Ethical Dilemma of Assisting a Loved One in Voting
My grandmother, who is now 97 years old, is grappling with advanced Alzheimer’s disease as well as significant hearing loss. Despite these challenges, she still retains enough awareness to recognize her loved ones and find joy in our company. However, communication has become increasingly difficult, complicating our interactions.
During the 2020 general election, she was able to obtain an absentee ballot, and her immediate family, including myself, assisted her in completing it. At that time, her cognitive decline was evident, though not as pronounced as it is today. I recall how she held the pen while we carefully explained each office and issue on the ballot. If there was any uncertainty, we would share how we cast our votes, and she would follow suit.
As the upcoming November election approaches, I find myself questioning whether it is ethical to assist her in voting again. I anticipate that the process will unfold similarly to last time, with her performing the physical act of voting while we provide guidance. My grandmother has never been a staunch ideologue, but she has always valued her right to vote. Prior to her illness, we were familiar enough with her political beliefs to have reasonable confidence in her choices. However, I am acutely aware of the thin line that exists between providing assistance and exerting coercion in this sensitive situation.
From the Ethicist:
Anyone is entitled to seek — and act on — advice regarding how to vote. This includes inquiring about how others have voted and deciding to follow their lead. If your grandmother is still capable of marking the ballot and signing it as a reflection of her choices, then she is exercising her right to vote with your assistance. However, if she does not fully comprehend the implications of her actions, it becomes problematic; voting should represent a genuine political choice, and it would be unethical to record a vote that does not accurately reflect her intentions.
When the circumstances are ambiguous, it poses a challenge to determine whether she is genuinely expressing her views. Various states have regulations that disallow individuals under guardianship or those deemed incompetent from voting. Nevertheless, it is crucial not to disenfranchise those with mild cognitive impairments. There is a significant difference between the ideal of civic responsibility — where one reflects thoughtfully on how electoral outcomes could influence their community, state, or country — and the actual rights one possesses as a voter.
In uncertain situations, I lean towards the principle of facilitating someone’s right to vote, as this act represents an essential form of civic engagement. It’s worth noting that in our polarized political climate, adherents of both major parties often perceive the choices of those on the opposing side as not only poorly considered but devoid of rationality. From their vantage point, your grandmother, despite her impairments, would not be an unusual case.
Ultimately, maintaining a broad franchise and holding regular elections is preferable for fostering social harmony than any alternative. For your grandmother, as for countless individuals worldwide, the simple act of voting may hold profound meaning that transcends the specific choices it represents.
