A disparity between what writer and interviewee perceive

There is a difference between how the author and the interviewee assess the experience's argument. The interviewees in both essays handle their health condition with a high degree of privacy because they believe it to be unique. This is demonstrated by their reluctance to acknowledge an issue. The tendency to isolate oneself is lessened when they engage with a stranger, though. a total outsider who is open to attending to their needs. As he tells the tale, Evans opens up to the authors, while the other interviewee expresses a strong bond with his doctor. The writer, on the other hand, considers the health condition to be a matter of acceptance.

This is portrayed in their hesitation to admit that they have a problem. The inclination to keep to themselves is however eased when they interact with a stranger. A stranger who is willing to pay attention to their need. Evans opens up to the writers as he narrates the story, while the other interviewee shares a deep connection with his physician. The writer, on the other hand, considers the health condition to be a matter of acceptance.

This is evident in the illumination of Evans expression after a two-hour reflection into his past. The writer is almost certain that he came to terms with his situation. However, the impacts of the health condition on the life and growth of an individual should be a concern to their surroundings. The difference in understanding the argument is not a problem. The point of view varies in every individual. The same can be said for this scenario. To add on the paper does not need further explication as it is elaborate enough. The critical details of the interviewees are brought out well. However, since the interviewees are incredibly private with their health conditions, it would be ethical to use a dummy name for either individual. That is the only sensitive part I feel is left out.