Mary Donohue – ALHE 5500 – Spring 2008

Waking Ned Devine - 15 points.

1.  What was the ethical dilemma faced by Ned's friends?  Explain, in your opinion, the situational ethics displayed in the movie and give 5 scenes or situations that best illustrate ethical dilemmas and define situational ethics in each of the 5 scenes. 

            The dilemma:  Ned’s friends had to decide whether they should go ahead and claim the winning lottery ticket of their dead friend Ned.  Since Ned had already signed the back of the winning ticket, only “Ned Devine” could claim the winnings.  Someone would have to pretend to be Ned Devine.  To go along with this, the rest of the townspeople would have to lie to the lottery man because he was coming to make sure “Ned” was really Ned.  Ned Devine didn’t have any next of kin (or so they thought), so the money would go unclaimed.  By claiming the prize, the money would stay in the town and be divided among the townspeople.

            A definition of situational ethics states “sometimes other moral principles can be cast aside in certain situations if love its best served” (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situational_ethics. retrieved 1/20/08).  In the case of this movie, the townspeople would all benefit tremendously from the winnings.  The small town was one in which everyone knew each other and seemed to be a close-knit group.  Ned was dead, he had no relatives and the money wouldn’t ever be claimed.  What would the harm be in taking something from their friend, who couldn’t use it anymore anyways, and allow it to help so many others.

            a.  The first ethical situation starts with the characters of Jackie and Michael.  Jackie finds Ned dead with the winning lottery ticket in hand.  He goes to his friend Michael to tell him and then they have to decide if they should leave it be or should one of them pretend to be Ned, claim the ticket and split the winnings.  The “right” thing to do would be to do nothing with the winning ticket since it didn’t belong to them.  The situational ethics comes into play when they consider both sides of the issue.  First, they said Ned had no other relatives, so it’s not like they were taking the money away from anyone else.  Jackie has a dream about Ned that he feels shows that Ned would want them to have it.  Are they hurting anyone by claiming the ticket?  No.  The money would be shared among the two friends, helping each of them out financially. 

            b.  The townspeople had to decide whether to lie to the lottery agent by saying that Michael was actually Ned in order to get a share of the winning ticket.  Again, situational ethics questions if it would be ok to tell the lie for the “greater good.”  By lying to the lottery agent, everyone in the town would benefit greatly.  The town is coming together as a tight knit community in order for everyone to reap the bounty.

            c.  The townspeople have a new dilemma when they discover that they will have trouble cashing the check.  They have to have “Ned” open an offshore account with a co-signer in order for the cosigner to be able to take out the money after it has been deposited.  Not only are the townspeople going to have to lie to the lottery agent, but now they would have to open an offshore account under Ned’s name in order to be able to cash the check.  The thought is that it would be no good to go through with the scheme if they aren’t able to split the winnings.  Again, who are they actually hurting if they do open this account?  No one.  If everyone gets something out of it, is it really that big a deal?

            d.  Lizzie Quinn has an ethical dilemma in which she needs to decide whether to join the townspeople in their charade and get an equal portion of the winnings or should she turn the townspeople in and get a larger reward (10% of the total winnings). Lizzie seems like an outcast from the very beginning, so her sense of loyalty to the townspeople didn’t appear very strong.  She was selfish and didn’t cater to the thought of situational ethics.   Her decision to turn the townspeople in was not because she felt it was a moral obligation to do so; she decided to do it because she wanted a larger portion for herself.  It was interesting how dramatic her demise was when she betrayed her village.

            e.  Maggie’s dilemma is whether or not to claim the total winnings for her son Morris because he was actually Ned’s son or should she be happy with her smaller portion and marry Finn, the pig farmer.  By keeping her secret about the true father of her son, she is able to have a father for her son and let Finn thinks he is the actual father.  Although her son was the rightful owner, she made the decision to not give him the money.  Was that right?  She made the decision on the best interest of her child.  She was still getting some money, but she was also giving her son a father.

2. I found myself booing or cheering for several of the cast...who were the good guys or bad guys in this movie for you?  State three good and 3 bad that emerge in this movie and tell me why this is so (6 total).

Good Guys:

            a.  Finn the pig farmer:  All Finn wanted was to get Maggie to marry him and be a father to her son Morris (because he thought he was the real father anyways).  He enjoyed being a pig farmer and just wanted Maggie to accept him for who he was.

            b.  Jackie O’Shea:  He was the mastermind behind the whole scheme of claiming Ned’s money, but he was a good hearted man.  He also showed his friend Michael how much he meant to him when giving his fake eulogy at the funeral.  Granted, he originally wanted to keep the money only for himself and his friend, but I still found myself cheering him on.

            c.  Michael O’Sullivan:  I loved this character.  He was drawn into the scheme by his good friend Jackie and you could tell he was uncomfortable portraying Ned at first.  When the lottery man came to visit “Ned” I felt his worry and anguish.  I just wanted him to say all the right things so the lottery man would leave him alone.

Bad Guys:

            a.  Pat Mulligan:  He tried to come between Maggie and Finn. He knew that Maggie loved Finn and vice versa, but Maggie was reluctant to be with Finn because he was a pig farmer.  Pat tried to weasel his way into her life by going through her father.

            b.  Lizzie Quinn:  Lizzie was the only townsperson to not want to sign the book stating that they agreed to lie to the lottery agent in order to claim Ned’s winnings.  She did say she would finally agree on one condition.  In the end, she went back on her promise and did make an attempt to turn the townspeople in, but in dramatic fashion, she was unable to complete her task.

            c.  Maggie:  I thought she was a “bad guy” because she kept poor Finn strung along.  She basically told him that she wanted to be with him but she refused because he smelled like pigs.  She wouldn’t accept him for the man he was.  She wanted him to change, even though he enjoyed his job taking care of the pigs.  He tried many things (like fruit scented soap) to make himself more appealing to her, but it was never enough.

3.  Was the welfare of the community worth the 'sin' or illegal activity in the movie?  Explain why.

            I do think the welfare of the community was worth the “sin.”  It really brought the whole town together for a greater good.  It was nice to see the enthusiasm of the townspeople when they decided to go along with the plan.  For example, they were celebrating in the pub after agreeing to the plan and the bartender asked who was going to be paying for all of the pints being poured.  Even though the winning was still unofficial, all of the townspeople raised their hands to offer to pay.  It showed true generosity and genuine spirit.  Everyone benefited from the winnings equally, so there was no resentment from anyone.