Action or Inaction and the Ethics of Choice Essay

One of Peter Singer’s four main principles of ethics is that we are just as responsible for our inactions as we are for our actions. This means that we as human beings have an ethical obligation to act if we witness something wrong happening. Even if we do not see it but we know it is going on, then once we possess that knowledge we have also incurred a moral duty to act. Without this obligation, we become a liability to the community because we are no longer taking responsibility for the well-being of others when it is in our power to do so. Examples of this are easily found in the modern media. The first example of such an understood and implicit responsibility would be in the case of Penn State and their football defensive coordinator, Jerry Sandusky. Jerry Sandusky committed horrible crimes, molesting and sexually assaulting numerous young boys who were looking to him to help them out of already bad situations at home via his charity, Second Mile. These were at risk youth. The head coach of Penn State’s football team, Joe Paterno, had been alerted to the crimes possibly being committed by his defensive coordinator but he had failed to act or contact law enforcement. The president of the university also was accused of knowing but taking no action. (1) In the eyes of the public, once the criminal trial began to get underway, the head coach and the president were both equally guilty for allowing such atrocities to go on under their noses. To the American people and the plaintiffs, simply saying, â€Å"It wasn’t me that hurt these boys.† was not enough to excuse their inaction. They had failed in their civic duty to protect the community and its children. To fail a society in this manner means you have become a hindrance and a liability to the people who once sustained you. It is no small question to wonder where the line is drawn between an obligation to action and the freedom to do nothing. Not only is it illegal to rob a bank, it is equally illegal to drive the getaway car. True, as a mere driver, you did not in fact steal money or hurt anyone. However, by your own inaction (you did not call the cops, you did not discourage the robbers), you have enabled harm to be brought to others. The consequences then are that had you acted, harm may have been avoided. Just as if you had held the gun yourself, your knowledge means that you acted to hurt someone else even if it was simply by not acting. Many cultures have shame and honor systems which detail explicitly the duties of a citizen to act and the restrictions on actions as well. American law makes very clear pronouncements about guilt by association, being an alibi, being an accomplice, and other specific things required by those who stood by. We as a people do not accept inaction as an excuse to avoid blame. Peter Singer’s specific principle denotes the ability to choose between action and inaction automatically confers upon the decider the weight of their choice. Once you are aware that you have a choice to make, you also should be aware that the choice rightly bears consequences. Surprisingly, many people find this unfair. They do not believe they hold any blame if they choose not to take action. If a woman is raped in a street in broad daylight with fifty witnesses, almost all the witnesses will feel that it was not their problem, not their responsibility to stop it or report it. When confronted later, they will squirm with shame, but as the well-known case of Kitty Genovese (2) proved, they do not honestly feel they did anything wrong. Therefore, the ethical idea of responsibility for both action and inaction is an idea that still needs advocates throughout the world. The social contract that exists between man and his government also extends to man and his fellow man. Works cited: 1.) Simon, M. (2012, November 7). Former Penn State president arraigned in Sandusky scandal – This Just In – CNN.com Blogs. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/07/former-penn-state-president-arraigned-in-sandusky-scandal 2.) Darley, L. (2010, August 19). Bystander Effect: The Case of Kitty Genovese. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from