For several years, my husband and I managed a small, family-owned video-rental store for my brother. The store was named by him, Good Guys Video and the advertising for new memberships made it clear that no hard-R rated movies would be carried by the store, but only those appropriate for family viewing.

Our store was examined and endorsed by local organization on family decency. It was only one of two stores in the community that received their endorsement. Parents often sent their children to rent movies and knew that they could rent videos at Good Guys that would meet their family standards. We built a large and faithful family-centered clientele based on that reputation.

When my brother's partner declared bankruptcy, Good Guys Video was sold to a near relative. The very day that the new owner took over the store, he began placing hard-R rated movies on the shelves. When my husband and I, who continued as manager protested this action, his replay was, "These will stay and there will be many more just like them, so get used to it."

The following are some of the ethical dilemmas that arose from this situation:

1. Should the name Good Guys have been changed when the store was sold?
2. Should the substantial fee paid for club membership be refunded to the customers who paid it in good faith, based on previous claims for such membership providing only family movies.
3. Was it unethical, on my cousin's part to operate a store using a different standard than the one originally advertised to its customers and club members?
4. Would the change in movie offerings cause families who purchased memberships and who trusted Good Guys' selection for them and their children consider themselves betrayed?
5. When the standards of operating the store changed, should my husband and I have resigned as managers even though it would have greatly jeopardized our family income?