Problems arising within the community today concerns individual rights, codes of conduct for criminal justice as well as public protection. Essentially, when solving such problems, the practical method is based on set rules. However, it is important for any individual working in criminal justice to have ethical standards of conduct. Philosophical and practical approaches are also critical in solving problems in a balanced way within a society. Even though there are a variety of approaches to choose from when solving issues depending on preferences, it is necessary to apply both methods to achieve a balanced solution. The purpose of this paper is to discuss various philosophy and practical approaches for balancing the use of immoral means to achieve desired outcomes, balancing individual rights and the public’s protection, balancing the use of reward and punishment, and recommend how to use ethics in decision-making on issues of criminal justice.
Balancing the use of Immoral Means to Accomplish Desirable ends
The Dirty Harry problem is a common ethical problem in the criminal judicial system in our modern society. This issue refers to criminal justice professionals using immoral methods to accomplish a desirable outcome. In many cases, moral means are hardly used to resolve problems. As such, it is usually necessary to lie, use bribes, or sham to prevent crimes or stop offenders. However, using immoral means for criminal justice professionals places them on the same footing with criminals (Clear & Karp, 2009). Moreover, the use of reward and punishment in issues concerning codes of conduct is immoral. In such cases, innocent people can be punished when the guilty ones go free if the award is used to set them up.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In my opinion, it is pragmatic to apply unethical methods to achieve the desired ends for a particular situation in the justice system. However, this ethical choice should only be utilized in a dilemma qualifying the following circumstances. First, the outcome of such a situation must be so urgent in such a way that if the professional does not use all means available to achieve them would be immoral. Second, the end of that dilemma should be unquestionably desirable and fail to reach such an end would be undesirable. Thirdly, there should be no valid or moral way that can be applied to achieve the expected outcome. The above conditions help limit the use of immoral means in the criminal justice system. In addition, from a philosophical perspective, there should be a fair and just investigation in order to achieve just judgment.
Balancing the Issue of Individual rights and the Public’s Protection
One of the major issues in the work of a criminal justice professional is balancing public protection and social order with maintaining individual liberties and rights. As such, there are set rules that are expected to be used in solving problems regarding public security and individual rights. For instance, the rules state that the work from a person’s hands lawfully gifts them with the property. Additionally, the law recognizes that every man who owns property has a right and no one has a right to his property but himself (Elkind, 2010). Therefore, any individual taking property that is not lawfully theirs should be subjected to the law and judged accordingly. This creates the basis for the existence of the society on a common good of law and order.
In this context, my ethical, philosophical stand is based on a combination of deontology and pragmatism. Essentially, individual freedoms can be limited to protect citizens, to ensure social order, and for the purpose of promoting the common welfare. However, sometimes it is not clear whether the social order or the common good can be affected by a particular choice made by an individual. This is an ambiguous situation where I use the utilitarian approach to help me weigh the balance of positive and adverse consequences of such a choice (Illes & Chin, 2008). In addition, I will take into account the breadth and depth of limiting individual rights and the resulting effect of social order and the common good of all.
Balancing the use of reward and punishment in Criminal Justice
There are different ethical perspectives in the criminal justice system regarding reward and punishment. For example, from a philosophical perspective on punishment, one would argue that an individual does not steal another person’s property unless they have a need. As such, a thief can be given a second chance to return the property. However, according to the utilitarian approach to punishment, a person should be punished to deter potential offenders from committing crimes, while retributive punishment claims that an offender should be punished for the crime committed to the extent comparable to with the offence (Elkind, 2010). In the issue of reward, one can be paid based on the result or efforts made towards achieving the desired outcome.
In my opinion, since there are many things influences the choice of reward or punishment, it is not possible to limit the choice to a single theory. For instance, in the issue of reward, I can reward a person if they accomplish their tasks successfully; for effort, I would reward if the results were in any way altered, thereby affecting the expected outcome. This approach helps motivate people to achieve results and allow to filter out the cases of window-dressing. On the other hand, for punishment, I would rely on utilitarian point of view. This will help choose and execute punishment, which will deter potential offenders from committing crimes. In the end, the society and public offenders should benefit from the choice and decision made by the criminal justice professional.
Ethics of Care and Peacemaking for Law Enforcement Professionals
In criminal justice, ethics is used in decision making where it may encompass intelligent as well as moral inquiry. Additionally, professionals in the justice system should follow key principles established to promote social order and the common good of all in the society. This is important especially in situations when public protection and individual rights come into conflict. Although methods of setting standards of conduct range from moral absolutism to cultural relativism, ethics is a central element in decision making that involves ethical dilemmas (Clear & Karp, 2009). Also, religion, natural law among other forms of law have also impacted in shaping ethical standards. Moral understanding is vital in decision making for professionals in the criminal justice for a proper working system.
I believe that deontological principles and utilitarian approach are useful as they provide efficient decisions and solutions in complex situations. For example, the utilitarian approach can be used to determine whether immoral means have been used to accomplish desirable outcomes. It is also quite efficient in choosing the best reward or punishment in a balanced manner. Also, incorporating ethics helps provide the background for effective decision-making. This is an important tool in the justice system, especially in ambiguous situations.
Recommendations and Conclusion
I can make several recommendations that will promote ethical decision-making for professionals in the criminal justice system. First, the utilitarian approach should be incorporated into the system to help provide a way out of a situation. This method will help deter future crimes, enable professionals chose a reward for reward and punishment, and help assess the use of immoral means to achieve desired outcomes. Second, although people have their preferences, it is important to apply both philosophical and practical approaches when solving issues in order to get balanced solutions. These recommendations can be implemented by criminal justice professionals in decision-making in ethical dilemmas. As a result, the criminal justice system will not only serve to punish criminals, but will also help protect such offenders in terms of giving them a second chance to change their lifestyle.
References
Clear, T. R., & Karp, D. R. (2009). The community justice ideal: Preventing crime and achieving justice (pp. 6-7). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Elkind, D. (2010). Developmentally appropriate practice: Philosophical and practical implications. Phi Delta Kappan , 71 (2), 113-117.
Illes, J., & Chin, V. N. (September 06, 2008). Bridging Philosophical and Practical Implications of Incidental Findings in Research. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 2, 298-304.
