I found a great book in the public library with stories about mensch-like pro-baseball players. It's called "The Good Guys of Baseball." The book is out of print, so we ordered up used copies of the paperback edition for the younger kids to read this semester. When the books arrived, we discovered that the paperback edition has two new chapters, plus a new cover featuring two smiling men in baseball uniforms. Not being a sports fan myself, I did not recognize them (and truth be told, neither did I bother to find out who they were!).
Last week, one of the children pointed to the cover and shouted: "Hey, this is supposed to be the GOOD guys of baseball -- but these two guys took steroids!" Oh dear. Sure enough, David confirmed that indeed, these two guys who were featured on the cover and in the additional chapter had fallen from grace not long after the paperback edition had been published.
How would you discuss this situation with a child? Are these two men no longer “good guys”? Are they now “bad guys” because of what they did? How do we talk about the distinction between who a person IS and what a person DOES? Or do we make the distinction? Might these two men still be role-models for mensch-like behavior despite the “sin” of steroid use?
Last week, one of the children pointed to the cover and shouted: "Hey, this is supposed to be the GOOD guys of baseball -- but these two guys took steroids!" Oh dear. Sure enough, David confirmed that indeed, these two guys who were featured on the cover and in the additional chapter had fallen from grace not long after the paperback edition had been published.
How would you discuss this situation with a child? Are these two men no longer “good guys”? Are they now “bad guys” because of what they did? How do we talk about the distinction between who a person IS and what a person DOES? Or do we make the distinction? Might these two men still be role-models for mensch-like behavior despite the “sin” of steroid use?