Student Name: Action Analysis There are numerous moral issues involved in this case. Nelson’s, call to the local newspaper to withhold publishing the article is in accordance to his professional code of ethics. Failure to call off the article printing would result in cancelling of the convention that would result in loss of millions that the city would benefit from. As the city’s mayor, it is the duty of Nelson to ensure maximum benefits for the city. At the same time Nelson has the duty of ensuring that his personal life doesn’t interfere with his obligation and duty to the city. Hence, the by calling the newspaper to withhold publishing the article, Nelson met his professional obligations to the city he served. Nelson failure to provide a letter of recommendation for McNair violated his professional code of ethics. As public servant, he has the obligation of providing a letter of recommendation to an individual who would make a good civil servant to avoid having the wrong candidate selected to the post. Further, Nelson’s values involves fully serving his city, hence the call to the newspaper served his personal duty. However, as a civil servant with the potential to determine the right candidates serve office, failure to recommend McNair violated his personal values and duty to serve his city. McNair had the legal obligation of keeping the agreement requirements of a peace pact and ensuring that he doesn’t violate this set agreement. One of his agreement requirements was to address the issues at hand and restrain from name calling. However, calling Mayor Nelson a bozo regardless of the platform used violated this peace pact. The duty to maintain a peace pact applied in all aspects of their interactions even in the media as this name calling would provoke the mayor to respond by calling him names and addressing his personality issues as well. Although McNair is entitled to his freedom of expression, this was restricted by the agreement. In Article 19(3) of the ICCPR, the right of expression of an individual can be limited on the basis of necessity that in this case involved ending the rivalry and name calling between the mayor and McNair. Hence, McNair violated the agreement by referring to the mayor as bozo in his article to the newspaper. McNair violated his agreement duty and the legal obligation instituted by the agreement to maintain a peace pact. This violation devours the power of the agreement and creates an open window for more rivalry characterized by name calling and attack of personal traits. As the town council member, McNair also has the duty of ensuring that his personal life doesn’t affect his service to the city. His affair with the city manager’s wife violates this duty as the publicity of this affair will ruin the city leadership credibility as well as affect other important aspects of the city such as the Family and Marriage convention that provides finances for the city. Further, McNair has the personal duty of providing a good image for the position he holds in the town, hence the affair also violates his personal duty. Mary is fully entitled to use her freedom of expression right as she desires as long as she doesn’t use it to defame others by spreading false information. Since the information given by Mary in this case is true, she didn’t defame McNair hence did not abuse her right of expression. Her personal values allow her to expose fouls in the society that negatively affect the society. Hence, Mary in sending the article was meeting her obligation and duty of ensuring such practices are eliminated from the society. Ethical Decision Making Considerations Part #1 VALUES SPECIFIC ROLE PUBLIC POWER ETHICAL DILEMMA Your Value Origins: Are they carved in concrete? Do they conflict with each other? Your Position: Responsibilities vs Obligations – Do your values inform your role or does your role inform your values? Have you established boundaries for each role? Person/ Family/ Community Duty and Oath: Have you taken an oath or have a duty to decide or act in a particular way? What are you being asked to decide or do? • Learned through experience • Taught by significant others Professional/ Work Identity Authority • Understood from society Agency/ Job Accountability • Based on your beliefs Jurisdiction/ Citizen Core Values: L&G (p. 29): Accountability; Impartiality; Justice and Fairness; Do Good; Avoid Harm Humanity/ Sustainability/ Legacy Whistle blower: Are you internal or external? Use company process? Does any action constitute a crime? Other? Role Diagnosis (L&G p. 35) Power Formal BASIS (for ethical decisions) ALL THESE ARE CONSIDERED TOGETHER AWARENESS Ethical Awareness: Knowing what is right and what is wrong. Rule/Law/Duty/Obligation =Theories This is largely Deontology Ethical Code/ Other Responsibility Org. Specified Rules Recognizing that there is a moral issue and understanding the specific moral principle involved Having the ability to make a choice to act or not to act What rules, duties, obligations, laws govern the action? Is the actor responsible to an ethical code? Is there more than one code in question? What value does the organization place on this conduct? Look at the code or the actions of leadership Have any of the RLDO’s been broken? If you do not adhere to them, what are the consequences Has the code been violated? Has the rule been violated? Not aware of any problem that needs ethical consideration – is this a valid viewpoint? Are there any other considerations - Absolutism No mitigating circumstances will apply. What are the consequences or violating the code? What responsibility does the org. have to punish violations? Recognizing that your decision or actions will affect others This is consequences, No RLDO or many people harmed? Look at the circumstances and apply other analysis – Utilitarianism, Egoism Altruism If there is more than one code, how should the codes be prioritized? (look to conflicts) CONFLICTING ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS Moral Intensity (Jones, 1991) Organizational/ Group Factors Conflicts in ethical reasoning and/or behavior Magnitude of the consequences – sum of the harms due to victims Group Dynamics – go or do not go along with the crowd Social Consensus – degree of agreement that act is evil or good. Within-group Authority Factors: Differences in your morality versus macro-level (org/group) authority Conflicting Imepratives – right to dissent (Legal/Effective/Ethical) Go/No Go: Illegal/Ethical – No action* (Δ ) Illegal/Unethical – No action Legal & Ineffective/Ethical – No action* (Δ) Legal & Ineffective/Unethical – No action Legal & Effective/Ethical - Action Legal & Effective/Unethical Probability of the Effect – act will occur and the harm will result Public Perception Appearance of Impropriety Impartiality Conflicting Personal/Situational Issues Lewis & Gilman: 1-Courage; 2-Multiple roles; 3-Camouflage; 4- Rhetoric; 5-Confusion; 6-Excuse, not explanation; 7-Consensus; 8-Hard but different choices; 9-Error; 10-Selectivity Recognition You have faced this situation before and therefore you knew how to act Temporal Immediacy – length of time between the onset of the moral consequences Allegiance to group based on nature of the organization – eg. Code of Silence Conflicting Codes – Prioritize Determine the reason that a specific code should be primary You are satisfied with the results even though it is not popular or supportive of the general ethical norms THEORETICAL INFLUENCES Proximity – nearness to victims/issue Concentration of the Effect an inverse function of the number of people affected by an act of given magnitude. Conflicting Purposes – Distinguish Understand what purpose is most important Act: What action have you decided to take? ORGANIZATION /GROUP INFLUENCES RESULTS Result/Integration Unintended Results – you did not know or were mistaken that your act would produce the results Wrong calculation – you did not have enough information, or were unable to calculate the results Who is the person making the decision? Values Roles Power/Authority/Accountability What is the question you are being asked? Option #1 Option #2 Theory or theories that support Ethical Theories that support Not Ethical Conclusion: I chose Option __ because…
Purchase answer to see full attachment