Part A – Short Scenarios
Scenario 1 – The Officer’s Dilemma
-
How would a deontologist respond? A deontologist would argue that the officer has a duty to report their partner’s use of unnecessary force, regardless of the potential consequences for trust within the police unit. Deontological ethics focuses on the morality of actions based on rules or duties, and in this case, the officer has a moral obligation to uphold justice and protect the rights of the suspect. Reporting the wrongdoing aligns with the ethical principle that one must act according to established moral rules.
-
How would a utilitarian respond? A utilitarian would evaluate the situation in terms of outcomes, aiming to maximize overall happiness and minimize harm. They might conclude that while reporting the officer could damage trust within the police force, failing to report the incident could lead to further injustice and harm to individuals affected by police misconduct. The utilitarian perspective might favor reporting the misconduct because it promotes accountability and encourages proper conduct among law enforcement, which ultimately benefits society as a whole.
-
Which approach do you think is stronger? Why? In this scenario, the deontological response may be viewed as stronger due to its unwavering commitment to justice and moral duty. While utilitarianism considers the consequences and could be persuasive, the notion of holding an officer accountable for wrongdoing aligns with a fundamental principle of justice regardless of the potential fallout. Upholding ethical standards is essential in ensuring the integrity of the criminal justice system.
Scenario 2 – The Judge’s Decision
-
What would social contract theory suggest? Social contract theory would suggest that the judge has a responsibility to uphold the laws that society has agreed upon for the sake of order and mutual benefit. Imposing a prison sentence on the first-time offender may demonstrate that crime carries consequences, reinforcing societal norms and expectations. Such actions ensure that the social contract is respected, as individuals rely on the legal system to maintain order and accountability.
-
What would care ethics suggest? Care ethics would encourage the judge to consider the individual circumstances of the offender, advocating for compassion and empathy. This approach would argue that rather than imposing a harsh penalty that could ruin the offender's life, the judge should seek alternatives that address the offender's needs, strengthen their ability to reintegrate into society, and prevent future criminal behavior. The primary focus should be on the person behind the crime rather than simply adhering to punitive measures.
-
Which approach do you personally agree with? Personally, I agree with the care ethics approach. While the social contract theory emphasizes important societal values, care ethics highlight the significance of individual circumstances and the human element in criminal justice. Understanding and addressing the root causes of criminal behavior can lead to better rehabilitative outcomes and ultimately a more just society.
Scenario 3 – The Corrections Officer
-
What would virtue ethics say about this? Virtue ethics would suggest that the corrections officer should reflect on what a virtuous person would do in such a situation. This perspective values traits such as compassion, integrity, and fairness, leading the officer to consider the well-being of the inmate and the overall environment of the cellblock. A virtuous corrections officer might choose to smuggle in food, seeing it as an act of kindness and a way to promote harmony within the facility.
-
What would egoism say? Egoism would focus on the officer's self-interest in this situation. From this perspective, the officer might choose to smuggle in food to prevent potential unrest, as this action could protect their own job security and avoid complications associated with handling conflicts. The officer would prioritize their own well-being and convenience over the potential ethical implications of breaking the rules.
-
Which outcome would best promote justice? The outcome that best promotes justice in this scenario would be guided by virtue ethics, where the act of smuggling food, though against the rules, fosters a more humane environment. This approach encourages a compassionate treatment of inmates, which can lead to reduced tensions and conflicts, ultimately serving justice in the broader context of rehabilitation and humane treatment.
Part B – Application Task
Ethical Theory: Utilitarianism
- The situation: A city is facing a significant spike in drug-related crimes, leading to increased violence and fear among residents. The local police force is considering implementing a controversial policy of increased surveillance and stop-and-frisk procedures in high-crime areas. This measure has the potential to deter crime but also raises concerns about civil liberties and racial profiling.
- How the theory applies: Under utilitarianism, the police would assess the overall benefits and drawbacks of the new policy. If the anticipated reduction in drug crime and violence would lead to a safer environment for the majority of residents, and the perceived benefits outweigh the negative impacts on civil liberties, they may decide to proceed with the policy.
- The outcome: The implementation of the policy leads to a short-term reduction in crime rates, generating community support. However, the backlash regarding civil rights violations and increased tension within marginalized communities leads to protests and calls for reform, complicating future police-community relationships.
Ethical Theory: Virtue Ethics
- The situation: A prosecutor is faced with the decision to pursue a plea deal for a defendant accused of a non-violent crime. The defendant has a history of mental health issues and has expressed a desire to seek treatment rather than face harsh penalties, which could worsen their condition and disrupt their potential for rehabilitation.
- How the theory applies: Virtue ethics would guide the prosecutor to consider what a virtuous person would do in this situation, emphasizing compassion, fairness, and the potential for rehabilitation. The prosecutor may lean towards offering a plea deal that allows the defendant to access mental health resources rather than pursuing a more punitive route.
- The outcome: By pursuing the plea deal, the prosecutor helps the defendant receive necessary treatment, fostering personal growth and reducing the risk of reoffending. This decision not only reflects virtues of empathy and compassion but also contributes to a more constructive approach to criminal justice.
Part C – Reflection
In the context of real-world criminal justice, I find virtue ethics to be the most useful ethical theory. This approach emphasizes the importance of character and moral integrity in decision-making, which can lead to more humane treatment of individuals within the justice system. By focusing on the development of virtuous traits, justice practitioners are encouraged to make choices that prioritize empathy, fairness, and compassion—elements that are crucial in a system often criticized for its rigidity and punitive nature.
Conversely, I find relativism to be the least useful in criminal justice. This perspective undermines the establishment of universal moral standards necessary for a fair and just legal system. When ethical decisions are made based solely on cultural or individual beliefs without a consistent moral framework, it can lead to significant discrepancies in justice application and a lack of accountability. The potential for injustice increases, which diminishes public trust in the legal system and its ability to provide equal protection under the law.