The title may seem a little unusual. How can there be dilemma with empathy, when it is such a revered quality?
Empathy is certainly a desirable trait. However, it may not always work in a manner that we desire. It’s consequences can sometimes be against the interest of the individual, or the society. In that case, there arises a dilemma, should we take action on the basis of the empathy or not.
It was a happening evening in Connaught Place, Delhi when we met Lakshmi. She was a young girl, 10 years old, who was selling balloons. She came to us and asked us to buy her a blanket as it was a cold evening in winters of Delhi.
Normally, while helping such kids who are forced to beg due to unfortunate circumstances, there is a thought which often holds us back. What if the money that we give to them is not used for their welfare? What if they are controlled by an organised criminal group, and all the money that these kids receive gets snatched by their captors? What if our empathy is being exploited by such criminal groups, and young children are being trafficked precisely because of this reason? What if our generous supply of empathetic alms creates a demand of trafficked children on traffic signals?
This creates a dilemma – should we help them with money or not?
When Lakshmi asked us for the blanket, we were also in this dilemma. However, in this case, she was not asking for money, but a blanket, which had lower chances of misuse and getting snatched away by her captor (if any)? We wanted to help her but there one major problem. We were not sure how we should help.
To resolve this problem, we decided to know more about Lakshmi.
We: Do you go to school?
Lakshmi: No, but a didi often comes to teach us.
We: Whom do you live with?
Lakshmi: I live alone.
We: Where are your parents?
Lakshmi: My parents are dead.
We felt very sorry for her situation, after learning that she is an orphan and lives alone without any support. This raised our curiosity too and we wanted to know about her more, as we could not even imagine how Lakshmi was able to make her ends meet. We continued our conversation.
We: Where do you live?
Lakshmi: I live near the Hanuman Mandir (showing the direction).
We: Where do you eat?
Lakshmi: There is a dhaba nearby Hanuman Mandir which gives a meal for Rs 15.
We: Where do you get money from?
Lakshmi: I sell these balloons. I buy food and clothes from that money.
We asked her more questions – about how she handles her day to day challenges. To each of our question, she gave precise answer with great confidence and optimism. The dilemma that we had at the starting had died down at this point, and we wanted to help her.
Being unsure of how we can help, we initially gave her some money and she left. Later, we realized that we could do more. Having the privilege of education and information, it was our duty to connect Lakshmi with institutional help. We decided to call Child Helpline (1098) and do our part in ensuring that Lakshmi gets a childhood that everyone deserves. We informed the Helpline officials about Lakshmi and our location. In between, we tracked Lakshmi again, and asked her about whether she would like to go to school, to which she replied yes. Then we told her that we are calling Child Helpline and they will provide her a shelter and education. She became anxious after hearing this, and pleaded that she doesn’t want to go there. We tried explaining to her about how it can be beneficial to her and she could go to school, but all in vain. She was not ready to listen and ran away.
We were perplexed. What had just happened? Why Lakshmi is refusing to get rehabilitation while being in such difficult circumstances? Our dilemma rechristened itself in the form of doubt.
The doubt was whether there was any falsity in Lakshmi’s narration. We decided to investigate further. We found another girl who was selling balloons nearby. We asked her whether she knew Lakshmi, to which she replied yes. We inquired about Lakshmi’s parents. We found that her parents were alive, and sell toys on the streets of Connaught Place. While we did have an iota of doubt, but this revelation broke our hearts. We left the place disheartened.
After we left, we received a call from a PCR van. They informed us that they have arrived in Connought Place to rescue Lakshmi on the basis of information that we gave to Child Helpline. We explained them the whole incident, and they left thereafter.
The quick response of the authority solved another dilemma that we had. The perception of slow and inefficient authority holds back many of us in reporting such incidents. In our case, the response was swift and it strengthened our trust in “the system”. It made us realise that we, as indifferent bystanders, have also been a part of the problem so far.
Although our trust on Lakshmi’s story was breached, it was really heartening to know her circumstances were not that extreme, as she had narrated. The non-involvement of organised criminal gang in Lakshmi’s case was also a relief.
However, the dilemma remained with us. Should we act with our empathy in such cases? And more importantly how should we act?
Individuals are not the only ones facing dilemma regarding desitutes. Governments have also struggled with this dilemma.
While providing rehabilitation, and adequate social security is a ‘sine qua non’ for addressing it, what else needs to be done? What can be done to prevent trafficking of children for forced begging? Does generosity of people in giving alms, create a market for organised criminal gangs? How should we address the cause (destitution) and the effect (begging)?
So far there are no simple answers to these question.
The Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 has adopted an unusual and crude approach. It has criminalised begging. In 1960, the Act was extended to NCT of Delhi. Supreme Court in Harsh Mander vs UoI (2018) has struck down the sections of the Act (as extended to Delhi) that criminalized begging.
Another effort by the government came in the form of The Persons in Destitution (Protection, Care and Rehabilitation) Model Bill, 2016. However no major steps have been taken in this direction.
While individual acts of generosity can sometimes help some of the destitutes, it is the institutional mechanism that works better. Individual acts can sometimes create a market for trafficking. Empathy is better expressed by connecting the needy with institutional mechanisms, and helping the institutions towards achieving their stated goal. However, these are just broader thoughts, the contours are still entangled in the dilemma.
It is very unfortunate that I have to end this article with a lot of questions and very few answers.