When Proximity Matters

       One of the important elements of Singer’s principle that we morally ought to prevent suffering if it is in our power without sacrificing anything of comparable moral significance is that it does no take proximity or distance into account regarding who deserves our aid. I will argue that Singer’s focus on physical distance fails to account for a type of proximity that I believe shows the importance of taking proximity into account. Different from the geographical difference Singer argues against, I will argue that the proximity of one’s familial relationship with an individual can and should be taken into account when providing aid.

       Singer is correct in asserting that physical distance and proximity should not be taken into account when determining where aid is directed. There is no moral difference whether or not someone down the road is suffering or someone across the Pacific. However, Singer makes no mention of the proximity that relates to the familial relationships of individuals. I do not believe it is morally wrong to direct aid to my hungry mother or financially struggling brother instead of giving to those with who I have no familial relation. This is not to say I can morally spoil my family; it simply means that if my family is suffering, familial proximity ought to be considered as a factor regarding where my aid is directed.

       The value of the family unit is too important to not consider when determining where to direct aid. It is crucial for the development of human beings into functioning members of society to be given special attention and aid from their families and to continue to have this special sense of care for the individuals you are related. Ignoring the importance of family could have a potentially devastating impact on society that makes it necessary to take familial proximity into account when considering how we help others.