Explain the difference between ethical issues and ethical dilemmas.
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials. Under certain conditions specifies in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research. If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of fair use, that user may be liable for copyright infringement.
Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior
Explain the difference between ethical issues and ethical dilemmas.
2. Give examples of how discretion permeates every phase of the criminal justice system and creates ethical dilemmas for criminal justice professionals.
3. Explain why the study of ethics is important for criminal justice professionals.
4. Define the terms morals, ethics, duties, supererogatories, and values.
5. Describe what behaviors might be subject to moral/ethical judgments.
Ethics Is the study of right and wrong. Stealing may be tempting, but It Is Judged as wrong and unethical.
In 2020, this country experienced turmoil not seen since the 1960s. The COVID-19 pandemic killed hundreds of thousands of people, forced massive business closures, and prompted culture conflict over the wearing of masks. The killing of George Floyd in May spurred Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests across the country.
Then, the shooting of Jacob Blake in August and news coverage of other killings, such as that of Breanna Taylor, increased the number and intensity of protests. Peaceful protests have occurred in small towns and large cities across the country, but there has also been arson, looting, and vandalism. Minneapolis, Roch ester, Seattle, Portland, Austin, and other cities have seen their police stations vandalized and businesses destroyed. Violence between BLM protesters and counterprotesters has occurred, and killings have been perpetrated by protesters on both sides. Although the extent and severity of the protests is new, the issue of racial discrimination in the criminal justice system is not.
The last edition of this textbook was written shortly after the shooting of Michael Brown and the Fergu son riots. The BLM protests that occurred in 2014 were smaller and ended sooner than the current unrest but stemmed from the same root cause-perceived and/or real discriminatory treatment of Blacks by criminal justice professionals. Policy practices that affect blacks and whites differently, and the individual actions of criminal justice professionals, must be addressed, not only with legal analysis, but also by applying ethical principles. The criminal justice system can be examined using political, legal, organizational, or sociolog ical approaches; however, in this book, we shift the lens somewhat and look at the system from an ethics
2 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
ethical Issues Difficult social or policy questions that include controversy over the “right” thing to do.
ethical dilemmas Situations in which it is difficult for an individual to decide, either because the right course of action is not clear or because the right course of action carries some negative consequences.
perspective. Asking whether something is legal, for instance, is not necessarily the same as asking whether something is right.
In this text, we will explore ethical decision making. More specifically, we explore the ethical dilemmas and issues within the criminal justice system. Every day, one can read news about ethical issues or individuals who have made choices that are subject to ethical judgments. Some decisions affect very few people; however, other decisions, such as former Officer Derek Chauvin’s decision to keep his knee on George Floyd’s neck despite fellow officers’ and bystanders’ entreaties to check his pulse, eventually affected thousands of individuals. One might say, in fact, that his decision has affected the whole country in some way. The ethical analysis presented and practiced in this text can be used to analyze decisions that spark national news coverage, but can also be applied to the smallest individual decisions as well. To be an ethical person, one must make ethical choices. This book will discuss how to do that.
Ethical discussions in criminal justice focus on issues or dilemmas. Ethical issues are broad social questions, often concerning the government’s social control mechanisms and the impact on those governed. These issues can be subject to legal analysis and/or ethical analysis, as the two are related but not the same. The following is a list of a few current issues in the field of criminal justice that can be subject to ethical analysis:
• Defunding police departments and channeling savings to social service programs
• Passing legislation designed to remove qualified immunity from police officers
• Decriminalizing recreational marijuana
• Reversing mandatory minimum laws for drug crimes
• Abolishing the death penalty
• Using private prisons
• Requiring police officers to carry their own liability insurance
• Instituting civilian review boards to advise police departments
• Instituting deportation against “Dreamers” (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Act recipients)
• Adopting “sanctuary city” resolutions
• Instituting conviction review task forces in prosecutors’ offices
• Requiring mandatory DNA collection for all misdemeanant arrestees.
The typical individual does not have much control over these issues. If one is a political or organizational leader, it is possible that it is within that person’s discretion to decide some ethical issues, but generally, these choices are decided by political action or deliberation by many people.
While ethical issues are broad social questions or policy decisions, ethical dilemmas are situations in which one person must decide what to do. Either the right choice is not clear, or the right choice will be difficult because of the costs involved. Criminal justice professionals face dilemmas arising from the choices they are faced with during their employment. Dilemmas of criminal justice professionals include the following:
• A police officer’s decision whether to ticket a traffic violator
• A police officer’s decision to tell a supervisor that her partner has an alcohol problem
• A sheriff’s decision to fire a deputy who has used excessive force
• A defense attorney’s decision to take a case
• A prosecutor’s decision on whether and what to charge
• A probation officer’s decision on whether to file a violation report on a probationer
At times, one’s belief regarding an ethical issue gives rise to an ethical dilemma. In 2000, George Ryan, then governor of Illinois, declared a moratorium on use of the death penalty in his state when five individuals on death row were exonerated with DNA evidence. One of his last acts as he left office in 2003 was to commute the sentences of all 160 prisoners on death row to life without parole. Unlike most of us,
3 Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior
Governor Ryan’s position meant he could act on his belief regarding the issue of capital punishment.
Another example occurred in Orange County, Florida, where State Attorney Aramis Ayala refused to pursue the death penalty against a cop killer in 2017. In fact, she reportedly expressed her intent to never pursue the death penalty because of continued constitutional challenges to Florida death penalty sentences and the cost. After she refused to recuse herself, Governor Rick Scott signed an executive order that removed her from the case and appointed another prosecutor. He then took 23 other death penalty cases away from her and assigned them to prosecutors in neighboring counties. Ayala contested the action, but the Florida Supreme Court sided with the governor. In 2020, another case was taken from her by the governor. She has indicated she will not run for reelection because Florida law conflicts with her values and beliefs (Evans, 2017;The News Service of Florida, 2020).
It was a legal question whether her position gave her the lawful authority to uni laterally reject the death penalty for all cases. It was also a legal question whether the governor had the legal authority to remove her from a case in her jurisdiction, because she is an elected official. However, beyond law, it is also an ethical dilemma when an elected prosecutor does not believe in the death penalty. Does she have an ethical duty to reject it, or an ethical duty to pursue it because it is the law of the state? Would it make a difference if her position regarding the death penalty was clear and publicized before the election and voters elected her anyway?
In this book, ethical issues and ethical dilemmas will be analyzed. As you will see, the approach taken in both types of analysis is similar. Throughout the book, we approach decision making using the framework of applying law, policy, and then ethics. In each chapter, at least one ethical issue or ethical dilemma will be presented and analyzed. You will see that tools of ethical reasoning are necessary for a good analysis. For this reason, we must first explore the foundations of ethics.
I Why Study Ethics? Although the decisions faced by professionals associated with the criminal justice system-ranging from legislators who write the laws to correctional professionals who supervise prisoners-may be different, they also have similarities, especially in that these professionals all experience varying degrees of discretion, authority, and power. They have awesome power that the rest of us do not. The greater role discretion plays in a profession, the more important is a strong grounding in ethics.
Legislators have the power to define certain acts as illegal and, therefore, punish able. They also have the power to set the degree of punishment. Public safety is usually the reason given for criminalizing certain forms of behavior. In other cases, legislators employ moral definitions for deciding which behaviors should be illegal. “Protection of public morality” is the rationale for some laws, including those involving drugs, gam bling, and prostitution. While judges sometimes invalidate laws that run afoul of state and/or federal constitutions, legislators still have a great deal of discretion in setting the laws that we must live by.
How do legislators decide what behaviors to criminalize? How do judges determine whether such laws violate fundamental rights?We explore these questions in more detail in Chapter 3, which covers the concept of justice, and in Chapter 8, which begins our dis cussion of the law and legal professionals.
Part of the reason that legislators are not respected in this country is that we perceive that their discretion is unethically influenced by lobbyists and personal interests rather than the public good. The 2010 movie Casino Jack and the U.S. of Money is based on for mer lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who ended up in prison for his notorious bribing of legisla tors. Ironically, in 2020, he became the first person charged with violating a law that was amended specifically in response to his previous criminal offenses. After having served almost four years in prison, he had pledged to reform when he was released in 2010.
discretion The authority to make a decision between two or more choices.
4 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
However, recent charges allege illegal lobbying of legislators in relation to marijuana legislation and bitcoin currency (Popper, 2020).
Police officers, who enforce the laws created by legislators, also have a great deal of discretionary power. Most of us, in fact, have benefited from this discretion when we receive a warning instead of a traffic ticket. Police officers have the power to deprive people of their liberty (through arrest), and the power to decide which individuals to investigate and perhaps target for undercover operations. They also have the power to decide that force, even at times lethal force, is warranted-this power has been the sub ject of recent national protests incited by the belief that they use this power in a discrim inatory manner. In Chapters 5 through 7, the ethical use of police discretion is discussed in more detail.
Prosecutors probably face the least public scrutiny of all criminal justice professionals which is ironic, because they possess a great deal of discretion in deciding whom and how to prosecute. They decide which charges to pursue and which to drop, which cases to take to a grand jury, how to prosecute a case, and whether to pursue the death penalty in homicide cases. In cases of alleged police brutality or unlawful homicide, prosecutors decide whether to take the case to a Grand Jury or not, and whether to pursue charges. Although prosecutors have an ethical duty to pursue justice rather than conviction, some critics argue that at times their decision-making seems to be influenced by politics or fac tors other than the goal of justice.
Defense attorneys have ethical duties to their client, but also as officers of the court. After deciding whether to take a case or not, they decide whether to encourage a client to agree to a plea deal, what evidence to utilize and how to try the case, and whether to encourage a client to appeal.
Judges possess incredible power, typically employed through decisions to accept plea bargains, rule on evidence, and decide sentencing. The higher the court, the more power possessed by the judges who sit on that court. The Supreme Court is the high est court in our country, and the power of Supreme Court Justices is tremendous. They resolve questions of legality even when there is no social consensus about whether something should be legal. For instance, in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644, 2015, the Supreme Court held that all states must license and recognize same-sex marriages, inval idating any state laws that were inconsistent to this ruling. In prior cases, Supreme Court decisions have dramatically affected social disputes, e.g., abortion, affirmative action, euthanasia, same-sex relationships, and interracial marriage. The power of Supreme Court Justices to settle public conflict over “private behavior” is why nomination and appointment to the Court incites such interest and political manipulations. Chapters 8-10 explore the ethical issues of legal professionals in the criminal justice system.
Finally, correctional officials have immense powers over the lives of some citizens. Probation officers make recommendations in presentence reports and violation reports that affect whether an individual goes to prison. Prison officials decide to award or take away “good time;’ and they may punish an inmate with segregation; both types of deci sions affect the individual’s liberty. Correctional officers make daily decisions that affect the life and health of the prisoners they supervise. Parole officials decide when to file a violation report and make other decisions that affect a parolee as well as his or her fam ily members. In short, all correctional professionals have a great deal of discretion over the lives of those they control. The ethical issues and dilemmas of correctional profes sionals are discussed in Chapters 11-13.
Although the professionals discussed above face different dilemmas, they also share the following common elements:
• They each have discretion-that is, the power to decide. Although the specific deci sions are different, they all involve power over others and the potential deprivation of life, liberty, or property.
• They each have the duty of enforcing the law. Although this concept is obvious with police, it is also clear that each of the professionals mentioned has a basic duty to uphold and enforce all laws; they serve the law in their professional lives. You may have heard the phrase “We are a nation of laws, not men:’ This means that no one is
5 Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior
supposed to be above the law, no matter how powerful; and no one is supposed to take the law into their own hands, no matter how clear the guilt.
• They must accept that their duty is to protect the constitutional safeguards that are the cornerstone of our legal system-specifically, due process and equal protection. Due process protects each of us from error in any governmental deprivation of life, liberty, or property. We recognize the right of government to control and even to pun ish, but we have certain protections against arbitrary or unlawful use of that power. Due process protects us against such abuses. We also expect that the power of our government will be used fairly and in an unbiased manner. Equal protection should ensure that what happens to us is not determined by the color of our skin, our gender, our nationality, or the religion we practice. Laws are for everyone, and the protection of the law extends to all of us.
• They are public servants. Their salaries come from the public purse. Public servants possess more than a job; they have taken on special duties involving the public trust. Individuals such as legislators, public officials, police officers, judges, and prosecutors are either elected or appointed guardians of the public’s interests. Arguably, they must be held to higher standards than those they guard or govern. Temptations are many, and, unfortunately, we find examples of double standards, in which public servants take advantage of their positions for special favors, rather than higher standards of exemplary behavior.
The Josephson Institute (2005), which conducts ethics training for corporations and public agencies, identifies the ethical principles that should govern public servants: pub lic service (treating the office as a public trust), objective judgment (striving to be free from conflicts of interest), accountability (upholding open decision making), democratic leadership (observing the letter and spirit of the law), and respectability (avoiding the appearance of impropriety). Unfortunately, as the In the News box indicates, we are not so sure in this country that our public servants represent these qualities.
When PresidentTrump was elected in 2016, it was the first time in recent memory that a president’s personal business interests had been criticized as creating conflicts of interest for a sitting president. The Emoluments Clause seeks to prevent the president or legislators from making decisions to benefit themselves rather than the United States as a whole. A paragraph in Article I of the Constitution reads in part, ‘: .. no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, orTitle, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” Potentially problematic would be foreign governments that rent office space in Trump buildings, foreign representatives who rent rooms at Trump hotels, or tax breaks from foreign governments to Trump businesses. The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a lawsuit shortly after the 2016 election, arguing that the Emolument Clause has been violated. Although
I[!ii IN THE NEWS IPublic Corruption
Transparency International compiles a list of countries ranked by the perception of corruption by public officials. For years, the countries perceived as least corrupt with the highest scores have usually been Scandinavian. In 2019, Scandinavian countries predominated in the top again, with the five highest-ranked countries and their scores being: Denmark (87), New Zealand (86), Finland (85), Singapore (85), Sweden (85), and Switzerland (85). In 2016, Canada
Source: Transparency International, 2017; Transparency International, 2020.
was ranked in the ninth place, with a score of 82, and the United Kingdom came in twelfth, with a score of 81. In 2019, both countries were in the 12th place ranking. In 2016, the United States had a ranking of 18, with a score of only 74. In 2019, the Index placed the United States in the 23n1 place, with a score of 69. Not surprisingly, the most corrupt countries, according to this perception index, include Somalia (9), South Sudan (12), and Venezuela (16) in 2019.
6 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
i:t•l=l•I Areas of Ethical Concern for Criminal Justice Professionals
Relatlonshlps with Public/Clients
Ethical concerns Sexual exploitation/coercion, bribery, rudeness, racial discrimination, and negligence
Agency/Organization Overtime fraud, theft, rulebreaking, and low work ethic
Peers/Coworkers Sexual or racial harassment, cover-ups, retaliation, gossip, and taking undue credit
the case was dismissed for a lack of standing at the Federal Dis QUOTE&QU ERV trict Court level, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the Part of what is needed [for public servants] case, held that CREW did have standing, and sent the case back to is a public sense of what Madison meant the lower court for trial. It is still pending. Although whether the by wisdom and good character: balanced president has violated the Emolument Clause is a new question, perception and integrity. Integrity means the danger of public servants at any level serving their personal wholeness in public and private life consisting self-interest through their public office is a perennial problem. of habits ofjustice, temperance, courage, Ethical dilemmas for professionals in the justice system arise compassion, honesty, fortitude, and disdain for within relationships with citizens, with their agency, and with each self-pity. other. Box 1.1 illustrates the different areas of ethical concern. We Source: Delattre, 1989b: 79. study ethics because it is important for criminal justice profession
als to recognize and analyze ethical dilemmas when they are faced(t,’l Do you believe that this is asking too much with them. A study of ethics is important to any professional, and ~ of our public servants? training in ethics helps to develop critical thinking skills (Felkenes,
1987: 26). We also could note that individuals who ignore ethics do so at
their peril. They may find themselves sliding down a slippery slope of behaviors that threaten their career and personal well-being. Even if their actions are not discovered, many people suffer from a moral crisis when they realize how far their actions have strayed from their moral ideals. We can summarize this discussion with three basic points:
1. We study ethics because criminal justice is uniquely involved in coercion, which means there are many and varied opportunities to abuse such power.
2. Almost all criminal justice professionals are public servants and, thus, owe special duties to the public they serve.
3. We study ethics to sensitize students to ethical issues and provide tools to help iden tify and resolve the ethical dilemmas they may face in their professional lives.
I Defining Terms morals Principles of right and wrong.
ethics The discipline of determining good and evil and defining moral duties.
The words morals and ethics are often used in daily conversation . For example, when public officials use their offices for personal profit, or when politicians accept bribes from special interest groups, they are described as unethical. When an individual does a good deed, engages in charitable activities or personal sacrifice, or takes a stand against wrongdoing, we might describe that individual as a moral person. Often, the terms morals and ethics are used interchangeably. This makes sense because both come from similar root meanings. The Greek word ethos pertains to custom (behavioral prac tices) or character, and the term morals is a Latin-based word with a similar meaning. As Box 1.2 shows, the inquiry into how to determine right and wrong behavior has perplexed humans for thousands of years. Philosophers through the ages owe much to the great Greek philosophers who discussed what the “good life” meant.
7 Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior
Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics
Socrates (469-399 BCE)
Socrates associated knowledge with virtue. He believed that bad acts are performed through ignorance. The wisest man was also the most virtuous. He believed that all people acted in a way to serve their own interests, but some people, because they were ignorant, pursued short-term happiness that would, in the long run, not make them happy. True happiness could come only from being virtuous, and virtue comes from knowledge. Thus, Socrates believed his role was to strip away self-deception and incorrect assump tions; hence, the so-called Socratic method of questioning a person’s beliefs. The concept of eudaimonia is translated as happiness, but it is much more than that and is sometimes translated as flourishing. Abraham Maslow’s concept of self-actualization is like the Greek concept of eudaimonia, the idea that one’s happiness involves the pursuit of excellence and virtue.
Plato (423-347 BCE)
Plato was a student of Socrates. In fact, his writings are the source for what we know about Socrates’s ideas. Because his writings were largely in the form of dialogues, with Socrates as the main character in many of them, it is hard to distinguish Socrates’s ideas from Plato’s. Another difficulty in summarizing Plato’s ideas about ethics is that he undertook a wide-ranging exploration of many topics. His writings included discussions of ethical and political concepts, as well as metaphysical and epistemological ques tions. In The Republic, he, like Socrates, associates virtues with wisdom. The four virtues he specifically mentions are wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice. Three of the virtues are associated with the three classes of people he describes as making up society: the rulers (wisdom), the soldiers (courage), and the merchants (moderation because they pursue lowly pleasures). Justice is the idea that each person is in the place they should be and performs to their best ability. A good life would be one that fit the nature of the person-that is, moderation for the merchant class, courage for the soldier, and wisdom for leaders. There is, of course, the need for all virtues in every life to some degree.
Arlstotle (384-322 BCE)
Aristotle was a student of Plato. Aristotle did not believe, as did Socrates, that bad behavior came from ignorance. He believed some people had weak wills and did bad things knowing they were bad. The idea of eudaimonia is part of Aristotle’s discussions of what it means to live a good life. Again, this concept, al though translated as happiness, has more to do with flourishing or self-actualization. The good life is one devoted to virtue and moderation. The so-called Golden Mean is choosing actions between two extremes. For instance, courage is the virtue, whereas the deficiency of courage is cowardice, and the excess of courage is foolhardiness. Generosity is the mean between stinginess and wastefulness, and so on. Aristo tle’s virtue theory is discussed more fully in the next chapter.
Stoics (Third Century BCE, Includes Zeno, Seneca, and Epictetus) The Stoic philosophical school is associated with the idea that man is a part of nature and the essential characteristic of man is reason. Reason leads to virtue. Virtue and morality are simply rational action. While Plato divided people into the three classes of leaders, soldiers, and everyone else, the Stoics sim ply saw two groups: those who were rational/virtuous and those who were irrational/evil. They perceived life as a battle against the passions. They argued that people should not seek pleasure but should seek virtue, because that is the only true happiness. Moreover, they should seek virtue out of duty, not because it will give them pleasure.
For further information, go to: Stanford Encyclopedia of Phllosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu; and the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: www.iep.utm.edu
Morals and Ethics Morals and morality refer to what is judged as good conduct. Immorality refers to bad conduct. We would judge someone who intentionally harms a child for his own enjoyment, or someone who steals from the church collection plate, as immoral. Some
www.iep.utm.edu
http://plato.stanford.edu
8 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
of us disagree on whether other behaviors, such as abortion, capital punishment, or euthanasia, are immoral. How to resolve such questions will be the subject of the next chapter.
The term ethics refers to the study and analysis of what constitutes good or bad con duct (Barry, 1985: 5; Sherman, 1981: 8). There are several branches, or schools, of ethics:
• Meta-ethics is the discipline that investigates the meaning of ethical systems and whether they are relative or universal and are self-constructed or independent of human creation.
• Normative ethics determines what people ought to do and defines moral duties based on ethical systems or other means of analysis.
• Applied ethics is the application of ethical principles to specific issues.
• Professional ethics is an even more specific type of applied ethics relating to the behavior of certain professions or groups.
While these definitions of ethics refer to the study of right and wrong behavior, more often, in common usage, ethics is used as an adjective (ethical or unethical) to refer to behaviors relating to a profession, while moral is used as an adjective to describe a person’s actions in other spheres of life. Most professions have codes of conduct that describe what is ethical behavior in that profession. For instance, the medical profession follows the Hippocratic Oath, a declaration of rules and principles of conduct for doctors to follow in their daily practices; it dictates appropriate behavior and goals.
Even though professional ethics concerns decisions related to one’s profession, these decisions sometimes overlap with what we might consider the private life of the individual. For instance, psychiatrists, psychologists, and lawyers are judged harshly if they engage in romantic relationships with their patients, and rules against such conduct are included in codes of ethics for these professions. Anytime private behavior affects professional decision making, it becomes an ethical issue, such as when school bus driv ers abuse drugs or alcohol, or when scientists are paid to do studies by groups who have a vested interest in a particular outcome.
The private life of public servants is especially scrutinized. President Clinton’s affair with intern Monica Lewinsky almost ended his presidency, and not just because he lied about it in the congressional investigation. Anthony Weiner’s political career as a U.S. congressman ended after it was revealed he “sexted” (sent a sexually suggestive picture) to a woman, who reported it to the press. When he attempted a political comeback in a run for mayor of New York City in 2013, more sexting by Weiner was revealed under the pseudonym of “Carlos Danger:’ Such behavior, while a gift to late-night comics, is tragically inexplicable behavior for any public servant. The 2005 audio recording of President Trump’s comments regarding how he could sexually accost women because he was “a star;’ and, later, his alleged sexual relationships with former porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal, are considered relevant to his position as the leader of the country arguably because such behavior represents his character, and character affects professional judgments.
In professions involving the public trust, such as politics, education, and the clergy, there is a thin line between one’s private life and public life. Citizens assume that if one is a liar and cheat in one’s private life, then that also says something about how they would make decisions as a public servant. If one displays extremely poor judgment and disrespect for one’s family in private life, arguably he or she is not a good fit for public office. What about police officers, prosecutors, and judges?They are also public servants. Should their private behavior, such as extramarital affairs, accumulating debt, or using illegal substances after work, concern us? We will explore these issues in the chapters to come.
For our purposes, it does not make a great deal of difference whether we use the formal or colloquial definitions of morals and ethics.This text is an applied ethics text, in that we will be concerned with defining behaviors as right and wrong (specifically, those of criminal justice professionals). It also is a professional ethics text because we are con cerned primarily with professional ethics in criminal justice.
9 Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior
Duties The term duties refers to those actions that an individual must perform to be considered moral. For instance, everyone might agree that one has a duty to support one’s parents if able to do so, one has a duty to obey the law (unless it is an immoral law), and a police officer has a moral and ethical duty to tell the truth on a police report. Duties are what you must do to meet the responsibilities of your role.
Other actions, considered supererogatories, are commendable but not required. A good Samaritan who jumps into a river to save a drowning person, risking his or her own life to do so, has performed a supererogatory action. Those who stood on the bank receive no moral condemnation, because risking one’s life is above and beyond anyone’s moral duty. Of course, if one can help save a life with no great risk to oneself, a moral duty does exist in that situation.
Police officers have an ethical duty to get involved when others do not. Consider the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center. One of the most moving images of that trag edy was of police officers and firefighters running toward danger while others ran away. Indeed, this professional duty to put oneself in harm’s way is why many of us revere and pay homage to these public servants. Many civilians also put themselves in harm’s way in this and other disasters, and because they have no professional duty to do so, they can be said to be performing supererogatory actions.
There are also imperfect duties, general duties that one should uphold but do not have a specific applicat’ion as to when or how. For instance, most ethical systems sup port a general duty of generosity but have no specific duty demanding a certain type or manner of generosity. Another imperfect duty might be to be honest. Generally, one should be honest, but, as we will see in Chapter 2, some ethical systems allow for excep tions to the general rule.
Values Values are defined as elements of desirability, worth, or importance. You may say that you value honesty; another way of saying it is that one of your values is honesty. Others may value physical health, friendships, material success, or family. Individual values form value systems. All people prioritize certain things that they consider important in life. Values only become clear when there is a choice to be made-for instance, when you must choose between friendship and honesty or material success and family. Behavior is generally consistent with values. For instance, an individual who is a workaholic, choosing to spend more time at work than with family and endangering their health with long hours, stress, and lack of exercise, may believe that they value family, but their actions indicate that they value financial or career success more. Others place a higher priority on religious faith, wisdom, honesty, and/or independence than financial success or status. Of course, our values are constantly being balanced. If one chooses to get an advanced degree, some family time is sacrificed for the benefit of future opportunities. The point is that we don’t really know what our values are until we must choose between them. Consider the values in Box 1.3. Which, if any, do you believe are more important than others? Do you ever think about the values by which you live your life? Do you think that those professionals who are caught violating laws and/or ethical codes of conduct have a clear sense of their value system?
Values as judgments of worth are often equated with moral judgments of goodness. We see that both can be distinguished from factual judgments, which can be empirically verified. Note the difference between these factual judgments:
“He is lying:’ “It is raining:’
and these value judgments:
“She is a good woman:’ “That was a wonderful day:’
duties Required behaviors or actions; that is, the responsibilities that are attached to a specific role.
supererogatories Actions that are commendable but not required for a person to be considered moral.
imperfect duties Moral duties that are not fully explicated or detailed.
values Judgments of desirability, worth, or importance.
10 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
Values Exercise
Achievement Altruism Autonomy Creativity
Emotional well-being Family Health Honesty
Knowledge Justice Love Loyalty
Physical appearance Pleasure Power Recognition
Religious faith Skill Wealth Wisdom
Arrange these values in order of priority in your life. What life decisions have you made that have been affected by the ordering of these values? Did you think of them directly when making your decision?
The last two judgments are more like moral judgments, such as “Lying is wrong” or “Giving to charities is good:’ Facts are capable of scientific proof, but values and moral judgments are not.
Some writers think that value judgments and moral judgments are indistinguishable because neither can be verified. Some also think that values and morals are relativistic and individual. In this view, there are no universal values; values are all subjective and merely opinions. Because they are only opinions, no value is more important than any other value (Mackie, 1977).
In contrast, others believe that not all values are equal and that some values, such as honesty, are always more important than other values, such as pleasure. In this view, val ues such as charity, altruism, integrity, knowledge, and responsibility are more import ant or better than the values of pleasure or wealth. You may value personal pleasure over charity or honesty, but to someone who believes in universal values, you would be wrong in this view. This question is related to a later discussion in Chapter 2 concerning whether ethics are relative or absolute.
As stated earlier, values imply a choice or a judgment. If, for instance, you were con fronted with an opportunity to cheat on an exam, your values of success and honesty would be directly at odds. Values and morals are similar, although values indicate the relative importance of these constructs, whereas morals prescribe or proscribe behavior. The value of honesty is conceptually distinct from the moral rule against lying.
An explicit value system is part of every ethical system, as we will see in Chapter 2. The values of life, respect for the person, and survival can be found in all ethical sys tems. Certain values hold special relevance to the criminal justice system and those pro fessionals who work within it. These include privacy, freedom, public order, justice, duty, and loyalty.
I Making Moral Judgments We make moral or ethical judgments all the time. “Abortion is wrong:’ “Capital punish ment is just:’ “It’s good to give to charity.” “You should put in a day’s work for a day’s pay:’ “You shouldn’t take credit for someone else’s work:’ These are all judgments of good and bad behavior. We also make choices, knowing that these actions can be judged as right or wrong. Will you give back that extra change a clerk gave you by mistake? Did you tell a friend that her husband is having an affair, even though he asked you not to tell? Have you cut and pasted sections of Wikipedia into a term paper?These actions can be judged as right or wrong and, therefore, should be subject to ethical analysis.
Current national challenges present numerous ethical dilemmas. Should you par ticipate in a BLM protest and, if so, should you join in when others spray graffiti on buildings? Should you carry your gun (in an open carry state) to a protest? Should you attend a party even though it is against the social distancing rules of your university? Should you do anything when a maskless person is harassed and heckled by others on
Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior 11
the street? Should you say or do anything when a Black patron of a coffeeshop is told to leave because they are loitering without buying anything, even while White people are sitting there without purchases? Should you donate the money you have saved up for vacation to the charities that are assisting victims of fires or hurricanes?
Not all behaviors involve questions of ethics. Acts that can be judged as ethical or unethical, moral or immoral, involve four elements: (1) acts (rather than beliefs) that are (2) human and (3) of free will (4) that affect others.
1. Act. First, some act must have been performed. For instance, we are concerned with the act of stealing or the act of contributing to charity, rather than an idle thought that stealing a lot of money would enable us to buy a sailboat or a vague intention to be more generous. We are not necessarily concerned with how people feel or what they think about an action unless it has some bearing on what they do.
2. Only human acts. Second, judgments of moral or ethical behavior are directed specifically to human behavior. A dog that bites is not considered immoral or evil, although we may criticize pet owners who allow their dogs the opportunity to bite. Nor do we consider drought, famine, floods, or other natural disasters immoral, even though they result in death, destruction, and misery. The historically devastating fires in the western states in 2020 cannot be judged as evil or immoral. On the other hand, when some fires were traced to individuals who either accidentally or inten tionally started one, both legal and moral judgments are appropriate. Interestingly, social media spawned a whole host of false stories about the fires being started by either Antifa members or far-right militia members. This seems to indicate the incli nation of individuals to want someone to judge – even when there is no one at fault. Philosophers widely believe that only humans can be moral (or immoral) because of our capacity to reason. Because only humans have the capacity to be good-which involves a voluntary, rational decision and subsequent action-only humans, of all members of the animal kingdom, have the capacity to be bad.
3. Free will. In addition to limiting discussions of morality to human behavior, we usu ally further restrict our discussion to behavior that stems from free will and free action. Moral culpability is not assigned to persons who are not sufficiently aware of the world around them to be able to decide rationally what is good or bad. The two groups traditionally exempt from responsibility in this sense are the young and the insane, similarly to what occurs when ascribing legal culpability.
Arguably, we do not judge the morality of their behavior because we do not believe that they have the capacity to reason and, therefore, have not freely chosen to be moral or immoral. Although we may chastise a two-year-old for hitting a baby, we do so to educate or to socialize, not to punish, as we would an older child or adult. We incapacitate the violent mentally ill to protect ourselves, but we consider them sick, not evil.
4. Affects others. Finally, we usually discuss moral or immoral behavior only in cases in which the behavior significantly affects others. For instance, throwing a rock off a bridge would be neither good nor bad unless you could possibly hit or were aiming at a person below. If no one is there, your behavior is neutral. If someone is below, however, you might endanger that person’s life, so your behavior is judged as bad.
All the ethical issues and dilemmas we will discuss in this book involve at least two parties, and the decision to be made affects at least one other individual in every case. It is difficult to think of an action that does not affect others, however indirectly. Even self-destructive behavior is said to harm the people who love us and who would be hurt by such actions. We sense that these elements are important in judging morality when we hear the common rationale of those who, when judged as doing something wrong, protest “But nobody was hurt!” or “I didn’t mean to:’
One’s actions toward nature also might be defined as immoral, so relevant actions include not only actions done to people but also those done to animals and to the envi ronment. Judgments are made against cockfighting, dog racing, laboratory experi mentation on animals, and hunting. The growing area of environmental ethics reflects
12 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
increasing concern for the future of the planet. The rationale for environmental ethics may be that any actions that harm the environment affect all humans. It also might be justified by the belief that humankind is a part of nature-not superior to it-and part of natural law should be to protect, not exploit, our world.
Thus far, we know that morality and ethics concern the judgment of behavior as right or wrong. Furthermore, such judgments are directed only at voluntary human behavior that affects other people, the earth, and living things. We can further restrict our inquiries regarding ethics to those behavioral decisions that are relevant to one’s profession in the criminal justice system. Discussions regarding the ethics of police officers, for instance, would concern issues such as the following:
• Whether to take gratuities
• Whether to cover up the wrongdoing of a fellow officer
• Whether to sleep on duty
Discussions regarding the ethics of defense attorneys might include the following:
• Whether to devote more effort to private cases than appointed cases
• Whether to allow perjury
• Whether to attack the character of a victim to defend a client
In this text, we will present some of the unique issues and dilemmas related to each area of the criminal justice system. However, it is important to first explore the means available for analyzing and evaluating the “right” course of action.
I Analyzing Ethical Issues and Policies “Critical thinking skills” has become an overused and abused phrase in education, but the core idea of critical thinking is to be more cognizant of facts as opposed to concepts, assumptions, or biases and to use objective reasoning to most effectively reach a deci sion or understand a problem. Paul and Elder (2003) explain that all reasoning is based on assumptions, points of view, and data or evidence, but reasoning is shaped by con cepts and ideas that affect our interpretations of the data, which then lead us to conclu sions that give meaning to the data. To be a critical thinker, one must ask these types of questions:
• What information am I using?
• What information do I need to settle the question?
• Is there another way to interpret the information?
• What assumption has led me to my conclusion?
• Is there another point of view I should consider?
• What implication or consequence might be the result of this conclusion?
In each discussion throughout this book that subjects issues or policies to an ethical analysis, critical thinking will be required. One of the most important elements of critical thinking is to separate facts from concepts and identify underlying assumptions. In the issue we will analyze here, we will use only general concepts concerning right and wrong, because ethical systems will not be covered until Chapter 2. In all analyses, we will begin by determining if there is any relevant law; then if there are relevant policies; and, finally, ethical principles will be applied.
Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior 13
Should governors have issued closure orders for all but essential businesses in the early spring of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic?
According to some sources, between March and April 2020, 43 governors issued orders directing residents to stay at home and nonessential businesses to close. All Democratic governors (24) and 19 of the 26 Republican governors issued stay-at-home orders in their states (see https:/ /ballotpedia.org/States_that _issued_lockdown_and_stay-at-home_orders_in_response _to_the_coronavirus_{COVID-19)_pandemic,_2020). These gov ernors faced bitter opposition, and some have been sued and faced recall efforts.
Law The legal authority of states to issue quarantine orders lies in the 10th Amendment, which gives states “police powers” to ensure the health and safety of residents. All powers not specifically given to the federal government in the Constitution belong to the states. This authority allows states to take public health emergency actions, such as setting quarantines and business restrictions. Whether the governor of a state has such power without a legislative act or court order is less clear and would have to be analyzed under each state’s constitution. Also, whether the closure orders were an overreach of state power is a legal question. Although the Supreme Court upheld California’s closure order against a First Amendment challenge by churches and businesses in June 2020, in November, the Supreme Court ruled that Governor Cuomo’s restrictions on church attendance in parts of New York City violated the First Amendment and, in December, ruled against California in a First Amendment challenge to a closure order against churches in areas with high COVID-19 rates. It seems safe to say that litigation in response to state’s actions in the spring of 2020 will last much longer than the closure orders themselves.
Polley Policy, whether it be national, state, or organizational, is a road map and guideline to what should be done in certain circum stances. Policy, ideally, should be developed carefully and with input from all interested parties. Sometimes events occur that are so unique or catastrophic that no existing policies are rele vant. It is not known whether state officials were following extant policy or “winging it” when closure orders were announced.
Ethics The ethical analysis steps are as follows:
1. Identify the facts. In early spring, it was known that the virus could spread rapidly and pervasively. Italy was the first country that experienced widespread contagion, resulting in overwhelmed hospitals. While medical advice was somewhat inconsistent in how individuals could protect themselves-e.g., to wear masks or not, whether gloves were helpful, or the
distance that aerosolized droplets could travel-it was clear that without some type of intervention, contagion would be on a catastrophic scale.
2. Identify values and concepts. Protesters against state or local closure orders argued that their freedom and rights were at stake. These are important concepts that come up whenever government seeks to interfere with the actions of individuals. Note, however, that they are concepts because no-one has unfettered freedom or unlimited rights vis a vis the govern ment or other people. Safety and community are also values that are relevant to this ethical issue.
3. Identify dilemmas and resolve them using ethical systems. Because this is an ethical issue, not a dilemma, we will address the remaining steps more broadly, although we could easily choose one governor and evaluate his or her dilemma whether to issue a closure order or not.
The utilitarian ethical system will not be discussed until the next chapter; however, it should be familiar because discussions and arguments about closure orders were presented using a utilitarian rationale. In April 2020, when the closure orders were occurring, the virus had killed 45,000 Americans (by December 2020, the death toll was over 300,000). Closure orders had also put 22 million people out of work. Those who advocated open ing businesses argued that the loss of jobs and the threat to the economy overrode the public health benefits of closures. For instance, Rep. Trey Hollingsworth of Indiana said “We are going to have to look Americans in the eye and say ‘we are making the best decision for the most Americans possible; and the answer to that is to get Americans back to work.”This was a clear argument that the best decision for most Americans was to open busi nesses, even if it resulted in death for some. In fact, some politi cians were blunt in their willingness to sacrifice Americans. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said “There are things more important than living” and suggested elderly Americans would be “willing to take a chance” on their survival for the country’s economic health. The economic calculus that peoples’ lives should be weighed against the economy was unpalatable to some, but the position that the interests of the majority should outweigh the minority is a traditional utilitarian argument. For instance, Peter Singer, a well-known philosopher, argued that “We can’t let the cure be worse than the disease~ His point was that saving lives should be weighed against the harmful effects on the economy and peo ple’s mental well-being. Another argument against the lockdowns was more of a “natural rights” position, with protesters insisting that they had the right to make decisions about their own health choices without interference from the government (Burke, 2020).
(continued)
https://ballotpedia.org/States_that
14 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
The opposing ethical argument, however, pointed to moral responsibilities to others. Other philosophers argued that any cost/benefit analysis about the number of people that could be sacrificed for the economy ignored the fact that such sacrifice would not be distributed equally across the popula tion . First responders, essential workers, and the poor would suffer the highest number of deaths. Studies, even at that time, showed that COVID-19 disproportionately affected minorities,
the elderly, and the poor. Opponents also argued that not enough was known at the time to make a utilitarian calculus-it was simply unknown how opening businesses would impact death rates.
With 20/20 hindsight, it seems clear that these orders did save lives, but it will never be known how many lives, or to what extent such closure orders impacted people in other ways, such as business bankruptcies.
I Analyzing Ethical Dilemmas Recall that an ethical dilemma exists when an individual is faced with at least two courses of action and the decision is difficult. In applied ethics texts, various authors set out the steps to take when facing ethical dilemmas. For instance, Ruggiero (2001) advises us to (1) study the details of the case, (2) identify the relevant criteria (obligations, ideals, and consequences), (3) determine possible courses of action, and (4) decide which action is the most ethical. This approach is like the one we will use throughout the book when analyzing ethical dilemmas, detailed in the steps below:
1. Identify the facts. Make sure that one has all the facts that are known-not future predictions, not suppositions, not probabilities.
2. Identify relevant values and concepts. Concepts are things that cannot be proven empirically but are relevant to the issue at hand. Understand that your concepts and values may affect the way you interpret the facts. For instance, the issue of abortion not only revolves around the value of life, but it is also a concept in that there is no agreement of when life begins or ends (although there are provable facts regarding the existence of respiration, brain activity, and other body functions). Many argu ments surrounding ethical issues are really arguments about concepts that cannot be proven (e.g., “life”).
3. Identify all possible dilemmas. Identifying all dilemmas can help us see that some times one’s own moral or ethical dilemma is caused by others’ actions. For instance, a police officer’s ethical dilemma when faced with the wrongdoing of a fellow officer is a direct result of that other officer making a bad choice.
ETHICAL DILEMMA You are a cqrrectional officer working the late-night shift. Your sergeant and another officer from the day shift come onto the tier where you are working and ask you to open an inmate’s cell. You do so, and they enter the cell. Then you hear a series of grunts, cries, and moans. They leave, muttering about how the Inmate has been taught a lesson. You believe that you have been a party to an assault, but you say nothing. The next night you find out that the inmate did not report the incident, nor did any other inmate. You believe that if you come forward and re port what you saw, you will be severely ostracized.You may not be believed (especially if the inmate doesn’t back you up). You might even lose your job. What would you do?
Law Correctional officers, like police officers, have the legal authority to use physical force to defend themselves or others, or to sub due an inmate. Legally, they can only use the reasonable force necessary to accomplish their goal (which is usually stopping a fight, removing an inmate from a cell, or moving an inmate to segregation). Obviously, if this was a case of going into a cell for the express purpose of a retaliatory beating, then it would constitute either simple or aggravated assault, and the officers involved could be prosecuted. The correctional officer has a le gal duty to protect inmates and might be an accessory after the fact if he lies about the incident, or be subject to some charge
(continued)
Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior 15
of obstruction if there is an investigation, or malfeasance of of fice for not coming forward.
Polley Every correctional facility has express policies regarding the use of force. Usually, a sergeant or lieutenant must approve the use of force; usually, a use-of-force report must be written; and, usually, there are procedures in place for a medical profes sional to check the inmate after the use of force to make sure there are no serious injuries. Obviously, there is no policy that would allow retaliatory use of force. Thus, what happened was a clear violation of policy.
Ethics Understanding the law and policies related to the event does not necessarily resolve the ethical dilemma. Thus, we move to an ethical analysis as detailed above:
1. This officer must make sure that he has all the facts. Was the inmate hurt? Did his injuries occur during the time the two other officers were in his cell? Is the officer sure that no one reported it? Would the inmate come forward if he believed that someone would testify against the other two officers, or would he deny the assault (if there was one)? What other facts are important to know? Remember that facts are those things that can be proven; however, this does not necessarily mean that the individual facing the dilemma knows what the facts are.
2. The officer might examine the relevant values. In this sit uation, one can identify duty, legality, honesty, integrity, safety, protection, loyalty, self-preservation, and trust. Are any other values important to resolve the dilemma? Con cepts that may affect this dilemma include things like just punishment-if one feels that prison as punishment is not enough, then that concept will affect the way this dilemma is perceived.
3. Several ethical dilemmas come into play here. The first is whether the other officers should have entered the prison er’s cell. There is probably an earlier issue involving what ever the prisoner did to warrant the visit. There is obviously the dilemma of whether the officer should have let off-duty officers into the cell in the first place. Finally, there is the dilemma of what the officer should do now that he believes an injustice may have taken place.
4. The most immediate dilemma for the officer is whether to come forward with the information.
5. To resolve the dilemma, it is helpful to work through Chapter 2 first, because one way to resolve ethical dilemmas is to decide on an ethical system. If the officer was a utilitarian, he would weigh the costs and benefits for all concerned in coming forward and in staying quiet. If he followed duty based ethics (ethical formalism), he would find the answer once he determined his duty.
4. Identify the most immediate moral or ethical issue facing the individual. This is always a behavior choice, not an opinion. For example, the moral issue of whether abortion should be legalized is quite different from the moral dilemma of whether I should have an abortion if I find myself pregnant. Obviously, one affects the other, but they are conceptually distinct.
5. Resolve the ethical or moral dilemma by using an ethical system or some other means of decision making. (Ethical systems will be discussed in Chapter 2.)
It is important to note that very often the ethical thing to do is clear once you identify the relevant law and/or policy. Although there are instances where the law or policy is unethical, in most situations if something is illegal, it is also unethical. Most individuals who engage in public corruption know that they are violating the law, but they do it any way. There is no ethical dilemma involved when a police officer decides whether to steal from a burglary site, or a prosecutor decides to hide exculpatory evidence; these acts are illegal and wrong, and the individual knows they are wrong. We use ethical analysis when the right thing to do is not clear. Why someone chooses to behave in an illegal or unethical way is the subject of Chapter 4.
Another type of dilemma is when you know the right thing to do, but doing it comes at great cost. The clearest example of this situation is the so-called blue curtain of secrecy that refers to police officers covering up the wrongdoing of peers. Those come forward and testify against a fellow officer typically face social ostracism and, sometimes, worse retaliation. It should also be noted that the same phenomenon exists in other profes sions to some degree. Whistleblowers may lose their job or be blacklisted from their profession. Thus, sometimes the right thing to do is clear, but extremely difficult to do because of the great costs involved.
16 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
IWALKING THE WALK
Scott Waddle was the captain of the USS Greenville in 2001, a former Eagle Scout whose career in the navy saw a steady progression of successes resulting in his command of the Greenville. A tireless promoter of the navy and the giant submarine he captained, Waddle sent autographed pictures of the sub to schoolchildren, and he enthusiastically participated in the “distinguished visitor” program, which allowed civilians to accompany the submarine crew on cruises.
During one of these public relations cruises, on February 9, 2001, the submarine captain gave the order for an “emergency blow,” a maneuver in which the submarine comes up out of the depths at great speed, breaking the surface of the water like a breaching whale before settling back onto the surface. In a tragic accident, the probabilities of which boggle the mind, the submarine came up under a Japanese trawler carrying students and their teachers as well as a crew. The submarine smashed it to bits and sent the crew and passengers who survived the initial impact into the ocean. The accident killed nine people and cost more than $100 million in damages and compensation costs.
The ensuing investigation and testimony determined that the person in charge of the radar deferred to Waddle’s visual inspection of the surface and didn’t tell him of a sonar contact that was within 4,000 yards. Waddle and other officers who manned the periscope had scanned the surface too quickly and missed the small ship in the turbulent swells. Testimony
Sources: Hight, 2005; Putman, 2008; Thomas, 2001.
indicated that after the crash Waddle grimly kept the crew focused and instructed them over the intercom, “Remember what you saw, remember what happened, do not embellish. Tell the truth and maintain your dignity.”
Against his lawyer’s advice, Waddle gave up his right to silence in the military tribunal that would determine whether to court-martial him. He was reported to have said, “This court needs to hear from me-it’s the right thing to do:’ In his testimony, he refused to shift responsibility to others and accepted all blame for the accident. He said, “I’m solely responsible for this truly tragic accident, and for the rest of my life I will have to live with the horrible consequences.”
Afather of one of the victims was sitting in the room when Waddle testified, and his anger was overcome by Waddle’s tearful apology. Waddle ultimately accepted a letter of reprimand that ended his career with the navy. Then he went to Japan to apologize to the victims’ families personally.
In the aftermath of his decision to testify and not fight to keep his career, Waddle reported that he considered suicide, but he moved past his shame and guilt. Today, he gives speeches on the experience and advises others of the importance of dealing with failure honestly. At a Boy Scout awards ceremony in Chattanooga, Tennessee, speaking to the 500 attendees, he said that the values of honesty and responsibility he learned in scouting helped him make the decisions he did during the aftermath of the accident.
Conclusion
In this chapter, we distinguished ethical issues and ethical dilemmas. We explained why a study of ethics is especially important to criminal justice professionals. It also was noted that not all behaviors would be subject to ethical judgments-only those that are performed by humans who are acting with free will and that affect others. We also defined the terms morals and ethics as both relate to standards of behavior. Professional ethics deals with only those behaviors relevant to one’s profession. We make ethical judgments (what we consider right and wrong) using rationales derived from historical and traditional ethical systems. These ethical systems will be described in Chapter 2.
The most important thing to remember is that we all encounter situations where we must determine the ethical or moral course of action. In the Walking the Walk boxes in each chapter, we will offer real-life examples of individuals who faced ethical dilemmas. In many of these situations, the easier decision would have been to avoid responsibility, transfer blame, hide behind rationalizations, or refuse to stand up for what is right. By becoming aware of those who uphold ethics in their professional decision making, we can honor them for doing what is right.
This chapter closes with a review and study questions to answer in class or in a journal. These can be helpful to check your understanding of the issues. They are followed by writing/discussion exercises, which have no right or wrong answers and can be the basis for classroom discussions or individual writing assignments. Finally, ethical dilemmas are presented to encourage the reader to practice ethical analysis.
Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior 17
Chapter Review
1. Explain the difference between ethical issues and ethical dilemmas.
Ethical issues are broad social or policy questions, while ethical dilemmas are sit uations in which one person must make a decision that can be judged as right or wrong, and where what is right is difficult to decide or is hard to do for some other reason.
2. Give examples of how discretion permeates every phase of the criminal justice sys tem and creates ethical dilemmas for criminal justice professionals.
Discretion can be defined as the power and authority to choose one of two or more alternative behaviors. At each stage of the criminal justice system, professionals have such discretion: legislators make decisions regarding the creation of laws, po lice make decisions on the street in their enforcement of those laws, prosecutors make decisions about which arrests to formally prosecute, judges make decisions about which evidence to allow, and correctional professionals make decisions that affect the lives of offenders.
3. Explain why the study of ethics is important for criminal justice professionals.
First, we stdy ethics because criminal justice is uniquely involved in coercion, which means there are many and varied opportunities to abuse such power. Second, almost all criminal justice professionals are public servants and, thus, owe special duties to the public they serve. Finally, we study ethics to sensitize students to eth ical issues and provide tools to help identify and resolve the ethical dilemmas they may face in their professional lives.
4. Define the terms morals, ethics, duties, supererogatories, and values.
The terms morals and ethics come from Greek and Latin words referring to custom or behavioral practices. Morals refer to what is judged as good conduct. Ethics refers to the study and analysis of what constitutes good or bad conduct. Duties are obliga tory acts {by law, practice, or morals). Supererogatories are those acts that go above and beyond duties. Values are statements of worth or importance.
5. Describe what behaviors might be subject to moral/ethical judgments.
Behaviors that can be adjudged under moral criteria are those that are acts (not thoughts) committed by humans {not animals) of free will {not by those judged as incompetent) and that affect others.
Study Questions
1. Define a public servant, and discuss why public servants should be especially sensi tive to ethical issues.
2. Discuss the reasons for why it is important for criminal justice professionals to study ethics.
3. Define morals, ethics, values, duties, supererogatories, imperfect duties, meta ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics.
4. What are the four elements that specify the types of behaviors that are judged under ethical criteria?Which groups traditionally have been exempt from legal and moral culpability? Why?
5. What are the steps in analyzing an ethical dilemma?
18 PART I Ethics and the Criminal Justice System
Writing/Discussion Exercises
1. Write an essay about (or discuss) a difficult ethical dilemma that you faced. What was it? What were the options available to you? Who was affected by your decision? Were there any laws, rules, or guidelines that affected your decision? How did you make your decision?
2. Write an essay about (or discuss) whether public servants should be held to higher standards than the rest of us. Touch on the following questions in your response: Should we be concerned about a politician who has extramarital affairs? Drinks to excess? Gambles? Uses drugs? Abuses his or her spouse? What if the person is a police officer? A judge? Should a female police officer be sanctioned for posing na ked in a men’s magazine, using items of her uniform as “props”? Should a probation officer socialize in bars that his or her probationers are likely to frequent? Should a prosecutor be extremely active in a political party and then make decisions regard ing targets of “public integrity” investigations of politicians?
3. Write an essay about (or discuss) the issue of the medical use of marijuana. What do medical studies indicate regarding whether it is necessary or the best medical alter native for certain patients? What do critics argue in their opposition to the medical use laws? If you or a loved one were suffering and someone told you that marijuana could ease your pain, would you violate the law or not? Why?
Key Terms
discretion ethical issues morals duties ethics supererogatories ethical dilemmas imperfect duties values
ETHICAL DILEMMAS Situation 1 A rich businessman’s daughter, Patty, had the best of everything all her life. Her future would have included college, a good marriage to a successful young man, and a life of comparative luxury-except that she was kidnapped by a small band of radical ex tremists who sought to overthrow the government by terror, intimidation, and robbery. After being raped, beaten, and locked in a small, dark closet for many days, continually taunted and threatened, she was told that she must participate with the terrorist gang in a bank robbery; otherwise, she and her family would be killed. During the robbery, a bank guard was shot.
Was her action immoral? What if she had killed the guard? What if the terrorists had kidnapped her mother or father, too, and told her if she didn’t cooperate, they would kill her parents immediately? What would you have done in her place? (Readers might rec ognize this dilemma as the Patty Hearst case. In 1974, the Symbionese Liberation Army, a terrorist group, kidnapped the daughter of Randolph Hearst, the tycoon of a large news paper chain. Her subsequent capture, trial, conviction, and prison sentence, portrayed in books and movies, provide ripe material for questions of free will and legal and moral culpability.)
Situation 2 You are taking an essay exam in a college classroom. The test is closed book and closed notes, yet you look up and see that the person sitting next to you has hidden under his blue book a piece of paper filled with notes, which he is using to answer questions. What would you do?Would your answer change if the test was graded on a curve?What if the student were a friend? What would you do if the student was flunking the course and was going to lose the scholarship he needed to stay in school? What about a situation of plagiarism?Would you turn in a student if you knew he or she had turned in a plagiarized paper? Why or why not? If someone cheats in school, isn’t it likely that he or she will be less honest as a criminal justice professional?
Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior 19
Situation 3 You are selected for a jury in a trial of a 64-year-old mother who killed her two adult sons. The two men had Huntington’s disease, a degenerative brain disease, and were institu tionalized. They were certain to die and would endure much pain and suffering before they expired. The defendant’s husband had died from this same disease, and she had nursed him throughout his illness until his death.
The defendant took a gun into the nursing home, kissed her sons good-bye, and then shot them both through the head. She was arrested for first-degree murder. The prosecutor informs you that there is no “mercy killing” defense in the law as it is written.
As a member of the jury, how would you decide this case? What punishment does she deserve? (See “Justice Tempered with Mercy:’ by K. Ellington, Houston Chronicle, January 30, 2003, 10A. The prosecutor accepted a plea of guilty to assisting suicide.)
Situation 4 You strongly believe that blacks have received discriminatory treatment by police and other criminal justice professionals. You believe it is your duty as a citizen to attend a BLM protest and are elated by the large numbers and enthusiasm of the crowd. As the evening progresses there is marching, speeches, and singing; the crowd is generally peaceful, if loud. Eventually, the massive group is blocked from proceeding further by a phalanx of police officers. You see individuals throw bottles of water at the officers, and a person next to you throws a lit firecracker at the officers. This is followed by a tear gas assault and general melee where many on both sides are injured. Now police are asking people to come forward if they have any knowledge of those who assaulted the offi cers. You know the person you saw throw the firecracker because he is a neighbor. What should you do?
Situation 5 You are on a county commissioners’ court, and an action committee has recommended
i 1111
that the county adopt a “sanctuary” status, which would prohibit the county sheriff from holding individuals who are the subject of detainers from ICE. Detainers are not war rants, and some jurisdictions have been sued for holding people on the document be cause it has no legal force. On the other hand, your sheriff advises you of the possibility 1:111• that federal money to hire five new deputies for an enhanced “saturation patrol ” de signed to address downtown burglaries and robberies that are affecting businesses will be withheld. What is the ethical decision? What criteria should county commissioners – use to determine the right thing to do? –
ADPF520.tmp
Document Type: Book Chapter
Copyright Information (bibliographic) Document Type: Book Chapter
Title of Book: Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice (11th edition)
Author(s) of Book: Joycelyn M. Pollock
Chapter Title: Chapter 1 Morality, Ethics, and Human Behavior
Author(s) of Chapter: Joycelyn M. Pollock
Year: 2022
Publisher: Cengage Learning, Inc.
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
