Ethical Decision Making Essay

Abstract Ethics is the branch of philosophy that examines questions of morality, or right and wrong. In this paper we will discuss the philosophical approaches used in ethical decision making. The two approaches that will be elaborated on are the utilitarian approach and the universal approach. Several questions will be addressed, (1) what is the utilitarian and universal approach? (2) How do we use them in the ethical decision making process and (3) examples of how it relate in the field of Criminal Justice? When conflict arises it’s not always possible to decide who is right or wrong; however our moral responsibility is to resolve problems to the best of our ability. The utilitarian and universal theories are two of several philosophical approaches or methods that can be implemented when making these types of decisions (Zalta & Geoff, 2008). The Utilitarian Approach: Utilitarianism is one of the most powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the history of philosophy. The utilitarian approach to ethical decision making focuses on taking the action that will result in the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It also focuses on the consequences of the course of action and policy, as well as the affects it has on the well-being of the people directly or indirectly impacted by that action or policy. This approach is used to promote the welfare of everybody by maximizing benefits and minimizing harm (Zalta & Geoff, 2008). For instance, when faced with a situation your first thought or question is what should you do? Once you assess the situation then you would apply which ethical decision is the best action to take. If you implement the utilitarian approach you did so with the intent of producing the greatest balance over harm. Utilitarianism offers a relatively straightforward method for deciding the morally right course of action for any particular situation we may find ourselves in. In the criminal justice field this approach can be widely used. To discover what we ought to do in any situation, we first identify the various courses of action that we could perform. Second, we determine all of the foreseeable benefits and harms that would result from each course of action for everyone affected by the action. And third, we choose the course of action that provides the greatest benefits after the costs have been taken into account (Velasquez, Claire, Shanks, & S.J). The Universal Approach: The universal approach to ethical decision making is similar to the Golden Rule. The golden rule is best interpreted as â€Å"Treat others as you want to be treated†. Universalism argues that knowledge can and should be applied to everyone in every similar situation (Williams & Arrigo, 2008). This approach can be taken in two steps. First, determine whether or not a particular action should be applied to all people under all circumstances. Second, decide if you would be willing to have that same rule to you. This approach claims that ethical principles hold for all and not for some, it is for everybody without exception (Williams & Arrigo, 2008). In other words if you act a certain way towards another and are not willing to be treated in that same regard than you are in violation of the universal rule. To apply the universal approach correctly we need to take into consideration the effects our decision making have on other people’s lives. We also have to be able to imagine ourselves in the other person’s shoes on the receiving end of the action. Imagine you are a police officer in pursuit of what seems to be a drunk driver, while in pursuit the drunk driver hits a pregnant woman crossing the street. What do you do, do you stop for her and leave a drunk driver on the road, or do you call the accident in and continue to pursue the drunk driver to keep him from potentially killing himself and others. The utilitarian approach would more likely call for back up and continue after the drunk driver, but if we use this same example and compare it to the universal approach, the question then becomes what would you want done to you. Both philosophical approaches are infused with flaws, the use of â€Å"utilitarian† thinking is not always clear of what form of action should be taken or if the action you took will have a favorable outcome for the majority. It is difficult to judge what decision will supply the best way to respond to a situation. The universal approach unlike the utilitarian bases its decisions on the facts that the action taken is best for everyone regardless of the situation or the difference in people. My choice between the two is somewhat tossed, because my belief is that you should do unto other as you would want done to you, but at the same time my desire to ensure the greatest number of success is important to me as well. Within the Judicial system decisions are made with or without the input of others; however it is our moral obligation to ensure that we make the best ethical decisions that we can, because every decision somehow directly or indirectly affects someone else. References Velasquez, M., Claire, A., Shanks, M. M., & S.J. (n.d.). Markula Center for Applied Ethics. Retrieved from Santa Clara University: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/thinking.html Williams, C. R., & Arrigo, B. A. (2008). Is Morality Relative? The variability of Norms and Values. In C. R. Williams, & B. A. Arrigo, Ethics, Crime and Criminal Justice (p. 77). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall. Zalta, E. N., & Geoff, S.-M. (2008). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy : http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaethics/