Controversies in Criminal Justice
The two differences between deontology and consequentialism
Deontology theory of ethics refers is a theory that focuses on the way actions depend on particular moral rules. Therefore, under this theory, the action is judged instead of its consequence (Alexander & Moore, 2007). Consequentialism is a theory that focuses on judging the results or the consequences of the action. These two theories have significant differences derived from their definitions and are to be explained in this essay.
From their definitions, we find that deontology is a duty ethics where one is to adhere to a particular rule. For instance when one is caught in the act of theft, a deontologist will condemn him/her on the basis of breaking the rule that one should not steal. Whereas in the same incidence, a consequentialist will judge the same thief basing on the harm caused to the other person due to the removal of his or her property (Jones, 1986). Therefore, deontology rule defends the law whereas consequentialism focuses on the impact caused by a given act.
Another difference between the two is that the judging of the deontologist stands firm depending on whether the action is morally right or wrong (Moynihan, 1993). For instance if one’s action is inherently good, it doesn’t matter what the outcome is. Whereas the judging of consequentialists does not look at the motives or intentions of the doer; for instance an action done with good intentions is judged morally wrong when the results are bad (Jones, 1986). On the other hand, an action done with bad intentions is judged to be morally right if its results are positive.
Examples of how each theory applies to policing
Deontological ethics stresses adherence to moral duties. This notion is important to law enforcement officers who by law, are bound to perform their duties. This theory aims to ensure that correct moral duties are performed basing on the existing rules (Huemer, 2009). This can imply that this ethical system can be applicable in the policing and its judging can to a certain extent be acceptable in the ruling of law. One of the examples is when a thief is alleged of stealing one’s property, he is judged of the act of theft which is morally wrong and similarly in policing theft is against the law. Consequentialism suggests that the morally right action yields the best consequence (Jones, 1986). This theory aims at creating good for oneself. For example if one is alleged of stealing another’s property, the thief is condemned of causing harm to the other person which lawfully right to protect the wellbeing of the citizens.
An insight about ethics in policing
Integrity is a basically an important tool in policing to maintain legality with the public since the police are given power to protect personal rights and defend the law in a fair manner without partiality. Owing to these, police departments have a code of ethics. In most of the countries, it is a requirement for the police to treat all people equally (Banks, 2011). . Additionally, when people act in an ethical manner, it is the duty of police to act fairly and respectfully to the public. Studies have shown that by doing these, they gain cooperation and trust from the people they serve (International Association of Chiefs of Police, n.d.). However, there has been loss of public confidence in the police for a number of years following widespread political corruption and police brutality which has resulted into serious efforts to reform the police.
References
Article: Alexander, L., & Moore, M. (2007). Deontological ethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/
Book Excerpt: Banks, C. (2011). The importance of ethics in criminal justice. In M. Maguire, & D. Okada (Eds.), Critical issues in criminal justice: Thought, policy, and practice (pp. 6–30). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Copyright 2010 by Sage Publications Inc. Books. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc. Books via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Article: International Association of Chiefs of Police. (n.d.). Ethics: Enhancing law enforcement ethics in a community policing environment. Retrieved fromhttp://www.theiacp.org/PoliceServices/ExecutiveServices/ProfessionalAssistance/Ethics/tabid/140/Default.aspx
Book Excerpt: Jones, R. A. (1986). Rules for distinguishing the normal from the pathological. In Emile Durkheim: An Introduction to Four Major Works (Masters of Social Theory, Volume 2) (pp. 65-68). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Copyright 1986 Sage Publications Inc. Used with permission from Sage Publications Inc. via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Article: Moynihan, D. P. (1993). Defining deviancy down. The American Scholar, 62(1), 17–30. Retrievedfrom: http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9302190538&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Article: Huemer, M. (2009). A paradox for weak deontology. Utilitas, 21(4), 464–477.
Retrieved from Walden library using the Academic Search Complete database.
