Critical Context of Law

Assignment 2

5. The characters in the Critical Contexts story are not generally filled with the milk of human kindness. What legal duties of care do they have and how would you distinguish between a legal duty of care and a moral obligation?

In actuality, the “critical contexts:” reveals numerous instances of the violation of existing moral norms and values. In such a context, the question concerning their ability to fulfill moral duties arises. For instance, when the child was stolen, it could be viewed as the manifestation of the violation of ethical norms but, at the same time, it was the professional negligence from the part of the babysitter as well as negligence from the part of parents, who failed to pay sufficient attention to their child. Therefore, the “critical context” reveal numerous facts of the violation of existing moral norms, which may raise legal issues. Hence, it is important to focus on the close interaction between moral obligations and legal duties, which may be closely intertwined, although the violation of moral obligations does not necessarily leads to the violation of legal duties. To put it more precisely, one may view a party’s action or inaction as negligent, but whether a legal claim exists is dependent upon whether a legal duty exists. Therefore, there is a distinction between legal duty and a moral obligation. Legal duty can result in a civil claim. Failure to fulfill a moral obligation can only make the negligent party feel bad, but only if that party so recognizes that moral duty exists (which unfortunately often is not the case.) Most if not all legal duties also will be a moral duty. However, many moral obligations that the norms of a civilized society would attach to an individual or institution do not constitute a legal duty (Miller, 1994). In this regard, it is possible to refer to the example of the child being stolen, when the babysitter acted immorally and violated legal duties, whereas parents violated moral obligations but they did not violate legal duties, because they were incapable to prevent their child being stolen and they were unaware of the existence of such a threat to their child. Therefore, both parties may be accused of the violation of moral obligations but the babysitter may be accused of the professional negligence, whereas parents cannot be accused of negligence.
Also, it is possible to refer to another example. For instance, if one sees a stranger drowning in a pool, no legal duty exists for that witness to rescue the potential drowning victim. However, if that same individual takes some action to assist the victim, but without good reason withdraws from such effort, duty may now attach if the victim has been placed in a worse position because of the withdrawn efforts (Norton, 1999). In such a way, individuals should distinguish legal duties and moral obligations because they do not always coincide. However, the legislation normally attempts to follow the existing moral norms and values to match moral obligations and impose respective legal duties on individuals. However, it is not always possible to match them perfectly. For instance, if a father steals a medicament to save the life of his child because he just does not have money to purchase the medicament. In such a context, the father faces the dilemma, when he has to choose between his moral obligation to protect his child and legal duty to observe laws and do not steal. In such a way, moral obligations and legal duties can be not only different but sometimes they are antagonistic. This is why people should be very careful with observation of both moral obligations and legal duties but they should understand that the violation of moral obligations do not always lead to the legal liability of individuals for their action or inaction.
Finally, it is worth mentioning the fact that the main characters of the “critical contexts” violate existing moral obligations abundantly but they do not always violate existing legal norms and duties. Therefore, it is the matter of individual choice to observe or ignore moral obligations, whereas it is only legal duties that impose legal liabilities on individuals for their action or inaction.