I like the analogy offered by Laux and Ethereal's points. One difficult thing is to realize at what point is helping or offering advice enough or too much? If people ask you for help (& they're at a loss), or refuse to work with you where their situation is linked to your own, then what would you do??
Consider your partner or spouse has not shown due diligence with finances and you've trusted this person has done so. Where this irresponsibility or naivete highly-influences your own financial situation and stability, not exerting effort to help can be detrimental to you. You can choose to help your partner learn to organize future finances or cut your losses and leave.
Consider your partner or spouse had an affair, emptied your shared bank account and incurred debts without your knowledge. You may choose to have your partner learn how to get back on his feet, but what would you do if you were also on that sunken ship? Doing nothing wouldn't be good for you.
Consider you discover your business partner is involved in illicit dealings and he refuses to provide you with accurate financials. If you share liability, then not taking any steps to investigate thoroughly could come back to bite you. If you can't motivate a crooked associate to change, distancing yourself from that business might be the next best option. If the associate refuses to admit any wrong and refuses to communicate except to cause trouble, you may explore your legal options. You motivate yourself based on pros & cons.
I like Michael Chiu's point which reminds us that we each have opportunities to learn as we choose how to intervene in the lives of others. We have to delineate our limits, meaning determine what would be in our interest even if we can't control what other person thinks or does for himself.
