Literary Analysis Essay on Problem Child

Introduction

The play Problem child is George F. Walker's Suburban motel series first play, its setting is in an old motel and from the characters it follows the story of dysfunctional parents who by all means attempt to get their child back from the foster family. From a review, the play exhibits issues of financial aspects, class and government bureaucracy while having the face of human put on addiction issues. The play depicts huge characters like Denise, R.J., and Phillie as it humanizes stereotypes. For instance, Denise who is a drug addict, a prostitute and wants her child back. R.J who has been in prison whereas Phillie is a drinker. The essay will give insights on the moral dilemmas the casts face explaining how each reacted to the difficulty and their ultimate decisions regarding the awkward moments. In closure, form a reasoned view on if doing nothing is just as much of a moral choice as taking direct and intentional action.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Moral dilemmas are encounters when an individual is pressured to make a choice amidst two conflicting views none of which resolve the state in a morally acceptable means. In this play, Denise faces moral difficulties in the instance when their baby was born, and his husband gets imprisoned. Denise situation worsens as she needs money for the upbringing of the baby and out of desperation she opts ultimately to be a prostitute in response to the dilemma. In resolving the state in a morally acceptable manner, the mother calls the police telling her off of her bad acts, and the reason is to have the baby be put under foster care upon being picked by social workers. Denise also faces another challenge when they are seen with Helen, the social worker who was not willing to help them as much. Mysteriously Helen losses her conscious and falls lying dead. Denise is forced to decide either to shoot her dead with the gun she held or think she is already dead thereby bury her. In this situation, no opinion resolved the issue at hand in the morally upright way, but immediately Phillie a worker at the motel who is a drinker is seen trying to help Denise even with the conscious mind that he would become a criminal by his acts. From the actions, Denise responds to the dilemma by ultimately deciding to dig a hole to bury the motionless body of Helen which is still a choice not morally acceptable.

R.J. is married to Denise and is seen as an individual attempting to be part of this new community having been imprisoned for a while. In the act of awaiting the signal to get their child back from the foster care, when in the motel He also tries hard to make an impression to Helen, the social worker which never yield any assistance from Helen. After that R.J is seen returning home and meets up with moral dilemmas that needed him to do the right thing as his conscious told which was to call the police, but the wife is seen against it. Here R.J is torn between calling the police or giving heed to Denise ideas; however, R.J resolves to give in since we see Helen in the next scene seriously injured as she was not dead but buried alive. In closure, it is clear R.J faces a moral difficulty and in turn, ultimately decides to join hands with her wife Denise in a show of support. R.J has been this good person in the community and now resolving to such acts with ideas that it is the morally acceptable thing to do, is by showing love and support to your wife without thinking of ethics behind being an accomplice of murder crimes. Moral dilemmas put individuals at risk of everything to salvage another of which many at times people should go a long way to considering the consequences before making the decision.

Phillie is depicted as a drinker working in the motel as a cleaner but also in the event seen helping the two protagonists Denise, and R.J get their baby from the foster family. He is faced by the moral dilemma of whether to help Denise get rid of the social workers' body even knowing the dangers behind engaging in such acts of crime. For Phillie, at this juncture, it did not matter the , but he knew to be supportive of them getting their baby is morally the right to do thus resolved to ultimately becoming an accessory through helping Denise get rid of the body of Helen by him dragging her out and digging the hole to bury her alive. It is with this decision that Phillie stood out for and he is seen executing it efficiently. However, in scene seven we see Helen the social worker alive taking a shower though severely injured. At this point, the moral dilemma that Phillie likely encountered is that if the social worker is alive, it only means for him being imprisoned for participating in such crimes. He again resolved to several attempts of kidnapping the baby with the notion that he is just being supportive to helping Denise since that is what we all as humans are entitled to do, help others if in trouble but the question would be most times making considerations of consequences to filter choices before the act. It eventually shows the relation there is from the main characters R.J and Denise who portrayed imprisonment and ease to participate in criminal activities from the play as a state to resolving any troubling issues they faced in their broken-down lives with ideas of it being morally acceptable.

In my opinion, doing nothing is just as much of a moral choice as taking direct and intentional action towards ethical dilemmas. From such moral difficulties choosing to do nothing allows people to think through the action consequences considering the fact if its moral value is dependent on an outcome. Ethical dilemmas have since worked best to probe our moral intuitions applicable in various scenarios like murders. From the play, the casts are willing to violate a moral regulation at all circumstances to minimize harm but show love and support. It is sometimes the best decision to opt to do nothing not out of lacking interest but since the solution is not the best alternative to solve the problem. In this case, most people think the moral choice of not doing anything as an individual happens to be that they have given up it should not be so, doing nothing should be considered as a phase to learn. Not only does keeping ourselves out of harm by doing nothing build our emotional state but it is the moral way to move away from what hurts or acts of crimes like depicted in the play (Wojciszke, Bogdan, Michal Parzuchowski, and Konrad 52). Generally to all matters of life, it is impossible to apply one rule all times as each problem requires a different solution. Doing nothing only means it is an objective to making the situation better. For example, in the play doing nothing would have been the conscious decision by Phillie as such acts would have stopped reinforcement of Denise act of burying Helen alive but take the direct action of letting the police handle the situation.

In disappointing someone we love makes one at most times feel bad but that should not justify our moral choices. One cannot be responsible for not being where those who love us would like us to be just out of love. At times doing nothing is a moral choice but, of course, we must not always be there for people we love even when we know its morally unacceptable under the circumstances like being accomplices of murder. Similarly in the case of R.J the husband to Denise who offered to cover up for death because it was her wife and he needed at that time to show his full support and love. In improving our emotional state, it is best sometimes to walk away and do nothing. It is this way that one better analyzes the different instances make a filter on choices to make better decisions in the end. Doing nothing, in my opinion, does not make one selfish or seem self-centered but recognizing when to approach the situation at hand is key to any moral dilemma. It is evident in an encounter of a moral dilemma; it calls for a resolving solution but do not do acts of evil to bring in good results. In other words, it would merely be of significance if we are faced with trouble and torn between two choices; it would just be better you do nothing. According to moral thinkers further specify this claims to the doctrine of double effect that a person does an evil impact directly to bring about better results, of which at first thus serves in eliminating good conflict possibilities by resolving dilemmas (Porter 71). However, if at all the options seem wrong it would only be appropriate to do nothing rather than doing more harm.

Conclusion

In conclusion, from analysis of the moral dilemmas faced by different casts Denise, R.J, and Phillie from the play the Problem Child. It is evident how every character responds to the issue at hand of getting the baby back from foster family and the ultimate decisions they make of resonating to participating in criminal activities that in turn impact their lives. In my view, in life all problems do not bear the same solution thus some instances it would just be ethically right to make the moral choice of doing nothing as a choice directly and intentional to hinder more harm but resolve the issue in the morally acceptable manner eventually. It is important to note that in a moral dilemma we look out for ethically proper course of action and not logically possible course of action thus the choice of doing nothing does magic as it allows one consider consequences, filtering options and embarking to better decisions.

Works Cited

Porter, Jean. Moral Action And Christian Ethics. Cambridge University Press, pp. 71-75.

Wojciszke, Bogdan, Michal Parzuchowski, and Konrad Bocian. "Moral judgments and impressions." Current Opinion in Psychology 6 (2015): pp. 50-54.