Chapter 1: Why Ethics?
Chapter Abstract
The material offers an introduction of the scope of authority of criminal justice members and ethical prescriptions for the administration of ones authority in contemporary society. The discussion introduces decision making and actions taken resultant of a decision that if they follow ethical pathways, it may aid in a better decision that can be well articulated and supported ethically. Materials offer an examination of one’s authority and thinking critically to come to a reasonable conclusion. This section suggests two propositions essential to CJ members: “Just because you can, does not necessarily mean you should”; and perhaps “We should guide our conduct on how we ought to live rather than how we actually live”.
Government and Ethics
The actions of government agencies in the criminal justice system are challenged to balance individual due process rights, with the need to provide effective crime control for the larger part of society. The decentralization of the criminal justice system, as displayed in the picket fence model is designed to provide separate but linked services at various government levels. The theme of this course is the challenge for the criminal justice system to balance its efforts in crime control, while acknowledging due process rights. The central premise of the due process model is the presumption of innocence. Due process protects the rights of a defendant while being processed through the system.
The first acknowledgment of any criminal justice practitioner is to understand that “Rules of Evidence are Rules of Exclusion”. By the same token not all evidence excluded from a trial or not seeing the light of day does not necessarily mean that the evidence was obtained illegally. The study of procedural due process has often been intriguing to me.
This material explores the evolution of ethics, the impacts of ethics within the administration of justice, and how does one maintain a strong ethical center when no one is watching. Sklansky (2006) asserts the demographics of policing has all but removed the “Blue Curtain of Silence” in policing. This author tends to agree with Sklansky, after serving a near 40 years in policing of which 28 years was as the head of an agency. This notion serving some is that most police are honest, which is true, but often never celebrated. Those that make headlines are generally officers in trouble. These headlines often create false equivalences that some accept. That is, officers just cover for wrong doing by other officers and are probably as corrupt. The latter is simply not true. So what keeps most in the CJ system honest? This journey explores these questions and hopefully will dispel false positives.
Before delving into the vast arena of criminal justice and just how ethics apply, one needs to understand the terms commonly consumed, often bantered about that rarely govern personal lives, realized by political affiliates that are often associated with government or lived through daily life-styles. One only needs to look at the disarray of the contemporary political landscape in the United States and the impacts this dysfunction has on the world as well as on U.S. soil. This unforeseen disruption in American life in the embryotic stages of the 21st Century does not bode well for stable life styles going forward. Then how does this turmoil seep into the fabric of all that is thought to be important to citizenry, CJ practitioners, and leadership; and more importantly how then does one sustain routine life free of missteps or misconduct.
This is not merely a practical exercise of follow the leader. The culture within an organization or profession may pose such power or authority over its membership that the members may yield to unsavory behaviors. How then can the CJ system attract ethical people from what may be an unethical society sufficient to alter unethical cultural strategy? Society may be better equipped to deal with the ethical questions posed in this material if we understand a couple basic propositions: “Just because you can, does not necessarily mean you should”; and perhaps “We should guide our conduct on how we ought to live rather than how we actually live”.
As an example of these schemes of ethical behavior, the reader is a police officer with access to the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC) data, and a personal friend of yours asks of you a criminal history on a perspective son-in-law. This is an innocuous request and you would certainly hope a friend of yours would do the same for you, but you know this is a violation of law and rules and regulation. None-the-less you perform the task because everyone else does it and what can it hurt, your friend is not in the mob. Albeit this is not a breach of national security, it is a violation of your oath of office, violation of rules and regulations, and most certainly a violation of law, regardless of enforcement activity. More importantly if you were to follow the former propositions more rigidly, you would not find yourself looking over your shoulder waiting for a formal inquiry.
So why study Ethics?
The daily life of most citizens within the United States and the world inclusively live by some form of moral guidance, character, values, and integrity. Albeit, not all of which may be conveniently compartmentalized to a one size fits all for every human being. An individual may be impacted by life course events that alter that which was once held sacred, however does not mean that should they move from one ethical approach to another the action does not render them unethical. This premise holds for the most part universally accurate in-spite of one’s vocation. Yet those that pursue a career in the criminal justice system morality, character, and integrity are paramount. At the end of the day when a shift or watch is complete or more so when a career has concluded the only thing we have that is truly ours is integrity and character (McCartney and Parent, 2015).
So why are ethics of such importance in criminal justice? What are ethics? Where had ethics originated? Taking the latter first, the roots of Ethics are woven into the fabric of the American Social Contract Theory that can be traced to the early teachings of Socrates (470-399 B.C.), Plato (428-348 B.C.), and Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). These philosophers are later found in the social contract era within the works of Thomas Hobbes (1651), John Locke (1689), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762); and more recently in the works of John Rawls (1921–2002), and within the framework of our justice system (Albanese, 2012; & Pollack, 2010).
Second, the former question; why are ethics important? The United States is a country founded on the “Rule of Law” unlike forms of an oligarchy, plutocracy, or dictatorship forms of government that “Rule by Law”. The Social Contract Theory in America in essence provides authority to local, state, and federal government to provide security of its citizenry through citizen consent, to relinquish certain freedoms, such as taking the law into their own hands. America, since its inception has begun the slow process of less citizen involvement of safety and enforcement of the law by permitting military and law enforcement to perform such tasks (Adler, 1991; Pollack, 2010; & Albanese, 2012).
This contract is the creation of man for the purposes of providing social tranquility administered by government; however in return members of American society expect the highest level of integrity and ethical conduct in doing so (Whitman, 2013). To this point, those employed in the CJ system generally conduct them self with limited supervision and have vast amounts of discretionary authority, specifically this is true within policing. Those that are employed in any one of these fields are human and are subject to bias, prejudice, and emotion. Thus ethical conduct is principal to ensure integrity within the system.
Third, what are ethics? The quick, down and dirty overview so far of this material emphasizes a historical perspective of the topic of ethics. Now what are ethics is a more broad discussion fraught with bias and myth. Hence forth it is important to read, research, and learn for yourself. We shall introduce and discuss “Critical Thinking” as a key component to the study of ethics. Critical thinking requires critical listening and readers are required to form an opinion for one-self, thereby there is no AP, nor can you Google your opinion. Later in this discussion we shall examine processes that are often employed to weed out unsatisfactory police officer candidates being considered for hire. First, it is important to define words that will often be used in this writing:
Character: the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual; “running away was not in keeping with her character”
Critical Thinking: Is the ability to evaluate fact-viewpoint and behavior objectively. Critical Thinking requires Critical Listening that is the ability to listen objectively without forming opinions prior to hearing all facts and points of view. The exercise culminates in the ability to compare that which was conveyed with that which is real, true, accurate, and can be substantiated. In research the critical analysis applies pro/con viewpoints and fact to the question to arrive at a valued opinion.
Ethics: The study of Morality (Ortmeier and Meese, 2010).
Factual Judgements: Describe something.
Integrity: the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
Integrity-Ethics: This involves maintaining high standards of personal conduct. It consists of attributes such as honesty, impartiality, trustworthiness, and abiding by laws, regulations and procedures. It includes not abusing the system nor using the position of authority for personal gain; not bending rules or otherwise trying to beat the system by tampering with evidence, slanting reports, providing inaccurate testimony, etc.; not engaging in assaultive or violent conduct; and not engaging in illegal or immoral activities – either on or off duty. This involves avoiding that conduct which brings discredit to oneself and the police agency (NYS DCJS, 2009).
Morals/Morality: Good conduct, or that which focuses on universal rules of society, how one ought to behave Ortmeier and Meese, 2010).
Values: a person’s principles or standards of behavior; one’s judgment of what is important in life (Webster’s Dictionary). That which provides guidance.
Value Judgements: a person’s principles or standards of behavior; one’s judgment of what is important in life; characterize a situation or event by making an evaluative statement. (Ortmeier and Meese, 2010)
Can Morality Be Taught?
Morals and ethics must be taught as they are not ingrained through genetic predisposition. Humans are not born naturally moral. We are taught how to act morally and ethically. They differ from manners and etiquette, however these act as a precursor to the moral being. One tells us how to act in social settings and the former expresses a moral obligation. What is right and what is wrong has little grey area involved. These are generally black and white issues, it is when social extracts are mixed that we move from what is right and expected to what is provided and rationalized.
Authority of Office
Police authority is an awesome power that provides opportunities by police to intrude into the privacy and liberty of individual members of society. Inclusive in this list, but not exhaustive, is the right to enter dwellings, limit freedom to total restraint of freedom, search vehicles and dwellings, and most extreme is the justifiable taking of life. All of which is legally permissive, if performed in accordance with legal obligations. Police officers are provided discretion to legitimately proscribe unlawful conduct and behaviors contrary to a peaceful environment. Equally, this profession is often called upon to perform pubic service to the citizens served. This entails controlling public behaviors, traffic control, persons in need of assistance, and service providers when no other agency is open or available. In fact police record many instances annually that they are first responders for services that ultimately may be transferred to other service agencies. More often than not the service may be provided to elements of society that are powerless and disenfranchised. Regardless of whom a service may be provided, it is essential that the authority is not purposely misused or abused.
Because the authority is provided to the gatekeepers of the CJ system through laws, rules, and regulations provided within the guidelines of the Social Contract discussed briefly. Most citizens of a free society will want the police to have this authority but not carte blanche. Interestingly society will want the civil and military authorities to perform their duty without hesitation to interrupt criminal or terrorist acts. However, this is not without increasingly higher levels of oversight and supervision (Pollock, 2010). Police officers through over 18,000 police agencies nationally, conduct millions of police/public contacts daily and most are without fracas or fanfare. The media and the courts generally do not find interest in routine police/public contacts. The smaller percentage of close calls gain the attention of media and the courts.
The public as a whole generally will pay little attention to the grand and glorious document penned into flaming gold by James Madison and his cohorts, The United States Constitution. That is not until the document favors them in some fashion. The U.S. Constitution is omnipresent with the thousands of cadre of the CJ system. First and foremost the Constitution provides guidance, ethics, moral conduct expected and an Oath of Office for those that serve to uphold and protect the contents within the four corners of the document. I say with little hesitation that the majority of America’s protectors, both civil and military, take the Oath of Office with obligation, strength of purpose and intent to perform their tasks with enthusiasm and will rarely find themselves on the wrong side of the issue. Guardians of our guardians are required to appropriately supervise and take punitive action for the small percentage that do not get it right. Ethical leadership will be discussed further on in the material.
Ethical Decisions
Ecstasy is having choices and Agony is having to make one. An ethical decision is often obfuscated by a plethora of information (factual or not) that muddies the pool of clear thought. The fact is a decision is simply a choice. How one makes that choice or concludes a decision is right for a particular situation is what shall be relegated to the 20/20 censors from now until eternity. Members of the CJ System are often called upon to make a decision anywhere from a Nano-second to Mill-second. The front line practitioner does not enjoy the same periods of time to ponder the action as does lawyers and judges that may have months upon years to evaluate an action. The greater the difficulty of the decision therein lies the mirrored degree of dilemma. The decision may be juxtaposed with competing values of equal intensity or may place the decision maker in a character challenge or in a personality conflict. Either of these will often render the most innocuous decision more difficult, and there are those moments in time we may make a wrong decision as a result of a choice.
Albanese (2012) asserts “Aristotle emphasizes that ethical conduct requires practice so that it become a habit” (p.18). In short decision making requires practice. Good decisions require correct measures or a set of skills to make the most correct decision. These are:
- Maintain an open mind;
- Evaluate relevant facts;
- Identify moral questions; and
- Apply ethical principles (Albanese, 2012).
Let’s re-examine the situation that you, the police officer found yourself misusing the NCIC system. How would you use these steps to analyze your dilemma and come to an ethical conclusion? What might you offer your friend rather than risk discipline or termination or jail time? How might you act rather than relying on the “Well everyone else does it” excuse? The choice really will not be that difficult if you follow these few steps and perform your duty as required.
Chapter Summary
What should be abundantly apparent to the reader at this juncture is that Aristotle’s measures of good thinking is a precursor to critical thinking that has passed the test of time. He along with other philosophical scholars have provided pathways relevant to ethical decision making today. A significant take-away from this section is simply this, a thirst for knowledge is a sound behavior for ethical thinking. As such, one must practice critical thinking daily, until it is second nature. Critical thinking requires the formation of a hypothesis (Why not this way or that way or specifically this way.) that may be based on experience, skill sets developed to date, and knowledge.
A key ingredient required to test this opinion is intellectual curiosity. Members of the CJ system may have received a degree from an institution of higher education prior to entering the field or one may rely on a certificate of training that has qualified you for participation in the CJ endeavor. Neither of which has qualified you to stop thinking. Ethical and moral guidance, the drive to get it right, and a continuous search of fact to establish a well-grounded opinion should be ones prescription and not a proscription to moral reasoning.
References
Adler, M. (1991). Desires, right and wrong: The ethics of enough. New York: MacMillan.
Albanese, J.A. (2012). Professional ethics in criminal justice: Being ethical when no one is looking (3rd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
McCartney, S., & Parent, R. (2015).Ethics in law enforcement. Victoria, BC: BC campus. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/ ethicsinlawenforcement/
Ortmeier, P.J., & Meese, E., III, (2010). Leadership, ethics, and policing: Challenges for the 21st century (2nd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pollock, J.M. (2010). Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Sklansky, D. A. (2006). Not your father’s police department: Making sense of the new demographics of law enforcement. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 96(3), 1209-1243. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21820080&site=ehost-live&scope=
Whitman, M.L. (2013). Investigating the correlation between preemployment screening and predicting unethical behavior in police candidates. Capella University Dissertation, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing ISBN: 9781303151750, 1303151758.
