A Callous Passerby

[Jazzy]

Roger Smith, a quite competent swimmer, is out for a leisurely stroll. During the course of his walk he passes by a deserted pier from which a teenage boy who apparently cannot swim has fallen into the water. The boy is screaming for help. Smith recognizes that there is absolutely no danger to himself if he jumps in to save the boy; he could easily succeed if he tried. Nevertheless, he chooses to ignore the boy's cries. The water is cold and he is afraid of catching a cold -- he doesn't want to get his good clothes wet either. "Why should I inconvenience myself for this kid," Smith says to himself, and passes on.

Source

Does Smith have a moral obligation to save the boy?

 

[Phazite]

This "Smith" just may be a sociopath.

 

[DrLeftover]

Smith probably didn't want to get sued, or face criminal charges, if he attempted the rescue and the kid died anyway, or was perhaps injured during the rescue.

In many jurisdictions, the "Good Samaritan" laws are meaningless and if you stop to help, you can end up in court.

 

[Bluezone777]

Sounds like a hallmark of the Me Me generation. He if asked will say he is a good person and have many who would back him up on that one even after this incident took place. Just shows how warped most people's sense of what being a good person actually is.

 

[Fayble]

A moral obligation!? Of course. He was worried of getting a cold? C'mon, the kid died which lasts forever, while a cold lasts a week. Do the math. His argument doesn't even make sense. The guy is just a selfish asshole. Sorry to ruin your nice shirt, don't worry I'll just die so you won't be inconvenienced.