Q: Our family is planning a trip to Amsterdam, and our son is pleased to be going where marijuana can be consumed legally. We’ve always discouraged this activity, mainly because it is illegal here. He’s over 18, so I suppose it is his decision. But is there a double standard in allowing your children to engage in an activity in one place that you prohibit in another? — Name Withheld, Connecticut
A: You can unhypocritically urge your children to heed a single standard: Obey the law. You could argue that citizens in a democracy generally have not just a legal but also an ethical obligation to do so — and the absence of a legal barrier to using pot, as in Amsterdam, means the absence of an ethical one. While there may still be good reasons for your son to avoid marijuana there, fealty to U.S. law is not one.
Whether this single standard is a wise one is debatable. Making ethical judgments requires more than consulting local statute books. A 20-year-old who buys a beer in Windsor, Ontario, does nothing illegal. (That we know of. No, no — I mean in buying that beer.) If the same 20-year-old buys a beer just across the border, in Detroit, he breaks the law. But it would be tough to argue that, the law aside, he acts unethically in one case but not the other, or that moral reasoning requires us to carry a map, or that “legal” and “ethical” are synonyms.
Update: Because of a change in plans, the family went to Switzerland rather than Amsterdam. It is unclear how the son feels about cheese and chocolate.
Q: A few hours before a dentist appointment, I had to cancel because my baby sitter was ill. The dentist charged me $25 for canceling within 24 hours. Days later, just two hours before my rescheduled appointment, the dentist’s office called: Because of an emergency, my appointment had to be rescheduled. Should demand “an eye for an eye”? — M.Y.R., Pittsburgh
A: Surely not an eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth, perhaps. A professionally examined, professionally treated tooth. For a precept to be fair, it must apply no matter who transgresses. Here this means that whether dentist or patient cancels at the last moment, the same penalty should apply.
Send questions and comments for Randy Cohen to Universal Press Syndicate, 4520 Main St., Kansas City, MO 64111, or ethicist@nytimes.com.
