I have a general ethics question that was prompted by another thread.

Are there situations where you believe you are justified in withholding the truth from another individual who it profoundly affects?

For example:

A third party, not bound by any professional oath, discovers that a man is not the biological father of children he has been led to believe are his?

A third party becomes aware that an indivudal was involved in affair years earlier but their spouse did not know?

A third party becomes aware that the CIA has been illegally detaining prisoners in secret prisons?

A thrid part becomes aware that you have a terminal illness then must decide to tell you?

Please compare the ramifications of continued fraud with the immediate disclosure of such info to the affected parties...

Low

Benefit(per individual) - cost(per individual) = descision threshold ???

Four thousuand years of ethics and we still can't figure this out in general.

I think it's mainly in the details. However, that puts one dangerously near the slippery slope of ethical relativism.

It's hard sometimes, no question.

My sister-in-law had an affair 20 years ago and had a child whom she passed off as her live-in's. I found this out 4 years ago. My husband, his brother, their mother, and I all struggled with this truth.

My husband's mother begged us not to reveal the truth to protect the child. We contacted the father and asked him how he felt about it. He had recently contracted a debilitating and life-threatening disease and had been hospitalized on 3 separate occasions.

He did not want the reveal.

I felt the most strongly about the truth, so my husband and his brother, both angry at their sister, allowed me to decide whether or not to reveal.

I decided that I was too agraid of ripping my niece's "father" away from her. He's been an awesome father. A second sister is his biological daughter, and it didn't seem fair to "take him" from the one.

In a bazaar twist of fate this sick friend hooked my husband up with his affair partner.

timing is so important

YOU are about to go into a huge career-life-changing meeting to give a presentation in front of the most important people in your field.... and your wife decides to tell you seconds before you enter the meeting "Our son George? You're not his daddy."

timing or lack of timing can make truth-telling an act of mercy or an act of cruelty.

I'm with Pep.

I try 2 eschew honesty at all times in all things, but there are certainly instances where choosing a "bad time" 2 reveal something could cause more harm than good.

But one must wonder: Even2ally, shouldn't the truth, however painful, be told?

Remember Usedlongago's story?

-ol' 2long

I understand what you are saying about timing, however, I would counter that for some information, there is NO good time to tell...which leaves only never, and as soon as possible.

Personally, given your example, I think it would be cruel to wait even as long as that meeting would take before telling me. I would want to know NOW.

The method is also important. Some things must be done face-to-face. Some things are better done by letter.

Low

Or how about this real life scenario. My 65 yr old father is expected to live for another couple of weeks at most. It is highly probable that his 41 yr old DD is not his bio daughter. When I fly home to see him this weekend should I pop the good news: "hey Dad, surprise surprise, did you know that M is probably not your real daughter?"

I very much believe in the truth, but not when it is used as a baseball bat to destroy the lives of others for absolutely no good purpose. I believe that truth should be used to help, not harm.

Mel,

I can't speak for your father, but I would want to know if I were in his situation. I would want to know that the woman I was married to for all those years chose to make me a cuckold and fooled me into raising a child that wasn't mine.

But that is just me.

I just don't get this idea of selective honesty, especially for folk that seem to so intent that honesty in an affair is essential, but somehow, paternity is of lesser importance.

But, perhaps telling you father on his deathbed isn't fair. You should have told him in the intervening 40 or so years that you have known this information. Timing probably is an issue here. You will have to live with whatever decision you make. I’m glad the decision isn’t mine to make (and I’m not being flip when I say this). Whatever decision I made I would always question if it was the right thing to do.

So much for Radical Honesty. Another MB myth debunked.

Here's another example in my case: my WH had a very dear Grandmother that was special to all of us,on both sides of the family.About the time the adultery came to light,she was rather frail and ill with cancer.We all chose NOT to tell her the truth about my WH and I for fear that it could really damage her more emotionally and physically.She inquired as to why we were all so thin,etc but we made excuses.

For someone like me who prefers the "honesty is the best policy" at all times,it was very hard for me not to be honest.But I also had to respect the wishes of my FIL too who had decided against telling her.

Three weeks later she died.And I am grateful that those weeks were not full of pain and sorrow at what my WH did to me,her great grandchildren and our families but were filled with old friends,family time,reminiscing and rest.

So in this particular case,I do feel it was appropriate to withhold the truth.

O

I disagree that it conflicts with the concept of Radical Honesty. [that is a concept for marriage building] Some truths should never be told. And this is one of them. The notion that I should go break my father's heart in the last 10 days of his life with such news is downright cruel and thoughtless.

Honesty does not mean that we mindlessly go around telling hard truths regardless of the consequences. Truth should never be used to destroy. Yes, it was a hard decision to make, but I feel confident that it was the right one.

I would also add that my father was not married to my mother all those years and never paid a cent of child support for my sister. He did not raise my sister. And lastly, in order to be certain that he is, in fact, NOT her real father, a DNA test would have to done and I am not willing to break this news without that certainty.

It's also highly disrespectful of your father that you would withold critical information from him.

I'm with CN. I should know. I should know NOW. When you keep that info from me, you disrespect me and prevent me from living my life with dignity. Even if it's only 10 days.

If there was ever a truth that SHOULD be told, the truth about my children's parentage is it...

The truth about an affair pales in comparison.

Low

OG, what about your affair was so critical that your GM would have had to know anyway? Your situation makes sense.

It does not make sense to keep secrets that directly affect the person involved.

It was highly disrespectful of my mother to lie to him all these years, I agree with that. However, it is not disrespectful of me to refuse to destroy my father in the last 10 days of his life with a unproven tale. It would be cruel and thoughtless to tell him at this late date.

I suppose I am trying to get at a principle here.

Let's hypothesize that you've just found out that your father will likely live another 20 years.

Would you tell him then?

It is at a man's core dignity to know that his children are his. I think any act that decieves a man into raising children that are not his...or even any act that leads him to believe that a child is his (even if he's been a crappy dad) is despicable...every bit as much as the lowest affair.

To adopt a child that you know is not yours and raise them as your own is one of the highest forms of love there is. It is love given freely...voluntarily.

To be deceived into raising that same child is abhorrent and despicable...to same degree.

IMO, Low

First of all, there is a difference between not volunteering information that you know and lying to a direct question. I believe you should always tell the truth when asked about something. However, you should consider the the situation when volunteering information, esp if it happened a long time in the past or the person is ill. If the situation is more recent then I think the omission of information can be just as hurtful as a direct lie. For instance: I was deeply hurt to find out that several people that I trusted knew about my WH's A and never even warned me.

As a step-parent, I think the act of parenting is more important than biology. So I don't personally see any good to telling someone they are not the biological parent of a grown child unless there is a medical necessity. That is different than it being a younger child with CS involved.

Agreed. You are an excellent step-parent, I'm sure.



Because you are a woman, you do not understand how important this is to a man. The "good" is that the man can live his life fully informed.

What if I found out that your H had a second wife that you were clueless about. Should I tell you?

It goes back to the "what he doesn't know won't hurt him" school. Is that they way we really want to live?

C-numb said:



radical honesty as described on this site is intended to foster marriage intimacy

I would be foolish to blurt out radically honest things in the general public ... believe it or not ... some things are NOT my business <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

I have never been a huge advocate of RH simply because it is too easy to interpret as "RAW honesty".

I don't think Harley advocates "raw" honesty. We are to carefully process and formulate what we share...but we should share it nonetheless.

How easy it would have been for me to never have told my W about the coffee shop incident. I wouldn't be heading for a divorce today.

Low

Here is RH ~~~~~~~~

[color:"blue"]

The Policy of Radical Honesty

Reveal to your spouse as much
information about yourself as you know;
your thoughts, feelings, habits, likes,
dislikes, personal history, daily activities,
and plans for the future.

To help explain this policy, I have broken it down into four parts:

1. EMOTIONAL HONESTY: Reveal your emotional reactions, both positive and negative, to the events of your life, particularly to your spouse's behavior.

2. HISTORICAL HONESTY: Reveal information about your personal history, particularly events that demonstrate personal weakness or failure.

3. CURRENT HONESTY: Reveal information about the events of your day. Provide your spouse with a calendar of your activities, with special emphasis on those that may affect your spouse.

4. FUTURE HONESTY: Reveal your thoughts and plans regarding future activities and objectives.
[/color]

I wish it were so straighforward, Pep

For example...emotional honesty...

Do I temper my reactions or do I just tell her "Jesus, I think that hair style is horrific".

WE MUST CONSIDER OUR WORDS BEFORE UNLEASHING THEM. RH can't be used as an excuse to do otherwise. If we don't execute RH along with the rule of protection, then we do nothing more than alienate our spouse.

Low