It’s odd how often the word “hero” is used in modern parlance and how a word, described in the Oxford Dictionary as meaning “a person…….who is admired for their courage or outstanding achievements”, has become so commonplace.

For example it seems that every time reference is made in the media, or by politicians, to members of the armed forces that reference has to include the word “hero” even if no heroic act has actually taken place.

Now don’t get me wrong, any man or woman who makes the decision to serve his or her country is worthy of our respect, gratitude and even admiration but just because they have decided to make a living as a soldier, sailor or airman that decision alone does not make them a hero. There is nothing “courageous” or “outstanding” in making a career choice, however noble that choice may be.

An act of heroism surely involves a person making a decision (spontaneous or otherwise) to perform a positive act, usually against all the odds, putting that person’s life at risk.

Thus, a soldier who, in the heat of battle, ignores enemy gunfire to rescue a wounded comrade is a hero. A fire officer who disregards the flames to rescue a member of the public in a burning house is a hero. Any member of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution who leaves the comfort of dry land and voluntarily takes to a boat in stormy seas to rescue a sailor in distress is a hero.

In all of these cases he or she has actually made an active decision to put his or her life at risk to save others. There are many heroes in all walks of life worthy of the name but we must not devalue the acts of real heroes by using the term so liberally.