Columnist slammed for saying ‘it’s OK to cheat on your dying spouse’

An ‘agony aunt’ at the New York Times (NYT) has been criticised for justifying adultery in a case of spousal sickness.

When asked by a wife whether it would be “ethically permissible” to have an affair in light of her husband’s accelerating Alzheimer’s disease, Kwame Anthony Appiah responded, “you’re entitled to take care for yourself”.

But Daily Wire journalist Megan Basham, who has stage four cancer, expressed astonishment at the exchange and testified to the faithful support of her devoted husband.

Fidelity dismissed

The anonymous correspondent explained that her husband’s condition had “rapidly accelerated” in the past year and that he was now deemed to lack mental capacity.

Describing herself as her husband’s carer, a single mother, and the family’s sole breadwinner, she continued: “I have a lot of working years and child-rearing years ahead of me — there is a large age gap between us — and I find myself desiring physical and emotional intimacy with a partner.”

Appiah, Professor of Philosophy and Law at New York University, replied that “you’ve had a lot to carry for a long time, not least caring for your husband as his Alzheimer’s has progressed. And you do owe him continued stewardship as his spouse.

“But given that his condition has evidently left him unable to sustain a reciprocal emotional and marital relationship, these obligations don’t mean you have to give up emotional and physical intimacy for the rest of his life.”

‘Glory to God’

Basham picked up on the story following a recent conversation with her husband “about what the matrimonial pledge ‘in sickness and in health’ means” as she faces stage four cancer.

She observed: “An utterly selfish, self-worshiping question that is answered in kind. Of course the New York Times says it’s OK to cheat on your dying spouse. Because they represent the values of the world.”

The Evangelical Christian concluded: “glory to God for my faithful, godly husband who would never ask a question like this and would immediately rebuke anyone who told him what the NYT’s abominable ‘ethicist’ says here”.