Racial attitudes towards Asian-Americans in Seattle

The underlying attitudes towards persons racially identifiable as "Asian" are expressed in, indirectly and sometimes directly, behaviors that express disdain and disrespect, especially, perhaps surprisingly, among lower socio-economic groups, including--and most virulently--other racial minorities.

Now that it is unacceptable to openly express reservations about African-American culture or to criticize individuals [a black person], without being very careful, it is still acceptable to treat poorly Asians and Asian-Americans.  One of the reasons being the generalized passivity of the latter.

I have personally observed this kind of situation at the downtown YMCA, Seattle Public Library, in Section 8 housing, supermarkets (such as Metropolitan Market) or department stores (Target, Nordstrom, etc.).  This may not happen all the time but often enough to make me wince...

Sometimes it is even Asians looking down or treating other Asians with disrespect or even contempt.

The components of hate: A preliminary analysis

My recipe based on what I have observed of myself and others



Hate =


rage + resentment +/- sense of injustice + a desire to destroy + pain + the inability to tolerate pain + blame +/- self-righteousness


Would love, then, be the opposite or +/- several of the attributes above?


Is hate the root of (all) violence?

review of Sound Mental Health in Seattle

A stupid system produces stupid people.

* * * * *

Seattle does have a burgeoning population of mentally ill and homeless people, but that does not excuse Sound Mental Health, which receives public money, for its egregiously poor management.

(1)  Despite the good intentions of its therapists, the administration, as one clinical psychologist on its staff confided in me, is bureaucratic, self-serving, and, in reality, much more interested in spreadsheets and high-level meetings than in the well-being of clients with whom, besides, they have no contact.  

I was virtually dropped as a client for twelve months, during which time Sound Mental Health was ostensibly looking for a replacement for a therapist about whose actual competence I was having serious doubts and who, obviously, enjoyed the favor of TB (top brass).

(2) The waiting room is like an insane asylum for the homeless, making Van Gogh's "Billiard Parlor at Night," by comparison, a vision of paradise.  The chairs are of the cheapest possible kind and the physical space is cramped.  I wasn't expecting the Pottery Barn, but the colors of the furnishings are garish and have the intended/unintended effect of
inducing nausea and a general malaise.

They might as well have asbestos in the walls, so toxic is the atmosphere to any sense of caring or well-being.  It won't be long, probably, before they have a bullet-proof window at Reception, although they do have a security guard (armed?) sitting behind the glass.

The receptionists seemed unconcerned about my discomfort in the waiting room.  They were not particularly busy.  They did not tell me that there was another place to wait (upstairs).  They did not try to contact my therapist to see if he was aware of my appointment.  Later the same therapist confessed that he was doing something else and had lost track of the time!

A little bit of imagination, real concern, and a real will to problem solve was evident in the conduct of the receptionists.  Being polite but "just doing their job"--and not being pro-active--was their response to my dilemma.

I take this is how they treat clients, in general.  With people like this you sense that they do not see their job as one of actually helping people.   They just do things perfunctorily.  "It's just a job" for them, right?  

If you arrive early and your therapist is late, as happened to me, you may have to spend what seems like an eternity in purgatory in the tiny waiting area.

One receptionist, a young Asian-American woman, suggested that I  step outside, where it was raining heavily and the wind was roaring at 40 mph, and wait there instead.  There had been a semi-psychotic individual or two standing on the steps half an hour earlier when I arrived at SMH.

If you don't like taking Metro buses (think Rapidride E to Aurora Village) because of the low-life behaviors and incivility, don't go to Sound Mental on Olive Way.  The annex on Broadway and Jefferson, for example, will jangle your nerves far less.

If you weren't a druggie, or either schizo or depressed, before going here, you will be after you go here...if you don't fall in those categories, you might very well be better off getting some decent self-help CD's, a good friend (not a Facebook or a Yelp "friend")--one who knows how to listen, the latter, albeit, a rare skill--, and doing yoga, or meditating.

Pet therapy, if not exactly an ideal replacement in and of itself, probably is more effective.

There are too many people in that situation now in Seattle for anyone, really, to be terribly concerned, most of all by the administration of Sound Mental Health, which must be aware of the mismanagement but choose to place its priorities elsewhere.

For this review I will undoubtedly never receive services again here despite denials to the contrary.

Their "Client Bill of Rights" framed like the Declaration of Independence and posted on the wall looks very nice.  But it's stuck there with a lot of red tape.

If SMH were honest, it would read as follows: "We do not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, gender...only between those who post reviews that excoriate the top brass and those who keep silent."

In the best of worlds, a philanthropist would establish a parallel SMH and siphon off the well-intentioned therapists, leaving the TB to stand in their own Seattle-sized puddle.

The top sets the example, and I am surprised, but on after-thought, not surprised that no one has blown the whistle on SMH.   No one dares.  No one knows.  No one cares (?).

The vast majority of therapists, called "clinicians" here, are in training and obviously want good recommendations once they move on.

Has anyone ever tried to interview the top brass to ask some hard questions of what goes on and who evaluates and how they do it?  How is client progress, or lack thereof, measured?

It is obvious they don't care whether the client stays or goes elsewhere:  it's all the same to them.

w

Review update of Seattle Veterinary Specialists

I received the results of the biopsy eight days after the CT and rhinoscopy were conducted, directly from the veterinarian specialist at SVS.

He stated that the rhinoscopy was useful in ruling out a fungal infection.  The CT alone had indicated a cancerous tumor.

In an earlier conversation, the specialist had candidly told me that the chance of the mass in my cat's nose being a fungal infection was less than 4%.

Doing the rhinoscopy was useful in determining which of the two cancers my cat had.  But even then, because my cat lost so much blood and because the tissue collected in the two biopsies was necrotic (dead), they could not even do that!   No, I was not going to let them take biopsies all over again...

Do your homework, as SVS does not provide more than the most minimal information about the necessity, practicality, or goal of its testing, which, from what I can tell, is the raison d'etre of SVS.

Rather like the doctors in the Pulitzer-Prize winning play, "Wit" by Margaret Edson.  They like their testing.  More than the animals.

One thought

Hold me in your heart, Ella,

as I you in mine.

Why the latest White House crisis is a really big deal" Stephen Collinson Profile By Stephen Collinson, CNN Tue May 16, 2017

It's even possible that lives could be at risk, considering that the information Trump reportedly shared was related to an ISIS terror plot against civil aviation -- currently the most urgent terrorist threat to the United States -- and emanated from a sensitive intelligence sharing agreement with a foreign agency.


...

Lawmakers and intelligence officials are already warning that disclosing this type of information could harm US efforts to counter an ISIS plot to place explosives in laptops and other electronic devices to evade airport security.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/16/politics/trump-russia-analysis/index.html

Glazunov, "Reverie Orientale"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ_7FrnDezs

Commie in the 1950's, racist in the 21st century

In the 1950's, the term of opprobrium was "commie."  To call a person, or to insinuate, a person was a "commie" was to effectively smear the person and cast  grave doubts about the character and integrity of the same, if not end the career and cause the person to be socially ostracized.

In the 21st century, the hot button word is "racist," and it is almost always applied to Caucasians and rarely people "of color."

The problem is that "racist" means different things to different people, and that many if not most liberals simply use the label to simply mean that they do not think that the action(s) or words that another person uses are "fair" to African-Americans.  These same people usually emphatically disagree with what you even if, objectively speaking (and if have you provide empirical evidence as well as personal experience to boot), you have said nothing that would indicate or necessarily imply that one believes all or even most individuals of a certain category possess certain non-physical traits based on their race.

There is always "a good guy" and "a bad guy," a "cowboy" and an "Indian" in the American mythology.

You cannot have a rational or open [public] conversation about race in America.  Or at least only with great difficulty. And liberals are as much to blame for this as conservatives, if not much.  Their minds are made up.  And closed.

"You're either for us, or against us."

What's going on on American campuses?

"That's emblematic of what's going on, on campuses; this kind of Manichaean split... I'm generalizing here, but the purpose of universities for large numbers of faculty is social justice — not search for truth."

That means "allowing marginalized people to have their proper place in the world and bringing down those who do the oppression," he [Charles Murray] said.

Charles Murray. author of "The Bell Curve"

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/education/2017/05/03/bell-curve-author-charles-murray-speech-protests-m-not-ann-coulter/101253106/

The power that African-Americans hold over white Americans

On peut parfois et meme souvent se connecter a la realite sous les apparences sociales et historiques.  C'est pas du surrealisme.

still from Hitchcock's "Rebecca" with Judith Anderson (left) and Olivia DeHavilland (right)//df


Le poids de l'histoire effectivement pese si lourdement.   Le ressentiment de coupabilite se cache bien et hante non seulement des individus mais peut-etre aussi egalement des races entieres.  Difficile a enlever ce poids quand elles s'y attachement si vigoureusement et que l'autre ne veulent pas bien s'arreter a y exercer ce pouvoir si magique, si remarquable.

La chretiennete y joue pour beaucoup beaucoup.

# # #

Des chats + La Grece

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh_n17IB32Y

Who's Afraid of the Millennial Generation?

Although I do hesitate giving a business five stars--I'm not American enough--and certainly not a Yelp millennial--, to lapse into the refreshing reuse of "Wow!!! Effin' awesome!," thereby jumping on the generational bandwagon (of hyperbole), unless I am highly satisfied in every aspect--, I decided to give a full endorsement to Urban Animal. 

Why? Because by comparison with some truly bad experiences (Cat Clinic of Seattle and Queen Anne Animal Clinic) in the past eight years, they have earned my trust and appreciation.

I found out of the existence of the downtown location by talking over the phone with a staff person at the Capitol Hill location. She really listened attentively and caringly. And she gave informed answers.

This was the opposite of the treatment I received at the Cat Clinic of Seattle, where within one minute, the horrible older fat Caucasian woman would say in a nasty tone of voice, "Bring him [your cat] in at once," and then practically hanging up the phone. Another time, that same individual treated me openly with contempt when I came in one Saturday--when there was nothing "going on"--to get an invoice. People, including minorities like myself, don't forget about things (barely disguised racism) like that.

My cat had been making rasping, rattling sounds that I had mistaken for idiosyncratic snoring on her part.

When I finally took my cat to the downtown clinic, I was treated well, with kindness and politeness. The possible plans for treatment were laid out clearly, and there was no "hard sell" whatsoever.

Unlike the Queen Anne Animal Clinic, where I was led to believe that I could put my 16-year-old cat under anesthesia to clean his teeth, at Urban Animal I was given sound, practical, honest advice.

In the end, the conservative approach--giving my cat a round of antibiotics in case my cat's congenital upper respiratory approach had flared up--seems to work. No invasive looking down her throat or x-rays, although I was sent an estimate of the work and cost of the more aggressive (and considerably more expensive) treatment.

* * * * *

My generation protested in the streets so that the conformity they saw all around them could be challenged, which, unfortunately and most evidently, is not the case with most of those writing on this website.

I never thought the 1950's would come back so soon, in full force.



"How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is
To have a thankless child!"

une vue d'un des pavillions des Halles de Paris (detruits pendant les annees 70)

http://www.paris-unplugged.fr/1967-les-halles-avant-destruction/

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1oYNZp8ea5yqxlpeiAmXDG2cKynjC-AH0H_0zIX9PrtWuqmtkcsRj5dl65CgJb_Et3hYw3v9x-LzxlT3jH-SHsw7dTT-EQCqpeIQsEEm8L6ZEmjy-ZaMcwirVeZFWCE9WdrSVo-prOyg0/s1600/P7206613.JPGLes H

Beaux Arts Seattle: The Paris of the West Coast that was never to be...

Visionary Seattle

1912

proposed 1912 Central Station, southwest corner of Lake Union

proposed 1912 Seattle Civic Center, where Belltown is today

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/off-track-seattle-rejects-first-rapid-rail-network-measure-on-march-5-1912/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=article_left_1.1




Instead we have the lovely Mercer mess (near South Lake Union)...and the stunning Westlake Plaza (a few blocks from Belltown)...and a rapid transit system with two routes rather than the two dozen proposed in 1912.

(I feel much civic pride and derive great aesthetic pleasure walking around Westlake Plaza or even the new City Hall plaza).

Note:  Paris razed its Les Halles ca. 1979, courtesy of the spectacular stupidity of President Georges Pompidou, while Seattle somewhat miraculously kept its Pike Place Market, admittedly a far cry from the twelve pavilions of Baltard, with which they bear a common architectural heritage and resemblance.

Les Halles, Paris, ca. 1863

THE FALL "the plaintiff caught the toe of her shoe in a moss sealed gap between a sidewalk..."

APPLICATION OF ROBINSON TO STATIC CONDITION CASES

While the decision in Robinson v. Kroger Co. is being applied in static condition/defect cases, its effect may not be quite as great as where a foreign substance is involved. One example is the decision in Tanner v. Lorango, 232 Ga. App. 599, 502 S.E.2d 599 (1998). Here the plaintiff APPLICATION OF ROBINSON TO STATIC CONDITION CASES

While the decision in Robinson v. Kroger Co. is being applied in static condition/defect cases, its effect may not be quite as great as where a foreign substance is involved. One example is the decision in Tanner v. Lorango, 232 Ga. App. 599, 502 S.E.2d 599 (1998). Here the plaintiff caught the toe of her shoe in a moss sealed gap between a sidewalk which served as the entrance to a store in the store's parking lot. Photographs showed that although green moss growing in the separation concealed the depth of the gap between the light colored cement sidewalk and the black asphalt parking lot, the gap itself was plainly visible. "Occupiers of premises whereon the public is invited to come are not required to keep their parking lots and other such areas free from irregularities in trifling defects. One coming upon such premises is not entitled to an absolutely smooth or level way of travel. It is common knowledge that small cracks, holes, and uneven spots often develop in pavement, and it has been held that where there is nothing to obstruct or interfere with one's ability to see such a static defect, the owner or occupier of the premises is justified in assuming that a visitor will see it and realize the risk involved."

- See more at: http://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/premises-liability-slip-and-fall.html#sthash.iyGT4CLi.dpuf which served as the entrance to a store in the store's parking lot. Photographs showed that although green moss growing in the separation concealed the depth of the gap between the light colored cement sidewalk and the black asphalt parking lot, the gap itself was plainly visible. "Occupiers of premises whereon the public is invited to come are not required to keep their parking lots and other such areas free from irregularities in trifling defects. One coming upon such premises is not entitled to an absolutely smooth or level way of travel. It is common knowledge that small cracks, holes, and uneven spots often develop in pavement, and it has been held that where there is nothing to obstruct or interfere with one's ability to see such a static defect, the owner or occupier of the premises is justified in assuming that a visitor will see it and realize the risk involved."

- See more at: http://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/premises-liability-slip-and-fall.html#sthash.iyGT4CLi.dpuf

When "diversity" hides real diversity: Oscars 2017

Watch for three of the four acting Oscars this year to go to African-American actors.  I promise you that there won't be a backlash ("too much diversity"), even if blacks are 12% of the population and whites 72%.   I just wish "diversity" would include other minorities.  By the same token, no one has ever complained about the NBA, NFL, other professional sports, or pop music, being "not diverse enough."

\

Special Needs Trust IV: A case study - Buying furniture

Proposal to trustee for purchase of furniture



I would like to buy some new furniture.

The reason I mentioned this is that the last time we spoke in person, as I recall, that I use up my inheritance by spending it, a large part of it at least, on furniture.

And am trying to an idea of what furniture you think I should have (your tastes, preferences, wants...) so I can go out shopping with an idea of what you have in mind to shop and look for.

With your previous experience in retailing, I know you would like to share///

Would my sending you photographs of my apartment help you to choose and decide what [kinds of furniture] you think I should have?

(I don't want to waste time and effort looking at furniture you would hesitate about approving disbursements for).

What kind of furniture do you like?     (What kind of furniture would you approve ?)

What material  (fabric, etc.) do you prefer?     What material would you approve of?     

What brands do you want me to do?    (What brands do/would you you approve of?)

What colors do you like?     Any strong preferences or dislikes?

What styles would you approve of?   What styles are you neutral towards?  Do you like solid pastel colors ?  Would they more likely earn your approval and support?

Do you like wingtip chairs?   Or do you think they're too old-fashioned?   How many do you want me to have?    (Is two chairs "excessive")?

Would you be happy (or dissatisfied) with furniture bought from Sears?   St. Vincent de Paul?   Nordstrom?  Ethan Allen?  J.C. Penney?  

For local retail stores, would you please make your preferences known from the list below:

https://www.yelp.com/search?find_desc=Furniture+Stores&find_loc=Seattle%2C+WA&ns=1

Do you wish to limit it to $, $$, $$$, or $$$$, or to **** and above?

Best Furniture Stores in Seattle, WA - yelp.com www.yelp.com Reviews on Furniture stores in Seattle, WA - Bedrooms & More, McKinnon Furniture, Kasala Outlet, ten22home, Used Furniture, Kasala, Digs, Reclaim Decor, Retrofit Home ...

"It's been so much fun shopping with you."

Would you like photographs of the furniture?   Would you like me to submit a list of furniture I would to purchase so that you can approve of the ones you really like and think that I should enjoy and that you think would  and should enhance my life, and so that you can decide how much you would like me to (I should) spend and so that you can decide whether or not you think the price is reasonable?

What would you like to have as your budget for my chair?

Would you approve of my buying the furniture this year or do want to wait another 3-4 years?

Do you want to fly out to Seattle so that we can look around at the stores you approve of , and, from the list pieces of furniture I select, you choose and make a final choice based on what you think you want me to have in my apartment and what pleases or really "grabs" you?   Or at least veto the ones you don't like on my list and let me make a choice from the remaining ones that you haven't crossed off the list?

Or do you want me to (and think I should) not buy any furniture (although you might "et me buy a piece of furniture depending on what it is) all together?

Is there else you think I should want something that I haven't mentioned?

(Do you want me to buy clothing?  Do you think I should buy shoes?  Should I get them at the Nordstrom Rack?   (Would you approve and say to me "That is a good use of  trust funds"?)

Maybe you're inclined to have me not buy anything/  Or is it your wish that I spend as little as possible?   Or are you undecided, "depending on the circumstances"?

     

Would you buy likely to approve of me buying plane tickets for both us to fly to London for a week so you can help me pick a wardrobe that we both like?    If I said "no," would that affect whether or not you approve my going to China in the fall?     Or do you think I need (= should want) you to accompany you?

And would come over sometime and rearrange my apartment for me so that it looks the way you think it should and the way you'd like it look?

Your wish is my command.

Relax, I am putting your needs (and wants) first.

Thank you, in advance, for this clarification.

Special Needs Trusts III: Siblings know each other

"Beneficiary, who has known trustee his entire life, asserts that she strongly is of the belief that the rationalization--emotional reasonin--used by trustee in administering the SNT is the following:  "I don't know if I should let her buy.  I don't want her to buy good X or service Y.   I don't like the item. I don't think he should she have X/Y.   Ergo, she should not buy it (at least not with trust funds).  

"It is excessive.  The price is too expensive.   She already has items identical or similar to X/Y.   Since X/Y is not necessary, so why am I obligated to approve X/Y...especially when there are so many other things she could buy instead?       

"I don't think she would benefit from it.    It would not enhance her life.  And I don't think she would enjoy it, even though she says she would.  I think I know her pretty well, being her sister.  

"I think I know what's good and what's not good for her.. Does she really know what's good for her?   Not necessarily.   

"God, I don't know what she's up to.  Haven't I let her buy pretty much whatever she has wanted?   If you think this is about my fear of losing control of things, you're wrong.  I'm doing this because I am looking out for her, as I always have."

Special Needs Trust II: Medusa, Marsha, Mother and T

The rationale:  The reason why the trustee will not approve a disbursement to cover the particular good (service) was that simply "she didn't the beneficiary to have it.  I don't think she should have it.  I don't like it.  I don't think it's necessary."

T for M, and M for T

The beneficiary ("B") was acutely sensitive to every mood of the Trustee ("T"), knowing deep inside, because they had known each other since childhood, that controlled his trust, that the Trustee was using her to enhance her own sense of herself as competent, powerful, and confident, vis-a-vis B who T convinced herself to see as congenitally weak, needing T to decide for B what she really needed, enjoyed, and benefited from, as if B were a vegetable who could not know what she enjoyed, who could say, "I prefer salmon to trout," to which T would say, "Are you sure that you wouldn't enjoy trout more?  You know, salmon has a weird taste to it..." and so badger B that in the end she relented and said, "O.K., I'll get the trout," relieved to have ended the stand-off.

If however B were to stand her ground, this would mean usually for B to explode and in same cases even call T the vilest of epithets ("C---" on a rare occasion), which T would, even if hurt inside about the abuse, use to say, "There she goes again, going off the deep end" and in T's internal logic, "She really is a basket-case.  She could use some help.  She should not really be allowed to make her decisions.  Mom and Dad told me I should take care of B.  I owe this to them to take care of 'B' and since I know better than B [how the world works, etc.], I am totally justified in doing what I do.  No need to veer off course, I'm doing everything right, B is just being difficult.  But reason [my reasons] will prevail."

"I wear the pants in this relationship" could have been T's motto, and the benefactor recalled vividly a dream in which he saw his own Mother embrace her, a penis pressing against her body, a penis in a woman.  The trustee had become her own Mother and vice versa.

When B realized that T was obstructing his access to it, and exacting psychological damage ('pressing his buttons" in the popular jargon) just as her own mother had done by figuratively "spanking her" (now scolding B for what the trustee said "she have should remembered, I already TOLD you this!"), she was now trapped for the rest of her lifetime in suffering and conflict.

Everything could be used against the beneficiary, the most intimate details, by T to maintain or consolidate control, as well as B.'s
deepest fears

To the point that B pleaded with the trustee if she could renounce the trust, to which the answer was a terse "Impossible, you cannot."

B would never be free of the trustee unless she, like Perseus, were able to slay this Medusa - Mother - Trustee, or unless she were able to persuade this modern-day Medusa to look in a mirror, in which she would be turned to stone as she had turned others into stone.

That fierce, implacable gaze, those eyes of stone...



To be continued

---

What did I do wrong?

What will set him/her over the top?

Special Needs Trust I: Dear SNT Trustee

Dear Trustee:

I am looking at a work of art that is priced over $7,000, considerably over my credit card limit.


How would you like to be consulted?   by Skype?  email?  phone?


What are your criteria for approving purchases of art work?


(1) Whether you like it


(2) Whether you absolutely love it.  You give full approval to the art work you love.  All I do is present six pieces of art work and then you chose which one to approve.


(3) Whether we both like it



(4) Flip a coin, depending on whether you're in a good or bad mood


(5) Compare it to any of the pieces of furniture you bought for $55,000 when you received your inheritance


(6) Whether I like


(7) Disapproval.  You disapprove of buying artwork, in principle, as you would like me to buy poster instead.  Genuine art work in your view is not necessary for ne,


(8) You need to be flown to the city where the art work is located to see for yourself, at the expense of the trust, before you can give trustee approval.  "It REALLY has to knock my socks off."  And then you require that I open my apartment up and so that you can visit and make sure that there is enough room and so you can "help" me decide where to hang it."   You don't really like to micro-manage as you're a very busy person.  I should be grateful that I have a sister who will go to such lengths to do these things like this "for" him, even when not asked to!   You are upset that the benefactor is not grateful for your "help."  Such ingratitude leads to the next months' balance paid 10 days late.


(9) Whether it would look good in your living room if I die before you do.


(10) Whether your boyfriend likes it


(11) Whether it has any nudity in it or not.  You disapprove of nudity.


(12) Whether it is contemporary (abstract) art.   You don't like contemporary art.   You prefer 19th century.  You would be happy with my buying an oil painting, smallish.  You wouldn't be comfortable with anything really dark or that had religious themes.  They'd be bad for me.  And dark oils are so gloomy.  You like miniature portraits with slabs of pink in them.  You could get really excited if I bought something like that.  You don't want to influence my disbursements but, on the other hand, legally you don't have to approve of $20 worth of U.S. postage stamps, right?  


Thank you for your wisdom and kind attention,

(name withheld for reasons of privacy)

Thought II

Why do you write?

I write to be free.

(Why do you meditate?

I write to be free.)

Thought

Why do you write?

I write to stay alive.

Special Needs Trusts in America: There s/he goes again, off the deep end

Henry Matisse

SNT Trustee to herself: 

"I think I know what he should or would enjoy.  In any case the real point is thatI would like him (her) to buy this.  That is something I could approve of.  The things he proposes buying that he says he enjoys are not things I approve of or like a lot.  I dislike them.  And I don't approve of men or women with nose-rings.  They're so ugly and probably carry germs.  I don't know if I should let him (her) buy any.

I'm tired of hearing the benefactor that he s/he doesn't get what s/he wants from the SNT.  I will tell him (her) that I will resign if s/he continues to complain, and let's how s/he fares then.  How dare s/he complain when I'm not asking for a penny.  It's me that is supposed to make the decisions.  Who does s/he think s/he is, anyway?  I don't have to let him (her) buy $20 worth of postage stamps."

 

A SNT does require that the trustee authorize (approve) of all disbursements from the SNT. But there is some confusion about this word approval in the context of the SNT means.

Approval of a disbursement is not the same thing as approval based on what the trustee thinks the beneficiary should buy.

“I cannot approve of this disbursement because I don’t think you should want [even if the beneficiary states that he would enjoy or benefit from the item] this item“ is a violation of the intent of the SNT.

The trustee's position is to not decide whether the beneficiary should or should not enjoy or benefit from a good service i.e., to substitute his or her desires for those of the beneficiary unless it can proven that the beneficiary is incapable of deciding what he enjoys or what enhances his life.

because that would violate the intent of the SNT which is to benefit, enhance the life or enjoyment of life of the beneficiary.  

This also why items bought using the beneficiary's credit card cannot be used to benefit a third party, including the benefactor friends or associates or the trustee himself or herself..

If the trustee were to substitute his or her preferences or choices of a good or service, this would mean that it is primarily the trustee rather than the beneficiary is benefiting from the disbursement, as the freedom to choose for each individual is an inalienable right that cannot be surrendered to another individual, even a relative, unless the individual is truly incapable or willingly surrenders these decision-making powers to another.

This is why often senior citizens resist going into assisted living homes, where they fear they would have to surrender freedom, e..g, have staff make choices for them.  Even so, such choices must be made to benefit the resident and not to enhance the power or self-esteem of staff.   Individual desires and needs have to be ascertained not by assuming the staff already know what an individual resident needs or desires but.

In the case that the trustee of an SNT is unable to perform his or duties, i.e., this capacity or unwilling to put the needs and wants of the benefactor as determined by.

The element of free choice within the parameters of the SNT must at all costs be preserved, and the distinction between guardian and trustee clearly understood by one assuming the position of trustee.

Free choice is a part of every person's dignity and self-respect, the ability to make decisions and choices on one's behalf rather than be dictated by another individual or organization (such as the state).  When we surrender free choice to another individual or group, we instinctively know we are losing our freedom.  And men and women will fight to preserve the freedom which is so dear to them.

The question of whether the trustee has the right to influence the choices made by the benefactor is an interesting one.   Pressuring the benefactor to not purchase what the trustee does not like ("approve of") and buy only what the trustee thinks the benefactor should like is a type of malfeasance, in this author's opinion, based on his own experience and research on the subject.

An example of this would be for the trustee to deliver messages like "I don't have to pay for a penny on your behalf...I don't know if I should let you buy this," which indicate that the trustee is not following the provisions and intent of the SNT.

I know of one particular case where the trustee, in essence, "hijacked" the SNT not for financial gain but for psychological reasons (for the enjoyment of demonstrating mastery to the benefactor and self-mastery to herself, to be able to pin the blame for and assuage her guilt over her own overspending habits on the benefactor, etc.) which she refused to admit.

Admonishments to "spend money with restraint, keeping in mind how hard our parents worked for it to leave it to us" or "My God!  I was shocked at your credit card statement!  I thought it can't be!  How could he spend so much money?" on a subject who is already shopping for clothes at second-hand stores and does not have a cellular plan, automobile, or cable television, things most Americans possess, and is already sensitive to every mood of the trustee make clear this intention.

The trustee is known to have gone out and spent out $55,000 on furniture immediately after she received her share of the inheritance.

The case may be headed to court.

* "projection" in psychological jargon)

The real question a trustee should ask:  Does the good or service fall into the categories stated in the SNT?

Not:  How do I know whether the benefactor will benefit from this even if s/he states s/he will?

  

The trustee might have doubts such as "I am not sure if the item is in conformity with the provisions."  But "I don't think I should have this [because I don't like it or think you should buy something else]" is not a legitimate reason for not approving a good or service unless it is clearly not covered in the categories of the SNT (food shelter to benefit a third party) or a substance/activity that is legal, poses danger to benefactor or others (going to a jihadist training camp in Syria, buying dynamite or a firearm by a benefactor with a felony record, etc.).

(name withdrawn for reasons of privacy)