite likely that one or more of the featured guests have been here and lurked, joined, and/or posted. Some might say - they went on national TV, they have opened themselves up to discussion and criticism. But we do not know what drove them to make that decision. They may have viewed it as their last and only hope. They may have a myriad of other reasons. We - too - post openly on a world-wide forum. Yet we all try very hard to show kindness, caring and support to one another. I would suggest that in discussing further episodes, we comment as if we know for certain that the "hoarder o'the week" is reading what we post; as if we know for certain, that he/she is one of us; and as if we know for certain that there are members here who share something in common with that person. |
|
|
|
Post by Chrysoprase on Dec 3, 2009 18:19:04 GMT -5
Over a year ago there was a documentary on the BBC entitled "How Mad Are You?". The premise of it was they took a group of ten people, half of whom had mental illnesses and over the course of several days, three experts whose jobs it is to diagnose mental illness, observed the group as they performed a variety of tasks. The experts were first asked to name the one person of the group they were convinced didn't have a mental illess. They got it wrong. Then knowing that she had mental health issues they tried two more times, on subsequent episodes to guess what she had from observing her. They got it wrong. Of the group of ten people they correctly diagnosed two of them, and that was only due to these people being put into situations which directly triggered their conditions. They incorrectly labelled two of the 'healthy' people with mental illnesses, one of whom they thought was schizophrenic and the other they thought suffered from depression. Over the proccess of the programme time after time these experts were wrong. I found the whole programme utterly fascinating. www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2008/nov/19/how-mad-are-you-mental-health has a link to a review on the programme. So a group of trained experts are unable to correctly diagnose mental illnesses from observing hours of unedited footage of people put through psychological exams. I would say that we have even less of a chance than they do of being accurate in armchair diagnosing people on tv. Especially when it's just an hours worth of footage, edited for the most shocking parts of it. There's so much you don't see. I would holds as true for whether or not she was a hoarder just as it does for what condition she might have suffered from. |
|
|
|
Post by disorganizeddragon on Dec 3, 2009 18:44:31 GMT -5
Totally off-topic. . . I think it's so intriguing that certain English words or expressions can have utterly different meanings in the UK than they do in the States. An American show entitled "How Mad Are You?" would probably be about road rage or other anger-related issues, but yet in the UK it's about mental illness. We all speak English, but it's definitely not the same language. So fascinating. . .  The show also sounds very interesting. I'm sure it won't be long until some American company, channel, or network jumps on the idea. It seems as if so many of the popular shows in the US have been copies of something that originally aired in the UK. Thank goodness for the creative people across the pond or we might not get as many entertaining new shows. |
|
|
|
Post by Peach on Dec 3, 2009 18:54:30 GMT -5
So a group of trained experts are unable to correctly diagnose mental illnesses from observing hours of unedited footage of people put through psychological exams. I would say that we have even less of a chance than they do of being accurate in armchair diagnosing people on tv. Especially when it's just an hours worth of footage, edited for the most shocking parts of it. There's so much you don't see. I would holds as true for whether or not she was a hoarder just as it does for what condition she might have suffered from. I no longer watch A&E's Hoarders but finally succumbed to reading this thread out of curiosity after reading a couple posts via 10 most recent posts. I agree with the above quote. Why are SooS members wasting valuable time diagnosing this lady based on a few sensationalized minutes of her life? I offer this Dec. 1 article from The Washington Post concerning the exploitation of mentally unstable people by the media in which A&E Hoarders is mentioned. Please note the following statement from a psychologist: "I call them 'disposable people' because they're used to get ratings and commercials and then discarded," says Huysman, who has treated dozens of former reality-show participants and consulted with producers about their pre- and post-screening methods. "They're easy to manipulate and coerce." www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/30/AR2009113004267_2.html?nav=rss_email/components&sid=ST2009113003525By extension, this SooS board discussion is catering to the ratings industry. Please return to your own lives and stop focusing on analyzing made-for-TV characters. Sorry if this offends anyone but I felt a reality check was in order. The manner in which these people appear on TV is not "real". All efforts to analyze them are futile. |
|
|
|
Post by gini on Dec 3, 2009 21:57:11 GMT -5
Why can't Hoarders be on 10 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 2 years?
Then I could watch someone make a step-by-step, one-insight-at-a-time, realistic journey out of squalor.
It would be fascinating.
To me.
Audience base of 1.
It's a weekly show.
We know it will over-dramatize, exaggerate, cut corners, etc. to squeeze that great big, messy, complex story into one hour.
Augustine stirred up negative reactions from us because of her seeming callousness about the deaths of her pets.
Her seeming lack of anxiety with strangers removing her stuff.
Her seeming resentment towards her daughter.
Her seeming indifference to her son.
Her seeming lack of gratitude about the new chair.
We look for the signs of common human emotions to help us relate to Augustine.
But she came across as flat and robotic, and so it's very hard to bond with her.
You know that if Augustine joined SOOS she would be welcomed and supported, and we wouldn't judge her at all.
But to be here at SOOS means that one day you said 'Enough'.
That one day you drew a line in the sand.
That one day you reached out for help.
And that now EVERYDAY you fight the good fight against your squalor.
Augustine is not at that point.
I am grateful to Hoarder's, for all its faults.
Because it opened my eyes to my squalorous tendencies.
Because it made me want to know more.
Because it led me here to all of you.
gini
|
|
|
|
Post by moggyfan on Dec 3, 2009 22:24:33 GMT -5
Amen, Peach.
|
|
|
|
Post by success19 on Dec 3, 2009 22:30:44 GMT -5
I missed it - will have to see if it repeats this weekend or something - one of those kind of weeks.
|
|
