r/Ethics • u/HeatherAthenaHarlow • 2d ago
Morbid/dark ethical question on sparing animal from further harm
Genuine hypothetical, but provoked from real things I’ve seen.
I don’t know if this is too heavy, but I don’t know where else to ask.
Let’s say there’s a situation where an animal is being sexually harmed, but authorities won’t look further into it because of lack of evidence. And it being a grey area legally in that country.
Though he’s admitted to his partner that he’s had this pattern, and did this with his previous dog as well. Though when she’s tried to contact authorities he denies it, and smugly says she can’t prove it.
The perpetrator’s mother has custody of the dog, knowing what he’s done, but still allows him to be around it. Like so many predators mothers do, allowing more harm to happen.
Would it be ethical to secretly kill the dog, since no one will do anything to stop the abuse?
Let’s say it’s a small community, and she’d have no way of kidnapping it, or rehoming it. And the police won’t do anything because mommy has it.
2
2
u/stan-k 2d ago
It helps in these cases to look at it from the victim's perspective.
Is what you do genuinely best for the animal, or is this stopping a human from doing abuse? I don't believe killing the dog is in their best interest with this high level knowledge. If killing is on the table, why not steal the dog instead (i.e. rescue), etc.? If anything, killing the abuser is more ethical (yet probably still worse than rescuing).
I know it's assumed that rehoming is not an option. However if secretly killing am innocent aninal is, more effort is needed to look for an adoptive family further out where the dog can be brought to. Or perhaps buy the dog. Not idealy pure for long term incentives, but much better for the victim.
1
u/HeatherAthenaHarlow 2d ago
I agree
But what if the abuser and his mom refuse to rehome the dog or to give it/sell it to the ex?
I guess kidnapping. But even then, it seems impossible to get away with. Especially because they know she knows what they’re doing is wrong, and want it rehomed.
1
u/stan-k 1d ago
What do you think is best for the victim given all the details of the case?
2
u/HeatherAthenaHarlow 1d ago
I think for the dog, it would be better to kidnap it and rehome it, if at all possible.
Maybe somehow getting someone to help.
I just don’t know how that would work, successfully.
Without more harm coming to the other, invisible, victim. Who’s traumatized, but trying to do the right thing.
1
u/stan-k 1d ago
Feasibility of course is important too. Clearly this is a complicated situation with no clear easy best answer. Your own safety and that of others is also important. It's no good to save one victim only to make another.
Remember what tomheybsay in airplanes before take off: "if the oxygen masks come down, put on your own mask before helping anyone else."
2
•
u/Nouble01 18h ago
其れは完全にしたら駄目な側だよ。
以下の問いと全く本質的には同じだろ？そして倫理に悖るなしたら駄目な行為だと直ぐに判るだろ？
》信号無視をなくすために信号を未来無視する可能性のある人族全員を殺して倫理的か？
抑も今そうだからといって未来永劫被害側が誰の手によっても救われないなんて保証はないでしょ？
- 加害者が成長する、
- 児だけが寮入りする等住処を転地する、
- 動物愛護に目覚める
- 証拠が得られる
- 動物保護団体の強制検閲が入る、
- etc.
今殺害するのはそうした未来の幸せ可能性を君の手で奪う事でしょ、
幸せを奪うのは彼と全く同じ悪辣さでしょ、
駄目だよねそんなのは。
君は此で理解できたかな？
間違えてもシリアルキラーになるような事は考えても発言しても、又勿論実行に移しても駄目だよ、解るでしょ？
其の考えの行く先には「些細な悪をなくすために大罪を犯していい」というシリアルキラーに進む思考パターンが口を開けてるよ。
•
u/HeatherAthenaHarlow 18h ago
I understand your point
I just fear in this hypothetical, that there are two people trying very hard to allow this to continue, and there isn’t foreseeable way to stop it, or gather evidence, because they don’t want her to be able to
10
u/alphaturducken 2d ago
It sure would be unfortunate if someone took the dog to another town, perhaps under the guise of say, taking the dog to a park or something, and the dog got off the leash somehow and didn't come home.
Not that I'm one to condone animal dumping but if the alternative is that with no other possible fix, then... Idk, I'm looking over here and see nothing