Is it easier to balance choice and health/safety if you don't know the individual very well?

Understanding an individual well is crucial for balancing their choices with health and safety considerations. When you don't know a person deeply, you lack important context about their preferences, needs, and history, which can lead to assumptions that may not align with the individual's true desires or best interests.

Knowing someone well allows you to tailor support that respects their autonomy while still addressing health and safety concerns appropriately. For instance, you can help them make choices that are both fulfilling and safe based on their unique circumstances. A lack of familiarity can create a significant gap in providing that balance, as you may not fully understand what choices are acceptable or what risks might be involved for that individual. Thus, the statement that it is easier to balance choice and health/safety without knowing the individual very well is not accurate. Deep familiarity fosters better decision-making and promotes a more person-centered approach.