GONE BABY GONE AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

When private eye Patrick Kenzie was hired to locate a 3-year old girl who had been kidnapped

from her home in the heart of his old Boston neighborhood, he sensed that he was getting in over

his head. As we follow him through the bizarre, twisted plot, he first becomes involved in a

covert plan to exchange drug money for the child. The plan seems to go horribly wrong, causing

her death. Kenzie, distraught, later murders a pedophile who has killed a young boy. It seems

odd, then, that in the end when he faces an ethical decision that he takes the moral high ground.

Through a series of plot twists, Kenzie discovers that the child Amanda is still alive and well

with her kidnapper - none other than the retired chief of police in charge of the kidnapping case.

Kenzie must decide whether to turn in those involved and return Amanda to her as he had

promised, or turn around and pretend he had never found her.

Kenzie could have taken a consequentialist approach as his girlfriend, Angie, begged him to do,

weighing the consequences of each option. He knew that the mother, Helene, was strung out on

drugs and alcohol. He knew that she left Amanda alone many times to go to the Fillmore bar and

snort cocaine, including on the night of the kidnapping. He knew that she had left Amanda alone

in a hot car for two hours while she went off to get high, nearly killing the child. He also knew

that Helene put Amanda directly in harms way by bringing her to the bar (she was our mascot,

one barfly tells) and she had brought her on the drug run when Helene and her boyfriend Ray

stole the dealers money. If Kenzie turned in Doyle and Amandas uncle Lionel for kidnapping

and returned Amanda to her mother, the child would lose the two men in her life that cared about

her. Worse, she would be subject to extreme neglect (a form of child abuse) by a mother that

cared more about drugs than about her child. On the other hand, Lionel (who had arranged the

kidnapping after overhearing Helene and Ray arguing about the drug money) had found her a

loving home with Captain Doyle. Doyle and his wife had lost their own little girl. They were

1|Page
 GONE BABY GONE AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

attentive, lived in the country, and wanted the best for Amanda and she appeared happy there.

If Kenzie decided to walk away, the child would have a chance at a normal and happy life.

But Kenzie was a deontologist. His strict Catholic values led him to see everything in black-and-

white terms. This was foreshadowed in the movie in his discussion with Remy after murdering

the pedophile. Murder is a sin, Kenzie says. When Remy retorts, it depends on who you do

it to, Kenzie replies, thats not how it works. It is what it is. This dichotomous thinking is

apparent when he confronts Doyle at the end of the film, saying (in reference to Helene), shes

her mother, and thats where she belongs. He reasons that Doyle and Lionel must be turned in

for kidnapping, because kidnapping is a crime. In a somewhat narcissistic way, the only

consequences he does seem to consider here are the effect on his own image as a man of his

word; perhaps he sees himself as a virtue ethicist. His argument against leaving Amanda with

Doyle is, what Im not gonna do is have to apologize to a grown woman who comes to me and

says but you broke your promise and you left me there it wasnt my family and you knew

better and you did nothing. And maybe that grown woman will forgive me, but Ill never forgive

myself.

People are complex. The world is complex. It is all too convenient to make decisions based on a

parochial idea of right or wrong, or by referring to a rule book - but black and white answers

dont take into consideration the rights, feelings, or well-being of others who might be impacted.

A consequentialist has a duty to consider the rules, but primarily considers the consequences of

his or her decisions to determine what is right. I also believe that to make effective

consequentialist decisions, you have to be creative. Thinking outside the box sometimes results

in a better alternative than the options that immediately present themselves, particularly if none

of the options seems best for all parties concerned.

2|Page
 GONE BABY GONE AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

In this case, I would not have turned in Lionel and Doyle, nor would I have returned Amanda to

her mother even if I had to break a promise. I would consider ethical principles in making my

decision, but ultimately take a consequentialist approach. Despite the ethical principle of

fidelity, I also have an obligation to act out of beneficence and nonmaleficence. As a

consequentialist, the latter two (which deal with the effect on others) would seem to override the

desire to uphold a promise. The principle of autonomy does not really apply to Amanda, unless

one considers the law of karma in which case, one might decide to let karma take its course and

let people keep doing what they are doing without interference. The principle of justice

subjectively can be served either way on the one hand, you have two kidnappers, and on the

other hand, you have a derelict mother who has abdicated her parental responsibility. Who

deserves justice?

In terms of the greatest good, leaving Amanda with Doyle certainly was best for Amandas

safety and her hopes for a happy future, and for Doyle and his wife, who now had a child to

lavish their attention on. It was best for Lionel, who could sleep at night knowing his niece was

well taken care of. Was it best for Helene? Well, in a sense, one could say it was the happiest

solution for her she had already gotten over the death of her daughter and was out partying

without having to worry about the burden of being a single mother. And better still, Kenzie

gets the girl! His girlfriend would have stayed with him had he made the decision that she

thought was in Amandas best interests. The alternative - returning Amanda to Helene - would

have all of the negative consequences I described above, and then some. As it turns out, those

consequences bore fruit almost immediately as you see Helene about to leave Amanda home

alone while she goes out on a date.

3|Page
 GONE BABY GONE AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

A third alternative which I would consider out of a desire to try to satisfy all parties would be to

see if some sort of guardianship could be arranged, maybe through the courts, to have Helene

declared incompetent and put into a rehabilitation program. Amanda could live with Doyle, and

Helene could be provided with resources to help her get clean and work toward regaining full

custody once she proved herself and showed a genuine interest in her daughters welfare. Doyle

and his wife could continue to play a grandparental role in Amandas life until she became an

adult, and beyond. If such an option were not workable, I would walk away.

In counseling, I will have ethical principles and a written ethical code as well as laws and

regulations to guide ethical decision-making. Although I will first consult these sources, I still

think a consequentialist approach is best. Only by taking such an approach, could I examine the

impact of my decisions on others and act in accordance with counseling goals to improve the

well-being of those who seek my help as well as those whose lives they intersect. For example,

suppose I have a client who is in an abusive relationship, and she tells me that her partner

threatened to beat her severely. Should I report this? What should I do? Under Florida law, I

am prohibited from reporting abuse unless there is a life-threatening injury. However, according

to the ACA Code of Ethics, serious and foreseeable harm is an exception to keeping a clients

confidence (Section B.2.a). Besides, the ethical code tells me that my primary responsibility is

to promote my clients welfare (Section A.1.a). A consequentialist would look at the alternatives

and ramifications. Reporting this threat to the authorities is likely to result in a police visit,

which will heighten the tension in the home and possibly result in a worse beating than my client

might have originally received in addition to possibly ending the counseling relationship

should the partner discover it was me who made the report. Trying to convince my client to

report the threat would result in a similar escalation of violence. Saying nothing is also not an

4|Page
 GONE BABY GONE AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

option, since my client is in a dangerous relationship and I have a duty to help her improve her

well-being, and saying nothing would only serve to perpetuate the difficulties and suffering she

experiences and not challenge her to think that any other life was possible. At some point, the

consequences of saying nothing could be deadly. Another alternative, which would be to work

with a safe house to help her develop a plan to leave, and meanwhile engage in therapy to build

on strengths and improve her sense of agency and self-esteem, would provide her with a means

of escaping continued injury. This approach would respect my clients right of self-

determination and create a positive outcome (not merely avoid a negative one). From a

consequentialist perspective, this seems to be the best alternative.

There can be difficulties with taking the consequentialist approach, such as:

It requires knowledge of alternative courses of action and their potential consequences.

Limited knowledge or understanding of the resources available to support different
alternatives can lead to sins of omission. In the example above, a counselor who was not
aware of safe houses and their operations would not even consider that alternative.

It requires enough understanding of the context in which the decision is made, in order to
accurately identify potential consequences of each alternative. Nobody can predict the
future with certainty, and it is impossible to accurately predict all of the ramifications of
our decisions, and so our decisions may have unforeseen negative consequences
turning a good decision into a bad one.

A decision that is right based on the potential for maximizing well-being may possibly
be illegal or may violate a professional ethical code.

Application of consequentialism in a way that maximizes the benefit to the client, to

others, and to society depends on the goodwill of the decision-maker. A counselor must
make sure that he or she is not making a decision based on personal benefit, such as
recognition or financial gain.

5|Page
 GONE BABY GONE AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

Personal bias may interfere with the ability to make objective decisions. When
determining what constitutes maximum benefit or well-being, counselors may fall
into the trap of projecting their own values and ideas of wellness and happiness on to the
client and others. The client may or may not agree on what is for her own good.

Despite the possible hazards of taking a consequentialist approach, I believe that when dealing
with human relationships, and particularly the counseling relationship, most ethical decisions
require it. After first consulting laws, regulations, and professional codes and guidelines,
weighing alternatives based on foreseeable outcomes allows the counselor to assess the impact of
the decision on her client, on others connected to the client, on society, and on the counselor-
client relationship. In addition, the legality or proscribed morality of each alternative can be
figured in as one of the consequences. Consequences to self-image (virtue ethics approach) can
also be taken into consideration. None of this, of course, precludes supervision and consulting
with experienced peers.

6|Page