Paralysed by Prudence

Today I noticed an article about a girl who, having just given blood, fainted outside a busy department store in Perth - and nobody offered to lend her assistance. A pastor has commented that we have become "paralysed by prudence". Ah what a beautifully alliterative descripter.

Have we though, become paralysed by prudence, or is the source of paralysis a consequence of our separation, our isolation from people we know - really know like people used to know each other in villages and stable communities?

Does this phenomena relate closely to our earlier discussions on reciprocity? It would be most unlikely that a good Samaritan in this situation would ever see the lass again, and unlikely that they would get anything out of helping. Is that the reason? But then that is not new - because, after all, the story of the good Samaritan highlights exactly this situation!

We come back to paralysed by prudence. Afraid to help because it might backfire on us? Afraid to assist as the person may resent it and abuse us? Afraid to help because if could be a ruse and we'll be robbed or beaten or both? How many people do you know who would react with violence, or abuse, or theft? I don't know any. So how common are they in the community? Have the newspapers and TV and Internet reports bought it so to the fore of our thinking that we can no longer think rationally, and no longer act compassionately?

Shades of Michael Moore's analysis of our need for fear to generate our daily dose of andrenalin discussed in Bowling for Columbine here perhaps.

What can we do as individuals to fight the paralysis of prudence?

I'll commit to offering help rather than moving on by.