Morality in Breaking Bad (No spoilers don't worry)

     Breaking Bad is, of course, the hit T.V show on AMC that is wrapping up its final season. If you haven’t been watching, shame, but I’ll try and make this post accessible to everyone. Breaking Bad is full of issues of morality and character that continue and progress throughout the series. However, that would take a whole semester to discuss so I’ll start at the beginning so not to ruin the show for everyone. Almost all of the below discussion can be pulled from the first episode.
In basic, Walter White, a fifty year old chemistry teacher decides to “break bad” and make crystal meth after he discovers he has inoperable lung cancer. Driven by many motivations, initially the strongest one is the desire to leave money for his family. Working two jobs to make ends meet for his teenage son, Walt Jr. and pregnant wife, Skyler, he fears for their financial security if he dies. On top of all this, his health insurance will not cover his treatments. Walter runs into an old student, Jesse, who knows some of the meth business and decides to make his family money before he dies.
Obviously if you have watched the show you will know his motivations and moral problems get exponentially more complex, however for those who wish to watch the show I’ll focus on the beginning. What do we think about Walter’s initial decision to "break bad"?
Clearly he has an applaudable dedication to his family and children at this point. However, is there, as Aristotle would say, a mean for dedication to family? When you are so dedicated to your family that you begin to hurt the rest of the community should that make you stop? I think that part of the attractiveness of cooking meth is that you never have to see the affects of the drug you produce, you are removed from the consequences. Walter rarely has to see the addicts whose lives have been ruined by the drug he produces. He does not care where the money comes from, as long as the money flows.
This is, of course, assuming that Walter is choosing between two moral wrongs here: leaving his family destitute when he had the power to change that, and profiting off making crystal meth. Some people may argue, including Walter at times, that making meth is not a moral wrong in and of itself, after all you are merely selling a service to rational people making the decision to buy your product. Walt’s meth, in fact, is arguably doing a service to meth users everywhere because of it’s quality and lack of contamination. However, the counterargument is that meth clearly is an extremely harmful and addictive substance. Addicts clearly do not have control over their desire for it and the people who make and distribute meth are taking advantage of the poor decisions and subsequent powerlessness of otherwise innocent people.
But even conceding that making crystal meth is wrong, is it the lesser evil in this instance? Walter makes a pure meth, safer than most on the street and arguably meth will be made and consumed anyway. His intention initially is only to not leave his family destitute and support them after his death, a kind of twisted martyrdom. Clearly, I sympathize with Walter’s initial decision even if I am not saying it was the right choice. The show vividly shows the slippery slope that comes after making this initial decision to "break bad". But Walter faces a dilemma at the beginning of the show, leave his family poor when he had power to change that or make a harmful substance illegally.
Comments? Objections? Snide Remarks?