Wampum

Better Questions

Each week, the New York Times Magazine runs a column by Randy Cohen called The Ethicist. In the column, readers pose questions about ethics and Cohen attempts to provide some guidance. It appears that Cohen is in need of better questions.

This week, Cohen deals with a question about the purchase of foreclosed property:

My partner and I are considering buying our first home. An acquaintance purchased a house from a bank that had foreclosed on it, acquiring it for half its value with no down payment. Some foreclosures result from investment firms making poor decisions -- I have no problem with that -- but others are the result of an individual's misfortune. The idea of profiting from a family's losing its home gnaws at my conscience. Is it ethical to buy such a house? David W. Machacek, Avon, Conn.

That does not seem like much of an ethical dilemma to me. Perhaps the party foreclosing on the property faces an ethical dilemma in some circumstances. Once the foreclosure has occurred and the lender is reselling it, I see no ethical issue for the buyer. In the interest of full disclosure, I must note that I have often purchased foreclosed property and made substantial profits on resell.

Randy Cohen agrees with me:

It is not just that you didn't cause any family to lose its home -- you did not -- but that foreclosure can be an acceptable part of a financial system. No bank lends money unless it is confident of being repaid. Using the home itself to back a mortgage allows people to buy one who otherwise could not, albeit with the risk that they may fail to make their payments and, sadly, could lose their homes.

What is necessary is that the borrower be given every opportunity to repay.

Exactly right. The clarity of the ethics of that situation suggests that Cohen is in need of better questions from readers. Perhaps some can be suggested:

Dear Ethicist:

I am a judge in the Federal system. I am also an avid hunter. I have the opportunity to go duck hunting in Louisiana with a group of friends. One of the friends is a very high profile government official. It is fair to say that without me, my friend would not have his current job.

My friend also happens to the defendant in a law suit. That suit also happens to be on my docket.

If I go on the hunting trip, my friend may have the opportunity to talk to me about the case without the other party being present. I find such discussions to be invaluable because they are not inhibited by the rules of evidence, the legal record or other technicalities. My friend and I can talk openly and freely on a hunting trip whereas in the courtroom, far too many people are listening, lawyers do all the talking and everything gets taken down by a court reporter.

Some people seem to think that going on the hunting trip creates the appearance of favoritism. The discussions we will have on the trip will not make any difference in my decision because I decided to rule in favor of my friend long before the case reached my court and long before the hunting trip was even planned. Can I ethically go on the hunting trip?

Sincerely,

Fat Tony, Washington D.C.

As the Ethicist usually runs two questions per week, let’s suggest another:

Dear Ethicist:

In my job I get to appoint people to be Federal Judges. Usually I have to get approval of the Senate but I found out that under certain circumstances, I can just do it and no one can stop me. Is that cool or what?

Anyway, I decided to appoint a good old boy to the Federal Bench down South. In the past, the good old boy belonged to some racist organizations and he favored segregation. In his previous job, he went out of his way to make sure that a guy who burned a cross in the yard of a black Mississippi family got off lighter than the law says he should. He also probably lied under oath about his ties to racist organizations.

I have already decided to appoint the guy, so that is not my question. The problem is that I need to find a way to send a signal to the racists that I am really on their side while not being hurt with swing voters. Do you see any ethical problem if I announce the appointment of the good old boy on Martin Luther King’s birthday?

Sincerely,

Junior, Crawford, Texas

I look forward to reading Mr. Cohen's answers.

Posted by Dwight Meredith at January 18, 2004 03:01 PM | TrackBack