Becoming part of the solution

5 minute read / Listen

The question of whether we have the right to influence or change someone’s choices is a complex and delicate one. It revolves around the concept of free will, the capacity for individuals to make decisions and take actions based on their own judgment. While it is a fundamental aspect of human existence, the ethical implications of interfering with someone else’s free will are multifaceted and context-dependent.

In some instances, overriding another person’s free will is not only allowable but also our responsibility, as in the case of young children. When children are too young to make informed decisions and protect themselves, it becomes the duty of caregivers to guide and protect them. This is a form of intervention that serves their best interests, ensuring their safety and well-being.

However, as individuals mature into adulthood, the boundaries of intervention become less clear-cut. Adults possess the autonomy to make choices, even if those choices are harmful or self-destructive. It is at this juncture that the ethical dilemma emerges. Should we intervene to prevent someone from making choices that could harm them?

The answer to this question is not universal and depends on several factors. One crucial factor is the individual’s capacity to make decisions. If someone is mentally incapacitated or lacks the necessary cognitive abilities to make informed choices, there may be a more compelling case for intervention. In such cases, intervening may be seen as a compassionate act aimed at safeguarding their well-being.

Conversely, if an adult is making poor choices but remains mentally competent, the decision to intervene becomes more complex. Here, the motivation behind intervention becomes essential. If the intervention is driven by genuine concern for the individual’s welfare and a desire to help them overcome their destructive behaviour, it may be justifiable.

However, if the motivation stems from personal discomfort, a desire to control, or a need to fulfil one’s own preferences, then intervening in another person’s life becomes ethically questionable. Interfering with someone’s free will should not be about imposing our desires or values on them. It should be driven by a genuine belief that our intervention will lead to their betterment.

Ultimately, the decision to override someone’s free will should be guided by careful consideration of all possibilities and motivations. It should prioritise the individual’s well-being over personal interests. While the outcome of such interventions may be uncertain, it is essential to approach them with due diligence and humility.

Fear of the unknown should not deter us from making difficult decisions when necessary. Life is a journey of learning, and sometimes the only way to grow and evolve is to make choices, even if we are unsure of the outcome. If an intervention leads to unfavourable results, it can still serve as a valuable lesson, helping us refine our judgment and decision-making process.

The question of whether to override someone’s free will is not a straightforward matter. It hinges on factors such as the individual’s capacity to make decisions, the motivation behind intervention, and the potential for positive outcomes. While it may be challenging to navigate these ethical waters, it is imperative to approach such decisions with empathy, selflessness, and a commitment to the well-being of those we seek to help. Making choices, even when uncertain, is an essential part of our journey toward personal growth and understanding