SWiM Starting with Me: May 2007

SWiM Starting with Me

A practical approach to promoting corporate and personal ethics.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

The Ethics of Everyday Decisions - Exercise

You know what your doctor says about exercise. You probably echo those words when you look in the mirror. Unless you’ve been living under a rock somewhere, you know what the health benefits of regular exercise are.

What about the ethics of exercise? Is whether to exercise or not a moral issue? Ask yourself what your values are around the following statements. Whether you agree or disagree, how does your answer affect yourself or others? (One description of ethics is considering whether an action has a negative or positive effect on self or others.)

Exercise affects my mood and how I feel about myself
Exercise affects my self-image and therefore, how I feel and act around others
Exercise affects my ability to carry out my job duties
Exercise affects my ability to care for my loved ones
Exercise affects what and how much I eat
Exercise affects my use of health care resources
Exercise affects my sexual health
Exercise affects how I carry out my life purpose

These are just some of the ways to think about how exercise may have a negative or positive effect on yourself or others. It is a moral decision. How will you decide?

A Scriptural Perspective: "...but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified." 1 Corinthians 9:27

Labels: , , ,

Friday, May 18, 2007

Ethics of Everyday Decisions - Diet

This is part of a series encouraging an examination of everyday decisions from a moral standpoint. How do our everyday actions help or harm ourselves and others? Think about it. For those interested, there is a Scriptural insight relating to the everyday decision, from a Christian standpoint. I welcome responses from those who might be able to offer similar insights from the Koran or other sacred writings. Over the next few months, watch for postings on health decisions, work decisions, environmental decisions, relationship decisions, and...who knows what else?

What constitutes an “ethical” decision? It is considering whether the decision has a negative or positive effect on ourselves or others. What we eat, or more importantly how we eat clearly has an effect on not only our bodies, but it also affects our mental well being, our social interactions, our family and friends, our economic system and, yes, even the cultural fabric of our society.

The effect on our bodies is well documented elsewhere, so just consider that your choice of what to eat is, indeed, a moral decision. While any particular choice about a particular food has little long term effects, we choose to build up or destroy our physical health by our collected decisions around diet. Beyond our physical health, though, the effects are not so obvious. However there is ample evidence that eating decisions are tied to self-image, mood, coping mechanisms, diagnosable emotional disorders, and more.

Dietary decisions, however, go far beyond ourselves. We have all been in situations in which choosing to eat or not to eat something hurt the feelings or offended the sensibilities of others. In certain cultural situations, the choice to eat or not eat certain things can have far reaching effects on our social relationships. Certainly, we see it often within families or in work situations.

Is it a stretch to say our decisions on diet affect our economic system? Hardly. The food industry is driven by consumer choice. Our choices help determine what is sold in our grocery stores and restaurants, what is advertised to our children, what is grown on our farms and what is imported and exported. For example, by choosing to include foods prepared with transfats in our daily or weekly diets ensures that transfats will continue to be used and affect our economy and our nation’s health (and therefore, the economy!).

Finally, dietary choices affect our cultural fabric. Perhaps it is not so much what we eat as how. The decisions we have made to make fast food a bigger and bigger part of our diet has clearly affected what our children eat, how people spend their money, how families cope with busy schedules around mealtimes, etc.

These are only some of the many ways to look at our dietary decisions, but it is enough to challenge us to examine our own decisions in light of how they affect ourselves and others. Decisions about what to eat are, indeed, ethical decisions.

Having established that, consider that each person must work through this decision maze for himself or herself. One person makes that hurts no one while another may make the same decision and cause a great deal of hurt. (This is easiest to see from a personal point of view. One person may eat peppers while the next person would suffer severe heartburn from the same decision). So, judge not, but do be intentional about your own decision making.

A Scriptural Perspective: One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. –Romans 14:2-3

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, May 10, 2007

CEO Pay - Ethics and Practicality

The ethics of CEO Compensation has hit the news again, this time in discussion of Doug Steenland, the man who pulled Northwest Airlines out of bankruptcy. The board rewarded Steenland with $26 million in stock awards (and another $10+ million to each of four other top executives).

There is no doubt that Steenland et al performed a great feat. One could make a good argument that it was well worth the approximately $75 million they were paid. But this whole affair poses both an ethical and a practical issue.

Ethically, is it right to reward top management for bargaining away employees' salary and benefits? Is it right to award the first fruits of what was clearly a team effort to just part of the team?

Practically, what are they thinking? NWA comes out of bankruptcy and immediately ignites a controversy with the very people who they will depend on to keep them out of bankruptcy. I don't know what Steenland and company's regular salary is, but I'll bet it's enough to contribute nicely to their retirement funds.

The board made a mistake in offering the bonuses. Steenland and his cohorts made a mistake in accepting them.

It's a matter of ethics. It's a matter of practicality.

Labels: , ,

Friday, May 04, 2007

Ethics of Everyday Decisions - Smoking

This is part of a series encouraging an examination of everyday decisions from a moral standpoint. How do our everyday actions help or harm ourselves and others? Think about it. For those interested, there is a Scriptural insight relating to the everyday decision, from a Christian standpoint. I welcome responses from those who might be able to offer similar insights from the Koran or other sacred writings.

Over the next few months, watch for postings on health decisions, work decisions, environmental decisions, relationship decisions, and...who knows what else?

The spate of laws around smoking in public places suggests that there’s more to smoking than one’s own personal decision. “To smoke or not to smoke?” It is a moral decision.

On the positive side, smoking may have a calming effect on the smoker, fulfill a desire for taste, or contribute to one’s self or group image. Many claim smoking depresses one’s appetite, helping people keep from gaining weight. Buying and smoking supports thousands of workers (and their families) in the tobacco industry and its entire supply and distribution chain.

On the negative side, smokers’ friends and families may have to stand by and watch as their loved ones’ health and lives are negatively affected. Smoking causes and/or contributes to numerous life threatening and life-limiting diseases and conditions for both the smoker and those close enough to inhale the secondhand smoke. As a result, individuals, companies and society bear higher health care costs. Smoking produces litter and indoors, coats walls and furnishings with a yellowish substance. As a result, more frequent cleaning is required, increasing costs to building owners, employers and taxpayers.

There may be more implications, positive and negative, but just considering the ones above, you can see that decisions around smoking are moral decisions, in addition to practical, political, financial and others.

A Scriptural Perspective: “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.” -1st Corinthians 3:16-17

Labels: , ,