A hypothetical question: If the only choices you are offered are to be the parent of either those kids who were run over and died for no fault of theirs or the parent of the kid who got drunk and killed them, which one would you choose to rather be?
This is a trolley problem question. There are no right answers. The purpose of this is simply to make you think and to be able to spark an introspection of your own moral compass.
I admit that I have been thinking a lot about this. And if those are the only two choices I have, I keep going to the second: a child that is alive, even if an unintentional killer. I am not comfortable with that choice. But that isn’t what bothers me. What bothers me is my selfishness. What about you?
Do note that I understand this does not represent reality. One may not have only these two choices. One can be a responsible parent and ensure their child does not have access to heavy machinery without the skill and the appropriate licence to operate it, nor is the child abusing substances at an age when they are to abstain, nor…you get the point. I get all that.
But here’s the thing: I was young once. And my father was one of the most open-minded, trusting souls who would rather give us freedom than protect us from harm if those were the only two choices. And there have been times when I have had access to the car (freely given, even though I had a licence by then) and have been drunk (without him knowing, of course. Side note: I started drinking early and with my father’s knowledge and, at times, participation, but he would never have approved of getting behind the wheel while under the influence) while driving. There have been times when I have stolen the vehicle before I achieved the age of majority or acquired a licence (and Baba has turned a blind eye to my clearly illegal acts). There have been times I almost died doing stuff my father ‘allowed’ me to do. And there have been times I have almost killed someone inadvertently. But this is survivor bias. Just because I didn’t die or kill or maim someone does not mean I couldn’t have.
Now, I do not know how everyone else’s childhoods were, how their parents were, or what their personal experience of parental trust or freedom is. But what I do know is that whenever I see a news clipping of a juvenile doing, well, juvenile things, I go, ‘There but for the grace of sheer luck, go I,’ and wonder what their parents are going through. Remember also that we, as a family, have been on the other side of the table, too, with a close family member (my own kid brother) dying because of someone else’s negligence and mistakes. So, I know what that feels like as well.
And yet. Yet, once again, I choose the option I choose out of the above two. Why?
Are we all, without knowing it, Dhritarashtras and Gandharis, blind to the flaws of our offspring, whether unknowingly or by design?
N.B.: This isn’t just about privileged kids. The more I think about it, the more I realise it applies across the spectrum.
