Should we question someone's motive for working for a cause?
Should those who become advocates for acause be criticized if they only embraced the cause because of a child or lovedone?
Areader wants to know whether a friend’s newfound dedication to working for andgetting others interested in working for the rights of children with aparticular disability should be taken any less seriously because the friendnever expressed any interest in that disability before discovering her childwas among those who had it. “Wouldn’t her passion be more convincing if thereweren't a clear self-interest involved?”
It'snot unusual to read stories of people becoming active for a particular causeafter they discover they have a personal experience with that cause. Sometimesthese stories don’t involve disabilities. And sometimes the discovery resultsin someone doing a complete reversal in their views. There are plenty ofstories of legislators who are adamant in their lack of support for same-sexmarriage, for example, until they discover one of their adult childrenidentifies as LGBTQ+ and in a loving relationship.
Withsupport for those with a particular disability, it’s less often the case thatsomeone is against supporting work for those with that disability. It’s farmore common that the disability never crossed their mind until it affected thempersonally.
Doesthis mean we should discount their activity because they only became involvedafter discovering that a child or loved one could be among those helped bytheir work? No.
Mybrother-in-law lived with muscular dystrophy. Marrying into his family raisedmy awareness, but I was no less compassionate or caring than others who careabout people with muscular dystrophy. I may not have lived with musculardystrophy top of mind until I became a part of his life, but my concern abouthim and others with muscular dystrophy was no less valid even though my awarenesswasn’t raised until I met and ultimately married into his family.
Similarly,if someone has a child with a medical condition that doesn’t get the type ofattention or support that would be useful to improve that and other children’slife, the passion a parent has to work for more research or treatment to helpthose with the condition — including her child — should in no way bediscounted. Working toward helping others who could benefit from the support isa good thing, regardless of how we arrive at the desire to do so.
Thereare plenty of causes to go around, and often, too few people to support them.If we start questioning the motivation of every person who wants to dosomething to help someone else, the best we can hope for is a free-floatingcynicism. At worse, such attitudes can serve to disincentive people fromhelping when they can.
Whensomeone discovers a cause about which they care deeply, regardless of how theyarrived at that decision, the right thing is to let them. If it seems a causewe might want to help with as well, then we should have at it.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of "The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice," is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues.
Do you have ethical questions that you need to have answered? Send them to jeffreyseglin@gmail.com.
Follow him on Twitter @jseglin
(c) 2023 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. Distributed by TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
