Decisions concern every aspect of everyday living. Ethics is also at every level of human life in which individuals are expected to create an ethically whole society. Ethics concerns right and wrong. There are various models of decision-making; some include utilitarianism and deontology. Baron (2017) argued that the utilitarianism approach contends that the best course of life is that which causes the least amount of distress, especially where large numbers of people are concerned. It entails weighing the bad and sound that is bound to produce an action. On the other hand, the deontological approach focuses on the use of appropriate means with good intents and objectives. The two models are critical while assessing criminal justice issues where decision-making is vital and delicate.
The utilitarianism approach applies across many social settings. For example, an ethical, environmental decision is one that its outcome gives forth a good result for all involved – environment, community, and corporations. It evaluates outcomes and its benefit on all stakeholders and strives to get the best for the most significant number of people ( Baron, 2017) . Gawronski, Armstrong, Conway, Friesdorf, & Hütter (2017) further maintained that the deontological model upholds that some underlying acts are wrong or right irrespective of its circumstances and it uses the rule-approach in decision-making. One must bring forth the best outcomes and also use the best actions coupled with good intentions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Deontology is not only comforting, but it is also appealing as it provides guidelines that apply and hold in all circumstances. It also gives the assurance that one understands an act is right or wrong by abiding by established regulations or laws. Law enforcement officers have the moral duty to evaluate the ethical aspect of one’s action. Police officers are bounded by law to undertake their obligations. A police officer must charge a couple of domestic assault irrespective of the outcome. The duty is thus imperative to a police officer. A police officer also has to an offender he considers unlawful regardless of the result. For example, a police officer following a deontological decision-making approach will arrest a careless driver driving on the wrong lane irrespective of whether the action leads to an accident or not. What is essential is that the police officer took the duty to comprehend an unlawful act and did not consider if the result of the action. The deontological approach works best for the police officer.
The deontological approach can thus help minimize ethical disputes for police officers as the most important thing to focus on it the act itself and not the result. As long as the action is not in line with outlined rules, the police officer is within the mandate of his duty to arrest the presumed offender ( Sacco, Brown, Lustgraaf, & Hugenberg, 2017) . Following the utilitarian approach, arresting the culprit in such a situation will produce the best outcome for a large number of people whose lives are put at risk due to dangerous driving. The police officer is thus acting in the best interest of a large number of people. The decision will no doubt produce less distress and pain to others. When faced with a dilemma or complicated situation, the police officer must always remember that it is a duty he or she took by oath and must ever be done by the good faith for the good of all.
Lawyers have a delicate situation regarding upholding moral values or upholding the interest of their clients. It is no doubt that a lawyer’s success and practice are all about the best interest of their clients. Patronage alliance thus presents a delicate balance for all lawyers in their profession since their interest, success wealth, prestige, and reputation all depend on their client’s interest ( Conway & Gawronski, 2013) . Due to the technicality of their work and the need to uphold their client’s interests, lawyers tend to apply utilitarianism approach that focuses on the moral rightness of the eventual outcome. Lawyers rarely apply the deontological approach that puts greater emphasis on the use of proper intent together with the best intentions ( Holyoak & Powell, 2016) . It is thus a complicated and technical situation for a lawyer whose concern is upholding the client’s interest and not the masses or the rightness or wrongness of an act. For the lawyer, none of the two decision-making approaches is practically applicable and none is best. But to a small extent, deontological approach that does not focus on the outcome and only centers on the moral intent may apply best for a lawyer, only to a small extent.
References
Baron, J. (2017). Utilitarian vs. deontological reasoning: method, results, and theory. In Moral inferences (pp. 145-160). Psychology Press.
Conway, P., & Gawronski, B. (2013). Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: a process dissociation approach. Journal of personality and social psychology , 104 (2), 216.
Gawronski, B., Armstrong, J., Conway, P., Friesdorf, R., & Hütter, M. (2017). Consequences, norms, and generalized inaction in moral dilemmas: The CNI model of moral decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 113 (3), 343.
Holyoak, K. J., & Powell, D. (2016). Deontological coherence: A framework for commonsense moral reasoning. Psychological Bulletin , 142 (11), 1179.
Sacco, D. F., Brown, M., Lustgraaf, C. J., & Hugenberg, K. (2017). The adaptive utility of deontology: Deontological moral decision-making fosters perceptions of trust and likeability. Evolutionary Psychological Science , 3 (2), 125-132.
