Letter to the Ethicist
My partner and I share a close friendship with a remarkable single father who is doing his best to raise his children. Although he is a devoted parent, his financial situation is challenging; he earns a modest income, carries significant debt, and struggles with the constant stress that money issues bring to his household. Despite these challenges, he owns their small, yet cozy home. Over the years, we’ve offered him various unsolicited financial gifts ranging from small to medium amounts, as well as the opportunity to borrow from us without interest in times of emergency. He has accepted our offers a few times and has consistently repaid us in installments.
Currently, however, the family’s kitchen is in dire need of repair, with several parts rendered almost unusable due to its poor structural condition. They have mentioned that a partial remodel would greatly enhance their daily lives and overall enjoyment at home. My partner is eager to provide him with a significant financial gift to cover the cost of these necessary repairs, with a clear stipulation that the funds be allocated specifically for the kitchen remodel. While I also want them to have a functional kitchen, I have reservations about our friend’s potential priorities, which might differ from ours. He might prefer to use the money to reduce his debt, treat his children, or address other pressing needs that are important to him.
I believe that placing conditions on this gift would come across as controlling and could even feel demeaning to him. Instead, I would be comfortable suggesting, “We estimate that a partial kitchen remodel would cost this amount. Please feel free to use it for that purpose or for whatever you deem most important.” My partner argues that making the gift conditional on the kitchen remodel is akin to providing a new car or a generous gift card to a particular store. However, I counter that if our friend had different priorities, he could at least sell the car or use the gift card for items he could then resell, thus giving him more flexibility. Since we jointly own all our assets, this decision would ultimately require mutual agreement. What are your thoughts on this situation?
Response from the Ethicist:
Let’s delve deeper into the car analogy you mentioned. Imagine you’ve expressed a desire for a new sedan, perhaps one you’ve been eyeing for some time, but you’re short on cash to make the purchase. If your affluent and generous friend, Mary, surprises you by having that exact model delivered as a birthday gift, would you feel offended?
While the gift may imply that Mary’s financial situation is more favorable than yours, you’ve never shied away from acknowledging that fact. In the past, she has used her financial resources to benefit you without straining your friendship. Generosity can indeed create a sense of moral obligation to the giver, but this only becomes problematic if that obligation turns into a power dynamic where the donor exerts control over you.
Thus, the gift doesn’t have to be perceived as demeaning. Regarding the notion of control: by giving you the car rather than simply providing the equivalent amount of money, Mary is making a decision on your behalf. Perhaps this isn’t how you would have chosen to spend the funds. However, if you accept the car as a gift, it’s essential to embrace it in the spirit it was offered. Your friend intended to support you by providing something you needed.
