"Bridge over troubled water..."

I was on my way to a meeting somewhere new. The sat nav suggested I could either turn left or go straight. I went left because that looked like the more fun option. As I happily drove down the road I came across a work-horse pick-up truck doing a three-point turn in the road to avoid going through the ford. I ignored the signs and kept going. It was fun, it was deeper than it could have been, and my car miraculously made it through (even managing to be cleaner!). It was a win-win really, but it could have been expensive... Especially if it had been deeper and faster flowing.

The better option would have been to have carried on straight along the other route, or to have turned around before I got there. A less dangerous option would have been a bridge, or to wait until the ford was lower.

But I had a meeting to get to, was probably running late, and there was no bridge.

I get this song.
I understand the longing to lay down as a bridge and provide safe passage.
When life makes us weary and there appears to be troubled water ahead the gut response is to turn around, build a bridge, hope it dies down, or give up.

But I'm not sure that's ultimately what's best.

What if being a bridge and helping people avoid the issues is less helpful than helping someone to traverse through the stream/river/torrent?
Wanting to build a bridge doesn't always deny the reality of the current and the dangers thereof, but it doesn't grow resilience and doesn't equip people for when there is no chance of a bridge.

​To quote a kids book:

Uh-Oh, troubled waters!
We can't go over it,
We can't go round it,
We'll have to go through it!
Splash-splash-splish-splash...

I think I want the commitment to be:
"Those waters look rough. But you have to go through them. Want me to come with you? maybe if I go through a little upstream I can take the brunt of it for you and mean you can walk a little easier in my wake for a while. Or I can pull you, or hold you up if needed. I'm here."