
Simple words that save lives: lessons from “expert talkers” - bookofjoe
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190919-the-simple-words-that-save-lives
======
mekoka
_When asked why she is incoherent, he replied: “How the hell do I know?” When
chastised for cursing he said: “Well I don 't care, ya stupid-ass questions
you're asking.”_

It's my understanding that some people are particularly sensitive to cursing
and aggressive language, while others don't really care much. When we read
something like the above, both our worlds collide. The language sensitive
people will relate with the dispatcher, while others will think _what the
hell_ , because it seems that she was not listening to what was being said,
but rather focusing on how it was said.

In society it's each person's responsibility to be civil and courteous, but
emergency dispatchers should not expect this from callers. Not everybody is
polite, but everyone deserves to expect help when they call for it, regardless
of the way they talk. Emergency response is not customer service, where you
can just tell a client that you'll have to drop them because they berated one
of the phone clerks and that's against company policy.

I'm not playing devil's advocate for bullies, nor saying that people who hate
swearing shouldn't do certain jobs. But I believe that if the work is to be a
public respondent to emergency situations, maybe learning to not take things
so personally should be part of the training.

~~~
chrisperkins
> emergency dispatchers should not expect this from callers

Why should emergency dispatchers not expect a civil working environment?

I do not condone the response of the emergency dispatcher here but I genuinely
want to know why an emergency dispatcher must be required to withstand hostile
behavior as part of their job?

~~~
oddsignals
Why? Because impoliteness shouldn't be punishable by death.

~~~
Ensorceled
That's what I was thinking ... "I don't care that (you/your wife/you child) is
dying, call back when you can keep a civil tongue in your head."

------
dazc
I once encountered someone who was contemplating jumping from a bridge. My
immediate response was to keep him talking, no matter what, because I just
didn't know what else to do? Everything I said agitated him more, to the point
where he actually ran across the road to the other side of the bridge to get
away from me.

Fortunately, I managed to flag down a passing ambulance and a paramedic
intervened. This seemed to calm things down for a while until the police
arrived.

However, one of the officers had the same effect as I had and the situation
became quite desperate. His female colleague intervened though and that's when
the situation turned around.

I ended up sitting in the ambulance with the paramedics while the drama
unfolded. Eventually, the policewoman came over and said the guy was willing
to get into the ambulance so long as 'that man' is not there (meaning me). So
I bid my farewell to my new paramedic friends and left the scene.

I doubt he was going to jump initially but I wonder, if it was left to just
me, whether the outcome would have been more tragic?

~~~
cm2187
What is the right approach in that situation? My intuition would be humour,
trying to dedramatise, make the person feel the absurdity of the act. But I
have no idea of whether that would make things worse.

~~~
dazc
I tried pointing out the absurdity and it didn't have the desired effect. At
one point I said 'what can be so bad that you want to do this to yourself' and
he said his son had just died. What do you say after that?

~~~
Nextgrid
You could tell him that if he proceeds he'd inflict the same pain he's in now
to his friends & relatives. Maybe that would work?

~~~
ambicapter
holy god please don't ever talk to a suicidal person in a manner designed to
guilt or shame them ever.

~~~
thaumasiotes
Why not?

~~~
DanBC
Watch the video on this page. It has interviews of people who survived a
suicide attempt. [https://www.kent.gov.uk/social-care-and-
health/health/releas...](https://www.kent.gov.uk/social-care-and-
health/health/release-the-pressure)

Here's a transcript: [https://www.kent.gov.uk/social-care-and-
health/health/releas...](https://www.kent.gov.uk/social-care-and-
health/health/release-the-pressure/release-the-pressure-video-transcript)

They already feel immense amounts of shame. Adding to that shame just re-
affirms what they already think, it confirms their distorted thinking that
everyone would be better off without them.

The distorted thinking runs something like: "Only an arsehole would kill
themselves and leave their family to deal with it, and I'm thinking of killing
myself, therefore I am an arsehole. And I'm so terrible that they would in
fact be better off without me."

~~~
thaumasiotes
Does it have interviews of people who didn't make a suicide attempt because
they were guilted out of it? The dangers of _not_ making a suicide attempt are
so low we usually don't even bother to call out "survivors".

------
flancian
The article tells us to prefer some phrases:

\- I want to speak with you (instead of: talk to you).

\- Is there something else you'd like to talk about? (instead of: anything
else).

To ellicit a better response from your interlocutors. The story goes that
"talk" and "anything" show only apparent openness to engage in dialogue due to
cultural associations/cliches, not actual interest.

In particular they mention the second one in the context of meetings. I think
I'll try that one as a very informal experiment as I tend to prefer "anything"
when asking that in meetings and I don't get a great response usually.

~~~
asplake
There’s a third alternative to “Is there something/anything else?” recommended
in some coaching books: “What else?”

~~~
chrisseaton
> “What else?”

But that's not even a complete sentence! That's a terrible question! What on
earth would you want as a response to that? If someone said to me 'what else?'
I'd just think 'what else... what?' What else were you planning to do today?
What else did I need to tell you? What else did you need to tell me? What else
did I want to ask? What are you asking me 'else' about?

~~~
sah2ed
> _But that 's not even a complete sentence!_

Why do you consider the sentence incomplete when the _context_ of the sentence
you quoted is quite clear.

FWIW, it was beaten over our heads in school that merely writing “Yes.” in
response to a question is not a complete sentence, but that may have been a
pedagogical rule rather than a grammatical rule, to force students to learn
proper grammar.

A sentence will generally not make sense out of context[0] anyway.

0:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)#Major_a...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_\(linguistics\)#Major_and_minor_sentences)

------
rurcliped
I think PSAPs should release a list of the most common questions they ask 911
callers. My kids basically know how and when to call 911, but they definitely
aren't trained on the best answer to the "is this a house or an apartment"
question cited in this BBC story. (In our case, the relevant answer is "house"
even though our mailing address includes an apartment number.) Maybe I'd
create a poster so they remember what to do under stress, e.g.,

DO tell the 911 operator that we live in a house, not an apartment

DO tell the 911 operator that we have five people in our family (omit the
detail that our foster child isn't biologically related)

DO NOT tell the 911 operator that, technically, our fish are "pets"

DO NOT attempt to negotiate a Creative Commons license for the recording of
the 911 call

~~~
atombender
I was taught in school (elementary or secondary school, I forget) how to make
an emergency call.

We were taught a recommended recipe: Who, where, what. You tell them who you
are, where you're located, then what the problem is. The responder can then
start asking questions to get the details they need to classify the category
and urgency of the emergency.

It's really something that should be widely taught.

~~~
spookthesunset
I’ve always thought answering the “where” part is more important. Especially
with cell phones where they probably don't have a clue where you are. At least
that way if the call got dropped or something they’d know where to direct some
kind of help.

I could be wrong.

In the several times I’ve called 911 in an urban area the dispatcher I get is
most interested in where to route the call. If medical or fire, they transfer
to fire and for everything else they transfer to police. It is almost like
they serve as a quick triage and then route to the appropriate place.

Once the actual dispatcher answers they ask a bunch of questions. They waste
very little time and can almost seem rude or impolite as they don’t really let
you deviate from the “script” but I assume it is because they need to gather
the most info in the shortest amount of time.

Thankfully I’ve never had to call with something that requires both medial and
police (eg shooting, etc)....

------
TamDenholm
I was curious about the 911 call the article mentioned, if anyone else is,
here's a transcript.

[http://www.aintnowaytogo.com/911Call.htm](http://www.aintnowaytogo.com/911Call.htm)

~~~
Ididntdothis
Admonishing someone for cursing in that situation is just nuts.

I once called 911 for a traffic accident and I also got flustered when they
kept asking for my address (I wasn’t involved) instead of telling me that
someone is on the way. Ali l wanted to hear is “we have sent somebody”. Then
it would have been much easier to answer other questions.

~~~
cs02rm0
I've sort of had the opposite experience. I made a 999 (UK) call for a traffic
accident - head on collision, one person dead at the scene, another died
later, devastating scene on a winter's night with just what car lights were
left, a horn stuck blaring and quite a bit of smoke in the air.

I was at my home and heard it. Ran to a few hundred metres away and as I got
there a nurse arrived too who by chance was driving that way. I made the call
because I was pretty certain she'd handle the carnage better than I could.

They answered and I explained there had been a head on car crash, the next
question was Police, Fire or Ambulance? Which threw me a bit, I don't care who
you send that can deal with this! I think I said Ambulance and then they sent
all three anyway.

They then asked what road I was on, it was a minor road and I couldn't
remember the road name so I was trying to describe where it went from and to
and how far along it was. The person answering the call seemed not to know the
place names I was giving, my brain was working overtime trying to find
references.

It wasn't until the next day that I realised I should've just given my home
address and they'd have found us easily.

~~~
playworker
I had a similar experience when making a much less serious 999 call for a
drunk dude we found passed out in the middle of a car park, it was only after
I hung up that I noticed Google have some sort of feature which knew I was
making a 999 call and was offering me information about my current location on
screen - had no idea they did that though so didn't think to look at my phone
screen...

~~~
feintruled
Wow, kudos to Google, a great feature! They really should publicise that more
though, I would have had no idea either.

------
whiddershins
I liked this article but kinda want like 50 more examples.

I think the talk vs speak and the something vs anything seem so obviously true
but I don’t think I would have realized it on my own, even given a lot of
time.

How many other small changes in wording can have a profound impact on
communication?

~~~
js2
You might be interested in the book “Never Split The Difference” which has
been recommended on HN frequently:

[https://www.amazon.com/Never-Split-Difference-Negotiating-
De...](https://www.amazon.com/Never-Split-Difference-Negotiating-
Depended/dp/0062407805)

You might also be interested in looking into nonviolent communication.

~~~
proverbialbunny
Thank you. ^_^

~~~
hansthehorse
He has several talks and interviews on YouTube:
[https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=never+split+the...](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=never+split+the+difference)

------
johnohara
Listen to Soma-FM: SF 10-33 sometime. The dialogue protocol between dispatch
and police/fire is remarkably controlled and consistent under the most
difficult of circumstances.

Exceptions are suspect gunfire, multi-story "working" fires, and foot chases.

Hearing an officer 10-97 (arrive on scene) at a multi-vehicle accident calmly
request multiple 408's (ambulances) code 3 (emergency response) belies the
chaos at the scene and the intensity of what s/he is actually experiencing.

~~~
JshWright
For what it's worth, most systems are phasing out all that coded stuff and
just using plain language.

~~~
johnohara
In SF, with all the hills and low spots, it seems to me the coded dialogue
might be more efficient or perhaps easier to communicate. Officers are often
10-1 (receiving/sending poorly) and requested to 10-9 (repeat last message) as
in "One Edward Fifteen you are very 10-1. Please 10-9."

And it's weird how your brain picks up on the code and immediately understands
the seriousness of the situation. When a 408 is upgraded to code 3, enroute,
you sense the urgency. A simple "affirm, upgrading to code 3" tells the
officers at the scene that the 408 "gets it" and "hang on, we're hurrying."
Usually with the sound of sirens and air horns in the background.

~~~
JshWright
It's not easier or more efficient (it's actually more error prone, since
there's less context). The systems also tend to be very regional (a "10-50"
can be very different things depending on where you are). Generally the reason
its used is "that's how we've always done it". The other reason is that it
sounds cooler...

(I work in a system that has (mostly) phased out codes in favor of plain
words)

~~~
johnohara
I've heard officers shroud context using codes. "Put me on it, I've dealt with
him before. He's a known 800 (mentally ill person)." Or "show me 97 (on
scene), subject appears extremely 811 (intoxicated). I'll advise."

99% plain language yet subtly informative.

~~~
JshWright
Generally we use meaningful acronyms in those cases. Still a code, but one
that is a lot less arbitrary. e.g. EDP="Emotionally disturbed person", or
EtOH=Ethanol

------
jonnypotty
In my opinion it's about keeping your priorities straight. That dispatcher had
been given a script and told that they had to get people to answer a certain
set of questions. The dispatcher had decided that people who called had to
conform to this rule, becuase they had to. They forgot their job was to save
lives, not get answers to questions. It's a symptom of attempts to codify
interactions between people with simple rules. The rules become the focus, not
the big picture.

------
flocial
Reminds me of this thread about a memorable 911 distress call:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/257agn/911_opera...](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/257agn/911_operators_what_is_that_1_call_that_you_could/chej079/)

------
cinbun8
Reminds me of non-violent communication -
[https://www.cnvc.org/](https://www.cnvc.org/)

Do you folks have book recommendations that have tips along these lines? I
find these useful while driving hard conversations too (Example: Letting
someone go from the team).

------
meigwilym
Another recommendation for "Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if your
life depended on it" by Chris Voss. An insightful look at negotiation and how
to be better at it.

I read it after seeing it recommended here a few months ago.

------
justforfunhere
With the advent and spread of AI based call response systems, would
negotiation be the final frontier that a General AI would have to break to
prove its efficacy and the replaceability of humans.

I guess, negotiation happens at a very human level. Taking SOS calls, asking
the right questions and making the right decisions is a subtle art.

~~~
groby_b
Given the current state of "AI", the dispatcher would've sent Jehova's
Witnesses and then badgered you for the next three years about "people with
emergencies like yours also liked"

