Previous posts in this discussion:
PostMore on the Diplomat's Dilemma (Timothy Brown, USA, 11/26/14 4:30 am)
On the suggestions of Mr. Mauricio (25 November) and General Sullivan (Marine to Marine):
First, about helping the applicant's son shop for a doctor willing to give a different diagnosis.
Only doctors that had been investigated and approved by the State Department/Embassy were authorized to do medical examinations of visa applicants. (And I had little or no knowledge of how to find one willing to bend the rules and risk the consequences if caught.)
Had the applicant's son successfully found and employed a doctor from outside the process, his diagnosis would not have been acceptable.
Had the doctor been inside the system made a diametrically opposite diagnosis, there probably would have been an investigation as to whether or not a bribe had been involved.
Both gentlemen suggest that, faced with this dilemma, I should take the initiative and knowingly break the law in the name of compassion.
Do other WAISers agree that, at his or her discretion, a Consul or other officer sworn to uphold the law is free to ignore the law?
Or can someone else suggest how I can resolve my dilemma?.
JE comments: This one does require Solomonic wisdom--or perhaps that of Sancho Panza, who proved to be extremely wise during his short-lived tenure as governor of the "ínsula" of Barataria. The problem with Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development, discussed by Leo Goldberger on 25 November, is that it doesn't guarantee you'll keep your job.
Next to take the Dilemma Challenge, Bienvenido Macario.