NYC Subway Death: Bystander Effect or Moral Blindness On December 3, 2012, a ter
ID: 400360 • Letter: N
Question
NYC Subway Death: Bystander Effect or Moral Blindness On December 3, 2012, a terrible incident occurred in the New York City subway when Ki-Suck Han was pushed off a subway platform by Naeem Davis. Han was hit and killed by the train, while observers did nothing other than snap photos on their cell phones as Han was struggling to climb back onto the platform before the oncoming train struck him. Davis was arraigned on a second-degree murder charge and held without bail in the death of Han. One of the most controversial aspects of this story is that of R. Umar Abbasi, a freelance photographer for the New York Post, who was waiting for a train when he said he saw a man approach Han at the Times Square station, get into an altercation with him, and push him into the train’s path. He too chose to take pictures of the incident, and the next day, the Post published the photographer’s handiwork: a photo of Han with his head turned toward the approaching train, his arms reaching up but unable to climb off the tracks in time. Abbasi told NBC’s “Today” show that he was trying to alert the motorman to what was going on by flashing his camera. He said he was shocked that people nearer to the victim didn’t try to help in the 22 seconds before the train struck. “It took me a second to figure out what was happening . . . I saw the lights in the distance. My mind was to alert the train,” Abbasi said. “The people who were standing close to him . . . they could have moved and grabbed him and pulled him up. No one made an effort.” In a written account Abbasi gave the Post, he said that the crowd took videos and snapped photos on their cell phones after Han’s mangled body was pulled onto the platform. He said that he shoved the onlookers back while a doctor and another man tried to resuscitate the victim, but Han died in front of them. Some have attributed the lack of any attempt by those on the subway platform to get involved and go to Han’s aid to the bystander effect. The term bystander effect refers to the phenomenon in which the greater the number of people present, the less likely people will be to help a person in distress. When an emergency situation occurs, observers are more likely to take action if there are few or no other witnesses. One explanation for the bystander effect is that each individual thinks that others will come to the aid of the threatened person. But when you are alone, either you will help, or no one will.
Questions 1. Do you think the bystander effect was at work in the subway death incident? What role might situational ethics have played in Abbasi's response? How might the bystander effect translate to a situation where members of a workgroup observe financial improprieties committed by one of their group that threatens the organization? In general, do you think that someone would come forward?
2. Another explanation for the inaction in the subway incident is a kind of moral blindness, where a person fails to perceive the existence of moral issues in a particular situation. Do you believe moral blindness existed in the incident? Be sure to address the specific moral issues that give rise to your answer.
3. What would you have done if you were in Abbasi's place and why?
at least 200 words each question, please.
Explanation / Answer
1. The bystander effect seems to be at work at the subway death incident since people seem to be nonvoluntary in lending a helping hand. The act of non-voluntarism could have been caused due to fear of the legal complications that might follow or due to the thought that someone else might help.
From Abbasi's response, situational ethics would have been re-instilled amidst a few responsible citizens who would have stopped themselves thinking that others might help.
According to bystander effect, In a group where one of the team member has caused financial improprieties, it is more likely that no would come forward to admit the mistake thinking that others might volunteer. It will result in a scenario where everybody will either be quiet or everybody will retaliate if someone is blamed without evidence.
2. Yes, moral blindness was evident in the subway death incident since, people were insensitive to the death that was going to happen in front of them. As individuals every human being is morally binded or obliged to be responsible citizens in society. But in this case they were willing to see a human die rather than lending a helping hand.
3. I feel that Abbasi himself had moral blindness since it is impossible to stop a fast approaching train as it would lead to derailment of train. Rather than taking photos, he should have raised verbal alarm and volunteered to help. Few other people would have then informed the station master and done something to avoid Han's death.
Had all worked together, Han's death could have been avoided.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.