Identify the ethical issue or problem concisely.
The ethical dilemma arises when the truth is manipulated in the second report, also known as the “signed off” report. In this report, the officer falsely claims to have personally witnessed the husband drive and park the car, despite not actually witnessing it happen.
The crucial point in this situation is that the first report stated that the officers only felt a warm hood on the vehicle and saw the husband walking up to his home. If the first report had not been approved, it may have been due to lack of evidence supporting the claim that the husband drove the car. This would have weakened their case, potentially leading to a victory for the husband. From an economic, social, and political standpoint, this would have exposed a vulnerability in the police department as they made an arrest without meeting necessary criteria.
There are multiple parties involved or key actors who have a stake in resolving this ethical issue. As a moral agent considering an ethical course of action, it is essential to consider one’s obligations towards each party involved.
(key actor)
Obligation (owed to the claimant)
Perspective (What does the claimant hope will happen?)
The officers
Fidelity, justice
The officers hope they will win the case of DWI despite not witnessing the husband driving.
The husband
Fidelity, beneficence
Hopes to avoid jail and win the case against him as he was not witnessed driving while intoxicated.
The wife
Fidelity, beneficence
Hopes to prevent her husband from going to jail.
Society
Justice
Hopes that criminal justice personnel and system will keep offenders off the streets to protect innocent citizens.
Prosecutor
Justice, non-injury
Hopes to uncover the truth to avoid flaws in the justice system and achieve complete justice for all parties involved.
Considering Other Options
4. What are two options for the situation? One option could be something unexpected or unconventional due to potential consequences. Both options must be within the individual’s ability to choose and control. Option A
Alternative B
Keep report number one and choose not to file charges against the husband. Proceed with report number two and press charges against the husband. 5. Answer the following questions regarding the alternatives you have developed.
Choosing Alternative A or Alternative B will have different potential outcomes. In the best-case scenario, if Alternative A is chosen, the husband will see it as fortunate and start a rehabilitation process. This would prevent any criticism for his arrest without following protocol. However, in the worst-case scenario, he may continue to drive under the influence and endanger others. Additionally, his previous arrest could be exposed, resulting in reprimand for the prosecutor’s failure to pursue charges initially.
Selecting this alternative would remove him from public roads and eliminate the risk of him driving while intoxicated and causing harm. Nevertheless, there is a possibility that disclosing the truth could lead to reprimands for prosecutors and police officers who withheld information at first.
If this alternative is chosen, harm can occur to citizens due to accidents caused by ongoing intoxicated driving. The wife may also remain vulnerable to abuse from her drunk spouse. Furthermore, if he gets arrested and serves as their sole breadwinner, it could cause financial difficulties for the family.
Moreover, revealing the truth could bring harm upon the department.
The idea that allowing an intoxicated driver on public streets poses a professional threat to public safety can invalidate this alternative.
Moving forward with a falsified report would be incorrect in professional, religious, and personal contexts.
Applying ethical guidelines.
Consider each ethical guideline and explain whether it would support or reject your alternative. Guidelines based on the action itself
Alternative A
Alternative B
Should this alternative become a rule or policy that everyone in this situation should follow in similar situations in the future? (Kant) Yes
No
Does this alternative result in using any person as a means to an end without consideration for his or her basic integrity? (Kant) Yes
Yes
Is the intent of this action free from vested interest or ulterior motive? (Kant’s good will) Yes
No
Does this alternative demonstrate a genuine concern for others affected by the decision, and is the moral agency responding to a perceived need? Yes
No
Guidelines based on consequences
Alternative A
Alternative B
Is the good that results from this alternative outweighed by the potential harm that might be done to others? (Mill’s harm principle) No
No
Is any harm brought about by anyone other than the moral agent? (causal harm) Yes
Yes
Will anyone who can be considered defenseless be harmed? (paternalism) Yes
Yes
How much is this alternative based on the moral agent’s own best interest? (ethical egoism)
In the context of utilitarianism, it is crucial to select a single alternative that maximizes benefits or minimizes harm for the majority of individuals. The initial option provides either the highest benefit or the lowest level of harm.
Ethical Decision Making involves assessing the morality of a situation by considering ethical principles, values, and potential outcomes. By carefully evaluating these factors, individuals can make fair, just, and advantageous decisions for all parties involved.
7. Choose between Alternative A or Alternative B, providing a justification for your decision. Alternative A allows the husband to make more informed choices and protects against dishonesty from law enforcement officials and the prosecutor. This ensures the truth is revealed and prevents any perception of negligence by the police department during arrests due to lack of evidence.
