BC-RIGHT-THING-COLUMN-ADV31-NYTSF
$ADV31
THE RIGHT THING: LOWERING THE BAR ON GOOD BEHAVIOR
(FOR RELEASE SUN., JULY 31, 2005, AND THEREAFTER.)
By JEFFREY L. SEGLIN
c.2005 The New York Times Syndicate
(Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate)
"Is it ethical to bypass helping someone who's angered you when you
see them in a situation that's potentially harmful?"
The question, from my reader M.B., gets to the heart of a challenge
many of us face: Should we let our emotions keep us from doing what we
know is the right thing?
M.B. works out in a Boston-area gym, usually without incident. But
one day, several weeks ago, a woman at the gym was doing a
"circuit-training workout," in which she was moving among different
exercise stations without stopping for rest in between.
"The problem," M.B. writes, "is that other people were trying to use
some of these stations as well."
If someone else was using a station and was taking a short breather
between sets, he reports, the woman would "very rudely" jump right in
without asking to "work in."
"This is really bad gym etiquette," he writes. "She was pretty much
annoying everyone."
As M.B. was heading to the locker room, he noticed that the woman
was doing bench presses without a spotter, someone who typically stands
over the bar ready to assist in case the lifter runs into trouble.
"She wasn't doing heavy weight," he writes, "but she was clearly
struggling."
In any other situation, M.B. says, he would have immediately gone
over and helped her get the bar up.
"Serious injury can happen if that bar falls on your chest," he
says. "Even the bar without any plates on it weighs 45 pounds."
In this case, however, he admits that he enjoyed seeing her
struggle.
"I had absolutely no intention of helping her," he says, "after how
obnoxious she had been to everyone earlier. I'm sure I wasn't the only
one who thought twice about helping her."
As he hesitated, another guy walked over to help the woman finish
her final set, leaving M.B. to ponder the ethics of the situation.
The woman had rudely disrupted the workouts of M.B. and others at
the gym. Why should they go out of their way to help her, now that she
was struggling?
Because it's the right thing to do. The fact that someone annoys us
doesn't make it right for us to stand by if she's about to shatter a
collarbone when there's something we can do to help her.
M.B. had every right to be annoyed with the interloper, and would
have been perfectly justified in telling her to wait her turn like
everybody else. It would also have been reasonable to let the gym's
manager know that she was disrupting other people's workouts.
Either of these actions would be an attempt to solve the problem
without destroying the problem-maker. To allow her to injure herself
out of pique at her earlier behavior, however, would be to impose a
punishment that doesn't fit the crime.
M.B. and some others at the gym might have received a moment of glee
from seeing the obnoxious woman struggle with the bar. In the long run,
however, they should ask themselves if they want to be the guy who
stands by while someone gets hurt when a simple action from him could
have prevented it.
Momentary glee is fleeting. Stepping up to do the right thing when
it's called for, on the other hand, is defining.
SOUND OFF: READERS TO SEX OFFENDERS: `GO AWAY'
My readers feel strongly about the question of whether it was right
for a community to pass an ordinance that effectively bans sex
offenders from living there, even if they have served their sentences
and kept current their registration as sex offenders.
One Californian woman -- who notes that her ex-husband was arrested
for soliciting young boys -- favors such ordinances.
"Even if it doesn't seem fair," she writes, "we need to do
everything we possibly can to protect our children."
On the other hand, a man from Canada who has himself been convicted
of sex offenses with minors notes that rehabilitation remains a goal of
our criminal-justice system.
"If they have paid their dues to society and keep their registration
up to date," he writes, "then they should be clearly cautioned by local
police then left alone -- but, like anyone else, checked for any
suspicious behavior."
In general, however, my readers disagreed.
As Madeline McIntosh of London, Ontario, puts it: "Anyone who abuses
children has crossed the line and should lose their rights."
Shelly Mason of Laguna Niguel, Calif., shares her sentiments.
"Children have to be protected by all possible means from anyone who
wants to harm them," Mason writes. "It absolutely doesn't matter what
inconveniences a convicted sex offender must endure."
Check out other opinions at: http://rightthing.nytsyn.com.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of "The Right Thing: Conscience, Profit
and Personal Responsibility in Today's Business" (Spiro Press, 2003),
is an associate professor at Emerson College in Boston, where he
teaches writing and ethics.
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to
rightthing(at)nytimes.com -- the (at) represents the symbol on your
keyboard -- or to "The Right Thing," New York Times Syndicate, 609
Greenwich St., 6th floor, New York, N.Y. 10014-3610.
-----
EDITORS: Visit The New York Times Syndicate Web site advisory page
at http://advisories.nytsyn.com/ for more information on THE RIGHT
THING and other syndicated features.
NONSUBSCRIBERS: To publish a "separate buy" feature article, it must
be purchased. Please contact one of these sales representatives:
--U.S. and Canada:
BOB FARNELL in New York at 1-800-535-4425 or 1-212-499-3335; fax:
1-212-499-3382; e-mail: farnellb(at)nytimes.com.
MIKE PEARSON in Nevada at 888-269-8796 or pearsmh(at)nytimes.com.
DEBRA WEYDERT in New Jersey at 1-732-390-4480; fax: 1-732-390-4697,
e-mail: weyded(at)nytimes.com.
Spanish Language: ANA MUNOZ in New York at 888-269-8796 or
212-499-3333;
fax: 212-499-3382, e-mail: munoza(at)nytimes.com.
--EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST, AFRICA AND INDIA
PHILIPPE HERTZBERG in Paris at 33-1-53-05-76-58; fax,
33-1-47-42-80-44;
e-mail: hertzberg(at)nytimes.com.
ISABEL METZLER in Friedberg, Germany, at 49-6031-161470; fax:
49-6031-161471; e-mail: metzler(at)nytimes.com.
--ASIA AND THE PACIFIC RIM
ALVIN CH'NG in Singapore at 65-6735-0535; fax: 65-6736-0283; e-mail:
chng(at)nytimes.com.
--Latin America:
ISABEL AMORIM SICHERLE in Brazil at 55-11-3812-5588; fax:
55-11-3812-8148; e-mail: sicheia(at)nytimes.com.
SIMONE ROSENTHAL in Brazil at 55-11-3812-5588; fax: 55-11-3812-8148;
e-mail: rosensi(at)nytimes.com.