Pubdate: Sat, 22 May 2004
Source: Charlotte Observer (NC)
Copyright: 2004 The New York Times Company
Contact:  http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/78
Author: Randy Cohen
Note: Randy Cohen writes The Ethicist column for the New York Times Magazine

Everyday Ethics

SHOULD EX-PROSECUTOR ENGAGE IN DRUG USE?

Q. I am a former federal prosecutor who has investigated and
prosecuted narcotics traffickers. A few of my friends smoke marijuana
and use other recreational drugs, and I have no problem tolerating
that. But would it be unethical of me to use such drugs myself, having
helped imprison drug offenders? I find it difficult to articulate what
I find unethical here, apart from the illegality and feelings of hypocrisy.

- -----

A chain-smoking family doctor is a hypocrite: She advises patients to
act one way while she acts another. An ethics columnist who preaches
moderation but acts licentiously is a hypocrite, too. But the failure
to practice what you preach doesn't necessarily reveal a lack of
ethics, just a lack of character. Both the hypothetical doctor and the
imaginary columnist know that their advice is good; they simply lack
the strength to follow it themselves.

If you still support the drug laws but can't resist the siren song of
drug use, hypocrisy (and illegality) might account for your
discomfort. But what I infer from your tolerating drug use in friends
and your contemplating it yourself now is that you have come to
believe that those laws are unwise. If that is so, you are guilty of
worse than hypocrisy. You did not merely give advice, you helped send
people to prison.

A major part of ethics is considering the effects of our actions on
others. Yours did real harm to those you prosecuted. If you acted in
service of policies you now consider unwarranted, you have an ethical
obligation to undo that harm, perhaps by working to free those
currently in jail as a consequence of your efforts, perhaps by helping
to reform the laws that put them there.

When you've done harm in the past -- and your query suggests that you
now believe you have -- your duty isn't merely to lament, but to make
amends.

There is a third possibility.

If the laws you enforced regulated different drugs from those you now
regard as benign, no problem. You might reasonably oppose the use of
heroin, for example, while smoking a little pot away from work on the
weekend.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake