The Role of Truth in Right: Separating Twins

Are we allowed to trick people into doing what we think is right?

What is the body of knowledge that makes one's moral compass more valid than the other's, such that it is allowable for one to circumvent the other's gut feeling?

I was having an argument with a friend about adoption. This stemmed from a recent news item that two twins, who were adopted by different families and were never informed of the other's existence, got married. It's difficult for me to fully comprehend the loneliness, shock, and anger these two must have felt. All this time they were not informed of this person who could have been their close companion, and now they've been torn away from both that source of comfort, and the companionship they thought they'd found all on their own. A double whammy of two of the most important people in your life being ripped away from you all at once. Add on top of that the stigma and self-loathing of having married and having intercourse with not just a sibling, but a twin. Its a strong person that would come out of that situation without committing suicide, let alone just wallowing in a turmoil of confusion, anger, hate, sadness.

And so the argument becomes, should the parents, at least, have been informed that their adoptive child had a twin, and left to their own devices to decide when it was a good time to tell their child? My gut answer is yes; when is hiding the truth wrong, especially when it involves something as important as family? If the parents didn't tell the children (as adults), and allow them to decide for themselves whether to go searching for this missing part of themselves or to exist with themselves peacefully as single human beings, then (pardoning some singular cases) I would be angry at the parents.

But no, says my friend, sometimes its the right thing to do to not tell adoptive parents that this baby has a sibling. Because there's a good chance that these parents only want to take one child, but will feel wrong about separating the children, and so will not adopt the child at all. If this is the universal response to twins, then neither of them will be adopted. And this is the worst possible situation, says my friend.

But, I say, if these parents feel bad about separating the children, and I see that as a valid point of view and moral motivator, then shouldn't they be allowed to make that decision? Although I personally believe that any parent who would not take twins is clearly not ready to be a parent (pretending you can plan and have control is a bad illusion), I also believe that people should be allowed to do what they think is right. Perhaps I'm biased, because I also believe that there's at least some importance to keeping siblings together. Clearly, separated twins have provided a lot of information to twin studies that allow us a better understanding of the role of genetics in human psychology, and in these studies, the twins do not seem to be emotionally stunted by not having their other half. But I don't think that should make it okay.