Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Field Researcher
#26 Old 3rd Nov 2011 at 3:40 PM
Even realistically in the US, if the mother is imminently dying and poor, take her to the emergency room: they have to treat, and if she's deathly ill, they have to admit. From there, the hospital could at least get a consult with social work, which would help set the family up with Medicaid and/or a patient assistance program. That would do a lot more than the crappy $500 I'm currently trying to save up for luxury things. Not to mention that if the kid is running around out stealing, they probably need a social work consult anyway, to help with family issues.

If someone is genuinely poor and dying, a hospital will find a way to get them decent care. Worked in an urban public hospital where we had a lot of John Does in ICUs, and their care was just as good as the people who had insurance. The worst problems are things that are catastrophic and lingering or chronic with expensive therapies (cystic fibrosis, RA, diabetes, patients who end up in the ICU after a stroke or heart attack and have both surgery costs + weeks in-hospital + years of drugs afterwards.)

SimsLover50, people don't always donate even if a cause/disease is genuine, and if the illness is really catastrophic and/or long-term, there's no way that they could raise enough money to cover it. For example, if you investigate and find out that the kid's mother is a drug addict, no dice. Same thing if the person is a convicted criminal, if they're mentally ill, if they're sick because they haven't been taking medication, if they're just not photogenic enough or if people don't understand the nature of the disease...and, like I said, there's generally no way that private charities can make up the costs, and in my area at least, even free/reduced-cost clinics have year-long waiting lists and are turning people away from even getting put on the waiting list.

This has kind of turned into a "what's wrong with US healthcare" post, but the point is, whatever money I can give isn't going to fix this problem even if it's genuine, the whole issue of stealing aside.

Edit: Also
Quote: Originally posted by HystericalParoxysm
but... people lie about this kind of stuff all the damn time, even when it doesn't gain them anything but attention. I had a coworker who claimed to have cancer - she shaved her head, started taking off work to "go to the doctor", and would call coworkers at all hours to bring her soup and come sit with her. When her story finally crumbled around her (as people who knew about that kinda stuff started asking questions - not out of suspicion but just concern) her answers were weird and she broke down


This too. How do you find out? I have a friend on Facebook who was convinced they knew someone from online who was dying of a brain tumor and had a sick child, was sending money to them...and just found out yesterday that this person is a single woman with no children who's been convicted of larceny multiple times. Maybe that's coloring my response to this post, but she'd sent quite a bit of money based on months of this woman building up a story and sending pictures of herself being ill and whatnot. (I mean, not to stir up trouble, but wasn't there someone in the Sims community who had a bad-pregnancy, sick-kid story that was just for attention? I mean, Internet is easier to defraud than real life, but still - heck, the mom in the proposed scenario could have Munchausen's for all I know and need mental health treatment instead of medicine.)
Advertisement
Instructor
#27 Old 3rd Nov 2011 at 3:47 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Julieryc
SimsLover50, people don't always donate even if a cause/disease is genuine, and if the illness is really catastrophic and/or long-term, there's no way that they could raise enough money to cover it. For example, if you investigate and find out that the kid's mother is a drug addict, no dice. Same thing if the person is a convicted criminal, if they're mentally ill, if they're sick because they haven't been taking medication, if they're just not photogenic enough or if people don't understand the nature of the disease...and, like I said, there's generally no way that private charities can make up the costs, and in my area at least, even free/reduced-cost clinics have year-long waiting lists and are turning people away from even getting put on the waiting list.



Of course. But who knows until you try and have exhausted those avenues. Problem with ethical debates, which do not include enough facts is that you are limited to making general statements. Adding more factors changes the equation.

So truthfully we can't debate what avenues are available or how we would respond unless we know the details and the facts in the case.
Field Researcher
#28 Old 3rd Nov 2011 at 3:50 PM
That's definitely true. There's just not enough information in the scenario to know how you'd react. If your money was desperately needed RIGHT NOW and it was the only way to save the person, I'm sure everyone would donate. The way this scenario is phrased just seems deceptive - are we debating the ethicality of stealing when it's needed, trust vs. non-trust, or commenting on what healthcare is like in various countries?
Scholar
#29 Old 3rd Nov 2011 at 5:03 PM
.

As in your healthcare in your current country, well were all from differnt countries here differnt senarios. Healthcare DOES play a role. Does this country have a must treat policy (but still big bills), does this country have healthcare (meaning the child is probably lying), does this country have a pay first policy (in which he could be telling the truth).

If you want to get to the nitty gritty of this debate you can ask, would you if this kid was black, Asian, white, French, British, from the UK, or whatever!

Ask yourself if a cholo looking kid in L.A. U.S.A. steals your money runs off and claims it's for it's sick mother what would you do?

A blonde haired blue eyed kid in adverage clothes in Toranto, Canada steals your money, and says it's for his mommy what would you do?

If these kids switched places (cholo kid in Canada, blonde hair blue eyed in L.A.) would you change your stance?

Face it there are differnt factors you must add up to answer this question truthfully. To just simply answer "A kid stole your money you saved up ran off and said it was for his sick mother" leaves out to many factors for a truely honest answer.

Disclaimer: I am just being a goof ball, please ignore me if offended.
Instructor
#30 Old 3rd Nov 2011 at 5:08 PM
What would I do? I'm not inclined to believe anyone who steals my money without proof whether said kid is purple, black or white. I'd let the cops decide whether the kid is being honest.
Field Researcher
#31 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 12:12 AM
I worked hard and earned my money. If he really needs it for his sick mother, then he should earn it. If he came to my house and did some housework for me, like wash my car, mow the lawn, or something, I would gladly fork over the amount of money that was about equal to the amount of labor he did. Let him earn it basically. If I just gave it to him, it would encourage him that he could do that later in life.

Life Stage: Teen Traits: Hopeless Romantic, Computer Whiz, Couch Potato, Shy Partner: Ted
School: High School Career: Writing; Fan Fiction Drafter Miscellaneous: Rich; Scorpio
Top Secret Researcher
#32 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 3:29 AM
Weel we dont know for sure if the kid is being truthful, and most dont have the time to check whether he is, so since I am a nice person, I would give a portion, possibly 1/2 or maybe even more to the child, and earn back the rest... because what if the child isnt lying, then someone could be seriously hurt. I personally think that life is worth more than money. So this way i help others while still helping myself

Why did I move here? I guess it was the weather.

GTA V
Forum Resident
#33 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 4:39 AM
I would obviously get my money back. Sometimes it can take a long time to save up money for the things you want in life and it's not right for someone, let alone a child, to snatch it from you. I would also explain how his actions have consequences and he could end up getting hurt if he continues trying to steal money from folks. My next move would be to inform if he really wanted to save his mom, he should hit up Wall Street, where there are tons of bankers who have so much money, they have no idea what to do with it LOL jk
Alchemist
#34 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 3:07 PM Last edited by SuicidiaParasidia : 4th Nov 2011 at 3:18 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by SpookyOkyBatGirl
I worked hard and earned my money. If he really needs it for his sick mother, then he should earn it. If he came to my house and did some housework for me, like wash my car, mow the lawn, or something, I would gladly fork over the amount of money that was about equal to the amount of labor he did. Let him earn it basically. If I just gave it to him, it would encourage him that he could do that later in life.


lawn: $5
car: $8
windows: $10



chemotherapy: $300-$30,000

now then...how long do you think itd take him to save up that much money, versus how long itll take for his mother's condition to get even worse (and harder to treat/more costly)/kill her?
even you dont work for those wages. you dont need your lawn cut, car washed, or windows cleaned daily, much less hourly, like a real job pays. a real job, yknow, like how child labor laws restrict children from obtaining.

unrealistic expectations are unrealistic.

and for the curious...i come from a below-average financial background. i know what it is to be poor and unable to help someone, but thats something else completely from when people who know that they can help someone, refuse to. even given how rare money is to me, it means less than the alleviation of suffering, which i would happily hand it over for, stealing or not. "i dont like what you just did" isnt a good enough reason to ignore someone in serious need of help. its petty. money is paper...what is a life?
not to mention, i dont know about the rest of you, but i hail from a culture that is very individualistic, to the point of apathy toward others' suffering. i have heard folks talk about watching a young woman being raped on the street while they just went on with their lunch.... didnt call for help... didnt intervene in any way. why? "she isnt me, so its not my problem." or the ever-prevalent attitude of "but i dont get a cookie for helping them with that, so why bother?" and i recall a time i bore witness to a womans son hit by a drunk driver, and nobody stopped to help her as her son lay bleeding on the asphalt. (i was the only one to pound on a nearby houses door to use the phone to call an ambulance, out of all the people going by.)
sickening.

"The more you know, the sadder you get."~ Stephen Colbert
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." ~ Jon Stewart
Versigtig, ek's nog steeds fokken giftig
Instructor
#35 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 4:13 PM
While it is altruistic and generous to give money to everyone who asks, this is exactly how con men and scammers thrive. To give money without the facts is not petty or ignoring someone's needs, it is being smart with your money.

There is a real difference between ignoring a crime you witness which is real, and not forking over cash to someone who tries to rob you.
Theorist
#36 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 6:10 PM
On a societal level I land firmly on the side of supporting everyone. On a personal level, I've spent just enough of my life destitute that the thought of letting people steal from me gives me hives. I don't mind being poor and giving people my last dime and all that, but I don't like the notion of people making the decision for where to spend my charity for me outside of government. You know, because that's the job of the government (no matter what some folks care to think about the efficiency they bring to that task or whether they agree with me about that role.)
Alchemist
#37 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 6:11 PM
Quote: Originally posted by SimsLover50
While it is altruistic and generous to give money to everyone who asks, this is exactly how con men and scammers thrive. To give money without the facts is not petty or ignoring someone's needs, it is being smart with your money.

There is a real difference between ignoring a crime you witness which is real, and not forking over cash to someone who tries to rob you.


i just knew someone would make me point this out, but im responding to the scenario as if there were no issue of the facts. that, in fact, the kid was not lying, and that, in fact, their mother was deathly ill.

"The more you know, the sadder you get."~ Stephen Colbert
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." ~ Jon Stewart
Versigtig, ek's nog steeds fokken giftig
Instructor
#38 Old 4th Nov 2011 at 8:17 PM
The scenario is vague I agree. However, I think everyone should be given a choice. Taking a choice away from a person via stealing is force. I'm opposed to forcing people even for a just cause to do what one person thinks is right. The money doesn't belong to the boy or his mom. They are stealing, even if it is for a good cause.
Field Researcher
#39 Old 5th Nov 2011 at 12:25 AM
Quote: Originally posted by SuicidiaParasidia
lawn: $5
car: $8
windows: $10



chemotherapy: $300-$30,000

now then...how long do you think itd take him to save up that much money, versus how long itll take for his mother's condition to get even worse (and harder to treat/more costly)/kill her?
even you dont work for those wages. you dont need your lawn cut, car washed, or windows cleaned daily, much less hourly, like a real job pays. a real job, yknow, like how child labor laws restrict children from obtaining.

unrealistic expectations are unrealistic.

and for the curious...i come from a below-average financial background. i know what it is to be poor and unable to help someone, but thats something else completely from when people who know that they can help someone, refuse to. even given how rare money is to me, it means less than the alleviation of suffering, which i would happily hand it over for, stealing or not. "i dont like what you just did" isnt a good enough reason to ignore someone in serious need of help. its petty. money is paper...what is a life?
not to mention, i dont know about the rest of you, but i hail from a culture that is very individualistic, to the point of apathy toward others' suffering. i have heard folks talk about watching a young woman being raped on the street while they just went on with their lunch.... didnt call for help... didnt intervene in any way. why? "she isnt me, so its not my problem." or the ever-prevalent attitude of "but i dont get a cookie for helping them with that, so why bother?" and i recall a time i bore witness to a womans son hit by a drunk driver, and nobody stopped to help her as her son lay bleeding on the asphalt. (i was the only one to pound on a nearby houses door to use the phone to call an ambulance, out of all the people going by.)
sickening.


You're not the only one who came from not a lot of money. Lots of people suffer economic problems, either in the past or now. Not everybody can afford to just give away money they spent a long time saving JUST because of a story they can't prove of a little child who claims his mother's ill.

Also you can earn a lot of money just by doing some yard work and if you don't blow all your money.

For example: For a long time, my parents didn't give me ANY allowance because they said they put a roof over my head, feed and clothe me (which I agree with and respect their reason). At twelve years old, I earned my play money by going door to door twice a week and shoveling sidewalks and driveways (I would do the entire right side of my street the first day then the left on the next). In the summer times, I mowed the lawn using the same method. I provided my own lawn mower and shower too. If I didn't screw around, I got done within six hours, and I got paid 10 dollars per lawn minus one of my neighbors, who also had me do his backyard so he paid me 20. When I had extra time, I got an extra 5-15 dollars (depending on the neighbor) to stick around and pull weeds or scrap the ice off their car and house windows.

I had 9 neighbors on my street, and 10 on the other. 19 neighbors total. 18x10 = $180 + $20 (neighbor with big yard) = $200 dollars. That's not bad for two days of lawn mowing/snow shoveling. Plus if you assume I pulled weeds or scrapped ice for every single neighbor, and assuming they pay me $5 dollars, that's another $95 though some paid me more because I would do more windows or pull a lot of weeds. In total that would be $295 dollars which is pretty fantastic. It's not that hard to earn a decent amount of money from just some simple yard work. Though it DOES also depend on how old the child was. I was twelve when I did this, so kids younger obviously probably won't do that.

I never did this every day for my neighbors, but there are OTHER neighborhoods you could go too if you were really desperate. I was desperate enough to go to the next block over and do even some MORE yard work about four times. I did this for a year and a half, and in that amount of time, I earned about $13,900. Of course, I spent a good portion, but by the time I moved, I had $7,000 in my bank account. (Don't have it anymore, I spent it all on buying a car, which I am proud to say I bought 100% with my own money)

Life Stage: Teen Traits: Hopeless Romantic, Computer Whiz, Couch Potato, Shy Partner: Ted
School: High School Career: Writing; Fan Fiction Drafter Miscellaneous: Rich; Scorpio
Alchemist
#40 Old 6th Nov 2011 at 5:09 PM Last edited by SuicidiaParasidia : 24th Nov 2011 at 9:29 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by SimsLover50
The scenario is vague I agree. However, I think everyone should be given a choice. Taking a choice away from a person via stealing is force. I'm opposed to forcing people even for a just cause to do what one person thinks is right. The money doesn't belong to the boy or his mom. They are stealing, even if it is for a good cause.


addressing the bold parts in order:

everyone does have a choice. you cant not choose something. even by not choosing anything, you are choosing to not choose. an unsavory choice is not less of a choice than a positive choice simply because its not preferable.

so itd be fine if a bunch of people agreed with it? that kind of leans toward 'its not right unless the majority agrees with it'--and im sure i dont need to tell you that the majority isnt always right. stupid ideas will still be stupid even when widely embraced.

and technically, money doesnt belong to anybody. you cant part with your money and then demand to get it back because those bills are yours. theres no way to "own" money like you own a house or car, or even a pet, thus, does it truly "belong to" anyone?

Quote: Originally posted by SpookyOkyBatGirl
You're not the only one who came from not a lot of money. Lots of people suffer economic problems, either in the past or now. Not everybody can afford to just give away money they spent a long time saving JUST because of a story they can't prove of a little child who claims his mother's ill.

Also you can earn a lot of money just by doing some yard work and if you don't blow all your money.

For example: For a long time, my parents didn't give me ANY allowance because they said they put a roof over my head, feed and clothe me (which I agree with and respect their reason). At twelve years old, I earned my play money by going door to door twice a week and shoveling sidewalks and driveways (I would do the entire right side of my street the first day then the left on the next). In the summer times, I mowed the lawn using the same method. I provided my own lawn mower and shower too. If I didn't screw around, I got done within six hours, and I got paid 10 dollars per lawn minus one of my neighbors, who also had me do his backyard so he paid me 20. When I had extra time, I got an extra 5-15 dollars (depending on the neighbor) to stick around and pull weeds or scrap the ice off their car and house windows.

I had 9 neighbors on my street, and 10 on the other. 19 neighbors total. 18x10 = $180 + $20 (neighbor with big yard) = $200 dollars. That's not bad for two days of lawn mowing/snow shoveling. Plus if you assume I pulled weeds or scrapped ice for every single neighbor, and assuming they pay me $5 dollars, that's another $95 though some paid me more because I would do more windows or pull a lot of weeds. In total that would be $295 dollars which is pretty fantastic. It's not that hard to earn a decent amount of money from just some simple yard work. Though it DOES also depend on how old the child was. I was twelve when I did this, so kids younger obviously probably won't do that.

I never did this every day for my neighbors, but there are OTHER neighborhoods you could go too if you were really desperate. I was desperate enough to go to the next block over and do even some MORE yard work about four times. I did this for a year and a half, and in that amount of time, I earned about $13,900. Of course, I spent a good portion, but by the time I moved, I had $7,000 in my bank account. (Don't have it anymore, I spent it all on buying a car, which I am proud to say I bought 100% with my own money)


same deal as above:

where did i ever state that i was? why was that necessary to say? i dont claim to speak or all, and i wont ever claim to speak for all.

again, and if you want, you can imagine me speaking it slowly; i am responding to the situation as if it were not at all untrue. proof is not an issue in the equation that i am responding to. jesus christ, does anybody read any more? and again, financially, im not in a position to preach about shoulds and shouldnts, but again, the scenario is that the money is excess. not being used for food, water, health bills, shelter, or clothing. money is used to obtain the bare essentials, it is not a bare essential in and of itself.

last i checked, if we're agreeing that you* have a job and worked for that money (to spend on something that you dont actually need)... its not the last youll ever see of it. particularly if you belonged to a union or something, but those are specifics that could evolve into a whole other argument, so im dropping that one there.

you can also "earn a lot of money" through porn and drug dealing, but circumstance has a lot to do with it. if you live in a big city where most people walk and dont have yards, youre a little bit up shit creek without a paddle, arent ya?
and thats not taking into account that the child in this situation probably doesnt have their own lawn mower/shovel/gardening gloves. good luck mowing a lawn with your teeth.
and again, circumstance comes to play in how energetic this child might be. and how old they are. if its a malnutritioned 6 year old in the city, your argument loses all of its value. if its a 12 year old in the suburbs who eats on a regular basis, then i would be the one at a loss.

thats also completely ignoring what some people deem "child" in terms of age, versus what others do.
ive had a doctor refer to me as a "child" when i was in an emergency room for heart problems... i was 18 years old, at the time. (blew my mind. until then, id only heard myself referred to as a "young adult".)

theres also the question of just how deathly ill the mother is. if shes going to die in 5 weeks, not all the yard work you can find would fufill the funds necessary to get her some urgent care (though perhaps by then, itd be too late, anyway). if she'll die in a year or two, you're still a good few grand away from a possible treatment. i suppose this would also be the part with what she was sick with, came into play (cancer versus a ridiculously high fever/constant vomiting type deal)... if its something thatll kill her in even less than 5 weeks, you can bet that yard work/chores wont save her.


regardless of the specifics, i, personally, see money as much less valuable than a mother. unless im using it to clothe, feed, shelter, or otherwise supplement my basic needs, its expendable... and its probably a personal trait that "stealing OMG" doesnt bother me as much as it might bother someone who can afford to be highly moralistic about their dealings with money. life just isnt always pretty, and i dont see that as a good enough reason to knowingly let a kid who has nobody else to go to, lose the only person they depend on in their lives.
and, of course...all you wonderful folks who have pointed out that, oh noes, the kid is learning that stealing is okay if you let him get away with it...what do you think theyre learning if someone who has money to spare, wont spare it, even knowing how dire someone elses situation is compared to theirs? learning isnt something you turn on or off, or a sim trait that only kicks on at specific moments. youre always teaching, and youre always learning. same thing goes for children.

would you be happier teaching them that stealing is okay in certain dire situations, or that people dont give a shit if your/your loved ones' life is in the balance if you do something that they dont like?
quite frankly, i think a child would be more turned on to a life of crime and disregard for fellow beings when they learn that those fellow beings wont help them at all if they so much as make one misstep in the name of something that is actually a worthy cause.
so, yes. when people cry "stealing** is WRONG" in the face of a persons life hanging in the balance, i find it petty. its an excuse to just not give a crap about someone who isnt you* in favor of hanging onto a few pieces of green paper.
... i dont know where im going with this any more, so im going to just go make some coffee.


*general "you". i should just put this as a disclaimer in my signature, or something, since if i dont, someone will (and always DOES) come along and go "ME SPECIFICALLY?!?!?!" as if i have the audacity to entertain that i have a semblance of a clue about anything pertaining to them specifically, and would be so bold as to actually point to them while speaking my generalizations.
**also assuming that its just stealing/pickpocketing. no assault or knives/guns involved.

EDIT: i also forgot to add that you, personally, had parents with jobs (who paid for your food, shelter, etc) as you did your yard work. you didnt have to account for food or rent. assuming that the kid in the scenario has only themselves to count on, even your yard work math wouldnt accurately account for the money he'd need to spend on rent and food just to maintain himself. and, yes, that would slow his progress toward a goal amount considerably.

"The more you know, the sadder you get."~ Stephen Colbert
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." ~ Jon Stewart
Versigtig, ek's nog steeds fokken giftig
Instructor
#41 Old 6th Nov 2011 at 5:24 PM
Quote:
everyone does have a choice. you cant not choose something. even by not choosing anything, you are choosing to not choose. an unsavory choice is not less of a choice than a positive choice simply because its not preferable.


Not really. Stealing to fund your mom's medicine is force. When you steal from someone you are taking by force and thus taking away someone's right to decide what they want to do with their money.

Quote:
so itd be fine if a bunch of people agreed with it? that kind of leans toward 'its not right unless the majority agrees with it'--and im sure i dont need to tell you that the majority isnt always right. stupid ideas will still be stupid even when widely embraced.


Never said that.

Quote:
and technically, money doesnt belong to anybody. you cant part with your money and then demand to get it back because those bills are yours. theres no way to "own" money like you own a house or car, or even a pet, thus, does it truly "belong to" [I]anyone


You certainly can own money. Collectible coin owners would beg to differ. But that's deviating far from the initial arguement.
Banned
#42 Old 6th Nov 2011 at 10:31 PM
Call me greedy, but I would get my money back. I work my ass off and don't get paid much, and if I had extra money and some thieving little bastard just snatched it out of my hands, I wouldn't just sit there thinking "Oh, I'm sure he has good intentions." because honestly, who can be sure? I'd love to help him and his mother out, but I do not help liars, thieves, or cheats. If the child had come up to me, and asked me if I could help, I would try, but as soon as he steals form me, I am not happy with him.
Instructor
#43 Old 7th Nov 2011 at 12:08 AM
These kind of debates are interesting because asked a certain way, there is no 'right' or 'wrong' answer.

This is like the question if you saw your child and a boat of other small children going down the river to their doom and you could only save 1 boat, who would you save.... To a certain extent they are intended to make you think, but also make you feel a bit guilty as both scenarios royally suck.

I doubt anyone wants the kid's mother to die, and most people would give money to prevent that from happening if the facts are presented properly.

In this country, a child pickpocket would be hard pressed to find anyone with cash on him though. He'd go for the credit cards, charge away, and well, sad as it is, the person who was stolen from woulg get their money eventually as most cc are insured.
Scholar
#44 Old 7th Nov 2011 at 1:33 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Extensa5420
If I were the child, then I would return the money back to its proper owner. Its not right to take things that are not rightfully yours, no matter how desperate you are. I would accept my suffering and pray to God that my mother will get better. If my prayers work, then I shall thank God for making my mother well. If my prayers fail, let's just hope that she goes to heaven and I to hell. On the other hand, if I do enough good deeds in the world, God can forgive me and bring me to heaven, so I can see my mother again! (Note: Prayers may not work for the irreligious; however, they may provide some emotional and spiritual comfort.)

If I were the victim of theft, then I would demand the money back. However, because I see the child's ill mother, my heart would be touched. I will take the money and buy whatever I want. However, I will help the child raise funds for his or her mother's illness to help the mother get better. Maybe, the child and I can raise a fundraiser and an awareness program. Money raised in the fundraiser will go to ill people affected by this disease -- the child's mother and others like her.


I thought you said in another thread that you are an atheist. In any case, I think it's best to be a little more proactive than just sitting back and hoping things will get better, but that one should be proactive in a morally acceptable manner. Stealing is not morally acceptable, but asking for charity and working are.
Test Subject
#45 Old 7th Nov 2011 at 2:02 AM
best to call Child Services. Let the professionals help the boy and mother, Social Workers have the training.

Get your money back, walk away and don't look back.

i'm confident there are genuine friends and family in our lives who value shared times.
Inventor
#46 Old 23rd Nov 2011 at 6:35 AM
Hell yes I'd take my hard earned money back. It's a dog eat dog world out there.

Besides, I'd rather beg for money than steal it and I'd rather get a paper run than beg for it.
Top Secret Researcher
#47 Old 24th Nov 2011 at 2:38 AM
This is on a Harry Potter sorting hat quiz O_o The question, I mean.
I don't give money to thieves; if he had asked instead of stealing it, maybe I would have helped.


ENTJ
Banned
#48 Old 24th Nov 2011 at 7:43 PM
Get it back. The kid should get a job if he needs money.
Instructor
#49 Old 25th Nov 2011 at 6:27 AM
Okay first off I give you my answer based off the question at face value.
-I would love to let the child have the money really I would but I can't even afford to put a dollar in the little basket they pass at church let alone give the kid money.

However this is a logical answer to a moral question so in theory thats what I'd do in practice I would buy the meds and give them to the child. And since I've always found that doing those kind of things not only makes me feel good it helps someone and anytime my family has done that kind of thing like buying groceries for homeless people ,dispite the fact that we cannot afford it, It strangly turns our luck around and things get better for us too. which would only silighty influence my decision.

BUT TO BE REALISTIC I would be far too suspicious too just give the kid my money. I would have to find out more.
Lab Assistant
#50 Old 6th Dec 2011 at 5:26 PM
Assuming I had psychic mind-powers that meant I could always tell if someone was lying... I would help the kid's mother out by donating some of the money and helping to raise the rest.

In the real world where you can't possibly know these things? I'd keep most of the money, and help the kid's mother out by campaigning to get the NHS to do their bloody job! Or to get the Tories to leave the NHS aloone and let them do their bloody job lol.
The funny thing is that, in the land of Harry Potter, even the wizarding world has free healthcare.
 
Page 2 of 3
Back to top