Senator: Have you ever visited Niagara Falls?
Nominee: Well, there’s an interesting story there, Senator…
Senator: Do tell.
[At this moment, the nominee realizes that she must confess to having broken the immigration laws, which are taken much more seriously in 2039 than we take them now, and thus create a ruckus.]
Nominee: I withdraw my name from the nomination.
This is the most practical response to the “who would it hurt?” question. The school trip people might have to leave one of the teachers/chaperones behind to take little Susy a/k/a Betsy home. And that might involve extra transport costs, plus inconvenience or difficulties for the rest of the teachers on the trip, since they would now be short-handed.
If she gets into any legal trouble over there – gets caught buying crack at the Frankenstein Wax Museum or whatever they have on the strip there – she could get her sister and her teachers in trouble.
The school could well be on the hook, to both US and Canadian customs and to parents, if something goes wrong at the border and a child is detained for some reason or simply refused entry. I’ve had to deal with notarizing any number of permission notes to be produced to US-Canada border authorities by adults in charge of children under 18, and I can safely say that in all cases, proper ID is necessary. See this site from US Customs and Border Protection, and note especially this excerpt:
Emphasis added. The days seem to be gone when Americans and Canadians could basically cross the border at will, and especially so if a child is involved.
Sorry there was no mention in the OP that people could potentially die due to the girl using the wrong birth certificate. Perhaps I should reconsider.
Martha Stewart was being investigated for a more serious crime (insider trading) and when they couldn’t pin that on her for legal reasons, they came back with lying as a substitute. (See also: Bill Clinton, Scooter Libby.)
Also, MS is a big celebrity, and a tempting target for a DA who wants to make a name taking down Someone Big.
Nominee: Yes, and while I was there I smoked some pot. But, I didn’t inhale …
In addition to the other responses already given, it arguably harms the child, who has been given a lesson in lying for the sake of expedience.
While I agree that this is illegal, and thus inherently ethically questionable, I fail to see how the girl is “ineligible” to cross the border. Why doesn’t she just go and get another copy of her birth certificate from the issuer? My sister has at least a couple. They keep the original on file. You have to pay for a new copy, but it’s a lot better than committing a crime.
As for the actual question in the OP: if one assumes a degree of “wrongness”. then it makes sense that a lie for expedience is less wrong than a lie for subterfuge. But both are still wrong, and in circumstances where one is illegal, the other is illegal as well. You might be able to negotiate a lower penalty/sentence, but you would still get convicted of the same crime.
Border agent looking at official school roster: I see you have a Mary Smith listed, but the birth certificate says Susan Smith. Care to explain? :dubious:
Teacher: Mary?
Ms Smith: :smack: DOH!
Thats my take on it.
Of course many people LIKE to think that somethiing they are doing that IS arguably wrong isnt harming anyone, but this isnt it IMO.
Say for example I was doing my taxes. I know damn well I donated 5 thousand dollars to some charity and need to claim it. I can’t find the paperwork easily and that sucker needs to go in the mail now. I’d seriously consider faking it.
If I get caught it might or might not get me in hot water. But is it morally wrong? No IMO.
No one’s mentioned this but if she does end up getting denied entry at the border and/or stuck in Canada for a few it’ll probally be the last international field trip the school board approves for quite some time.
Here’s the reality problem (and a few have touched on it). Stuff like this ALWAYS seems to come to light in the worst possible way, like the school roster question.
Let’s say they are on their way back. All the kids are rowdy (like they all will be) and laughing, joking and shouting (like they all will be!). As they are crossing, one of Susan’s friends shouts “Hey Susan…hurry the hell up!!” But Susan’s BC says “Mary” instead, and now there is a real problem. The students all get help up at the border, school officials get involved, parents get called, and the whole class is delayed, with Susan potentially being held behind.
Who is harmed??
In addition, now you’re teaching an impressionable kid that it is OK to break federal law, since it’s just a “minor issue” and that it’s OK to lie. Who gets harmed there? The kid, when they do something dumb again based on the lessons they learn in this scenario.
Niagara Falls will be there for a long time. The kid can go later if she can’t get her documents straight.
To modify the situation a little…(and yes this is a real situation)
I live outside of my home country. I had to get my passport renewed. (as in take in the old one and get it replaced). Fill out all the paperwork etc etc.
Hmm…here it says I must get my photo authenticated by either my employer or a fellow countryman who has known me for at least six months. O Dear - I am self employed, and not near any countrymen who have known me for so long. But there is this guy I am meeting tomorrow - he’s known me for three months - I will get him to do it - JOY!
Now…my exisiting passport is checked by the embassy, my photos match in both my old and new passports etc etc -
Any harm?
If you had been asked to sing the photo in the same situation, would you have done it?
No.
This move is wrong in all senses.
The harm is mostly to the rest of us though of course the child/family/school would be penalized if the student is caught. Things like this result in the system tightening up to prevent abuses in the future. Once the border police figure this out, and someone will get caught doing this as has been pointed out downthread, the system will say to itself: self, this time it was just a harmless teenager, but next time it could be a dangerous terrorist. We must demand more evidence, do more checking, etc to prevent such abuses in the future.
So the damage done is damage to us all.
It is particularly stupid as copies of one’s birth certificate are readily available for a small fee.
missed the edit window.
the OP asked whether harmless lies are important. I say they are-because they are never harmless. The consequences of this particular lie have been detailed downthread. In general, lying teaches bad behavior, behavior that will have negative consequences for the liar. Note I am not saying any individual lie will hurt, one could get away with it, but it teaches behavior that will eventually be costly. Lying may be worth it, but it is never harmless, even if the chances of getting caught are remote (they can never be zero-one could get a sudden attack of conscience after all!).
HAHAHAHA…oh, sorry. Yes, unless you like large stretches of empty ground where historic buildings used to be, boarded up residential towers, cheap plastic food, hot-dog stands everywhere…yeah, the US side is not looking very good these days. There is a casino, though. But everything the kiddies might want to see is on the other side from where I am.
If there was no chance of getting caught, I think morally it’d be fine. Nobody at all is getting hurt. The fact that it would cause some harm to others if she got caught bumps it into “a little morally sketchy” territory. But I’d still be pretty tempted to do it.
Geez, for me the worry wouldn’t be getting into Canada, it would be getting back home to the U.S.
And I agree with rbroome. I don’t like any lessons that teach: “Breaking rules is fine as long as you don’t get caught.”