Medecins Sans Frontieres, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Medecins Sans Frontieres, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Med Ethics. 2018 May;44(5):299-304. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104399. Epub 2018 Mar 17.
Humanitarian organisations often work alongside those responsible for serious wrongdoing. In these circumstances, accusations of moral complicity are sometimes levelled at decision makers. These accusations can carry a strong if unfocused moral charge and are frequently the source of significant moral unease. In this paper, we explore the meaning and usefulness of complicity and its relation to moral accountability. We also examine the impact of concerns about complicity on the motivation of humanitarian staff and the risk that complicity may lead to a retreat into moral narcissism. Moral narcissism is the possibility that where humanitarian actors inadvertently become implicated in wrongdoing, they may focus more on their image as self-consciously good actors than on the interests of potential beneficiaries. Moral narcissism can be triggered where accusations of complicity are made and can slew decision making. We look at three interventions by Médecins Sans Frontières that gave rise to questions of complicity. We question its decision-guiding usefulness. Drawing on recent thought, we suggest that complicity can helpfully draw attention to the presence of moral conflict and to the way International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs) can be drawn into unintentional wrongdoing. We acknowledge the moral challenge that complicity presents to humanitarian staff but argue that complicity does not help INGOs make tough decisions in morally compromising situations as to whether they should continue with an intervention or pull out.
人道主义组织通常与那些对严重不当行为负责的人一起工作。在这种情况下，决策者有时会被指责有道德上的共谋关系。这些指责可能带有强烈但不明确的道德指控，并且经常是引起重大道德不安的根源。在本文中，我们探讨了共谋的含义和用途及其与道德责任的关系。我们还研究了对共谋的担忧对人道主义工作人员的动机的影响，以及共谋可能导致道德自恋退缩的风险。道德自恋是指人道主义行为者在无意中卷入不当行为的情况下，他们可能更关注自己作为自觉的好人的形象，而不是潜在受益者的利益。在提出共谋指控的情况下，可能会引发道德自恋，并且可能会影响决策。我们研究了无国界医生组织采取的三个行动，这些行动引发了关于共谋的问题。我们质疑其决策指导的有用性。借鉴最近的思想，我们认为共谋可以帮助人们注意到道德冲突的存在，以及国际非政府组织（INGO）如何被卷入无意识的不当行为。我们承认共谋对人道主义工作人员构成的道德挑战，但认为共谋无助于 INGO 在道德上有风险的情况下做出艰难的决策，即他们是否应该继续干预或撤出。
