The first story takes place in an industrial city in the Midwest. The police department is large and well funded. The police officer job requires a college degree and officers go through a rigorous training program followed up by 40 hours of training a year. The new chief wanted to move more toward community policing, but she had just completed her first year and it seemed that and the process would take a while. Many officers were opposed to moving from the traditional crime fighting model to one that incorporated community problems.
A group of young professionals moved, as a group, into a row of 100 year old large houses in a deteriorating neighborhood. The group bought the properties cheaply and pulled together to remodel and refurbish their homes. There were a number of old “mansions in the area and the initial group hoped to entice other young professionals to buy the contiguous properties in an effort to rehabilitate the entire area. All was going well except for one reoccurring and very annoying problem. It seems that a past practice had developed in front of the row of houses. Between 4:00 am and 6:00 am during the week, prostitutes would meet their customers in front of the houses. The customers – johns – would pull up along the curve, usually with high end cars such as Mercedes, BMWs, Lincoln Town Cars, etc. The prostitutes would provide their services to the johns in the parked cars leave the car and enter the next car in line. It was bad enough that the prostitution went on in from of their houses, but the johns and prostitutes were not averse to disposing of their garbage on the street on the tree lawns of the houses.
The group notified the police of their problem. A police officer came over and took a detailed report from the group members and even took photos of the trash. The officer advised he would turn the report and photos over to the vice squad. However, the early morning prostitution market continued unabated. The members of the group continued to call the police and were given other departments to call with no results. The group even took to throwing eggs on the cars of the johns but that didn’t have any results except for the threats made toward them by some of the prostitutes. The group leaders turned in the license plate numbers of the johns; cars, but that information was apparently not used by the police. Finally the group hired a lawyer who petitioned the police commission asking the group for help. The group leader received a polite letter from the police commission stating in effect, the department had limited resources and had to prioritize problems by threat level and would take action to help the group when time allowed. In other words, the police commissioners were claiming the police were too busy to help.
However, one of the group members, while touring the neighborhood at 5:00 am desperately looking for information, discovered a restaurant 5 blocks away from the row of houses. He staked out the restaurant for a week. You guessed it: at 5:00 am several police cars were parked in the lot and the officers spent around 20 to 25 minutes in the restaurant before leaving. After this embarrassing discovers was made public, the group did get service from the police department and officers chased the open air sex market out of the neighborhood.
The second story is short and is advice a young officer received from a veteran officer about taking gifts from community members. The young officer was fresh out of the academy and had taken his ethics training seriously. He believed that almost al p[police officers were no corrupt and he knew he would never be corrupt. He would never take the first step on the slippery sloop. He was assigned to a veteran for six week period. The veteran seemed to be a stand up guy. He was firm but fair, was polite with people but would not be backed down. The veteran also reinforced the importance of being a clean cop and working for the citizens who were to be served. For lunch one day, they stopped at a local restaurant. The owner was working and he was very happy to see the veteran cop. The owner advised that lunch would be on him today. To the rookie’s surprise, the veteran accepted and thanked the owner for being gracious.
After they left, the veteran explained that there is an exception to every rule. In this case, the restaurant owner was repaying him for a job well done as he had prevented the restaurant from being burglarized some week ago. The rookie attempted to pay for his meal, but the veteran cop explained that this owner – being a moral person – felt morally bound to give something back. Even thought cops were paid to help, the restaurant owner a debt of gratitude toward the cop for saving him a major headache that would have resulted from his store being burglarized. The free meal while a token offering, non-the less eradicated any debt between them and gave the owner the recognition that the cops and he were part of the same community – in a sense were equals. The veteran also explained that they would not go back to that restaurant for a number of weeks to make it clear they did not expect and further repayment.
“ethicalproblems empathically; that is, impartially and fromthe perspective of all parties concerned. In the followingsituation, consider what the relevant needs and inter-ests are of the participants, giving equal attention totheir various perspectives.• A second-time convicted pedophile has justcompleted a mandatory fifteen-year term in prison.The ex-offender is now living in your local commu-nity. Some residents are outraged that this manresides in this family-oriented neighborhood. Theleadership of your home owner’s association calls fora “special” meeting. The purpose of the meeting isto discuss how the community should respond tothe presence of a “pedophile roaming their streets.”At the meeting, some insist that the police shouldbe contacted and that they should handle thesituation; others suggest that any pedophile—even if“reformed”—is mentally unbalanced and, conse-quently, should be involuntarily hospitalized forpsychiatric care; still others believe that the manshould be completely shunned by all those whoreside in the neighborhood because this will protecttheir children from the man.•
Question 1
How do you interpret this moral dilemma? What is theethical thing to do here? Given Kohlberg’s levels andstages of moral development, how would you interpretthe respective positions taken by your neighbors?
Question 2 (Multiple choice)
2.To the best of your ability, indicate which of Kohlberg’sstages of moral development might best explain themoral reasoning involved in the following:
a. Waging war to protect or further economic interests.
b. Engaging in a self-defensive war, having been attackedby another country.
c. Waging war to retaliate against another country.d. Executing convicted murderers to serve vengeance.
e. Executing convicted murderers to protect the publicfrom further harm.
f. Avoiding paying taxes to further one’s profits.
g. Refusing to pay taxes as a means of protest against injustice.
Question 3 (multiple choice)
3.To the best of your ability, indicate how the followingethical dilemmas might be resolved based on each stageof Kohlberg’s model of moral development: use Table 7.4as a guide.
a. Speeding versus not speeding
B. Lying versus telling the truth
C. Cheating on an exam versus doing”
1 – 3. Select and answer 3 discussion questions from chapter 7.
Answer the following questions using the posted lecture:
4. Does the first story suggest that organizations can function at a lower level of moral development? Explain your answer.