Available facts, values and concepts of each party
From the case scenario provided, a 19-year-old woman was brutally raped, seriously beaten, and left in a coma and is not expected to come out of her coma. The suspects of the crime, 16-year old and 15 years old young men, have been picked for interrogation. My working partner has interviewed both the suspects but without their parents. They are entitled to have their parents present during such an interview, but their parents were not involved in the interview exercise process. However, the suspects have pleaded guilty to the crime. The interview was also conducted without a videotape recorder, even though the policy requires so. The department policy requires videotaping important interviews such as this, but the partner, who is also a senior investigator, neglected the tape recorder's need. I have been asked to sign the investigative report on the matter to move to the District Attorney’s office. Going to the parking lot, the victim’s parents are waiting for me. They want to inquire more about the investigation process, which should be a confidential information. They are seeking justice for their beloved daughter.
Ethical issue
As an investigator, one is expected to follow the policies and guidelines set by the investigation department. Among them includes using videotape recorder while interviewing serious crimes (Haworth, 2018). Besides, the policy requires that their parents be aware of the interview when interviewing children under 18 years. The policy also requires that in investigation, the information should remain confidential. The officers who are carrying out the investigation should keep the information as confidential as possible.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
There are two main ethical issues in this case scenario. Whether to sign the investigation report of an investigation that has been conducted unprofessionally. The investigation was unethically conducted since the children were interviewed without their parents’ presence or notifying their parents of the interview process. The interview was conducted without using a videotape recorder that the policy requires for the investigation process of a severe offense. The partner was aware of the need to use the videotape, but he neglected its importance. Another dilemma in this scenario is whether to tell the victim's parents about how far the investigation has gone. I have complete information about the investigation process, and these are the parents of the victim who are seeking information about the investigation process. Besides, we are all alone in the parking lot. No one will hear what I decide to tell them. However, the policy requires that information concerning an investigation of such a case remain confidential until the issue is presented in the court of law. These are the two main ethical dilemmas in the current case. Between these two ethical dilemmas, deciding whether to tell the parents about the investigation information is the most immediate dilemma.
Alternatives and cause of action
On the most immediate ethical dilemma, whether or not to tell the victim's parents about the ongoing information about the investigation process, the two main alternative actions are giving them information or denying the information. The fact is that they are seeking justice for their beloved daughter. Therefore, it is ethically right to give them the information concerning the investigation process of the case. However, my department policy requires me to keep the investigation information confidential. In case I give out the information, and my seniors realized that I went against the policy, I may lose the job. However, since I am close to my senior colleague, I will seek help from him to resolve this conflict. Seeking help from a colleague is essential whenever one struggles to choose an ethical dilemma (Hem et al., 2018). It will help in such a scenario.
There are only two alternatives on the other dilemma on whether to sign the report of an investigation conducted without following the department policy. The alternatives are signing the report or refusing to sign the report. When I sign the report, it might end up being a legal matter because no videotape recorder was used during an interview. Secondly, the suspects' parents were not involved during the interview process of their 15 and 16 years old sons. In this dilemma, my senior colleague is an enabler of the current conflict. He is the one responsible for interviewing without considering the two vital department policies. Failure to sign the report would mean the case cannot be taken to the Attorney's Office to be presented in court. And that would mean the girl's parents will not get justice for their daughter. When I sign the report, I might be called for legal action in a court of law. It is essential to jump the command chain when a senior is causing the dilemma (Workplace Ethics Advice, 2021). It is better to jump the chain of command and ask the head of the investigation department for advice before signing the report. Based on these two decisions, my senior colleague might not respect me when I seek help from his senior in the command chain. Yet, he assured me that there was no problem with having no parents during the interview and having no videotape. However, I think I will be proud of my decisions since I feel that I will have helped the girl's child
References
Haworth, K. (2018). Tapes, transcripts and trials. The International Journal Of Evidence & Proof , 22 (4), 428-450. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712718798656
Hem, M. H., Gjerberg, E., Husum, T. L., & Pedersen, R. (2018). Ethical challenges when using coercion in mental healthcare: a systematic literature review. Nursing ethics , 25 (1), 92-110.
Workplace Ethics Advice. (2021). Resolving Ethical Conflicts in the Workplace . Workplace Ethics Advice. Retrieved 19 February 2021, from https://www.workplaceethicsadvice.com/2016/10/resolving-ethical-conflicts-in-the-workplace.html .
