Short paper assignment: Police
Select one of the police scenarios on the power point discussed this week.  Analyze and resolve the ethical dilemma in a 3 (12 point font, double spaced, 1 inch margins) page paper using the steps on how to resolve a dilemma.
Determine the facts (summarize).
What is the dilemma (state the dilemma)?
Possible decisions for the ethical actor (state and discuss).
Values related to the actor (state and discuss).
Ethical systems (discuss and compare one from each ethical systems list 1 and 2).
Resolve the dilemma (explain).
Be sure to write clearly and concisely.  Use the language of the ethical system (cite the book in text and works cited).  Feel free to find external sources.
Ethical systems 1
Relativism and Absolutism
There are two main arguments for relativism.
o There are many different moral standards of behavior. 
o We do not know how to determine the absolute rules. 
Cultural relativism defines good as that which contributes to the health and survival of society.
It must be noted that even absolutist systems may accept some exceptions.
The principle of forfeiture associated with deontological ethical systems holds that people who treat others as means to an end or take away or inhibit their freedom and well-being forfeit the right to protection of their own freedom and well-being.
Relativism allows for different rules and different judgments about what is good.
Universalists would argue that if moral absolutes are removed, subjective moral discretion leads to egoistic (and nationalistic) rationalizations.
Absolutists would argue that the reason that things like the Holocaust, slavery, the slaughter of Native American Indians, etc., is because people promoting what they consider to be a good end do not apply absolute rules of morality and ethics and, instead, utilize relativism: it is okay for me to do this, at this time, because of what I consider to be a good reason.

Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethical system: what is good is determined by the consequences of the action.
Jeremy Bentham (17481832), a major proponent of utilitarianism, believed that the morality of an action should be determined by how much it contributes to the good of the majority.
The following are some criticisms of Utilitarianism:
o All pleasures or benefits are not of equal value
o Utilitarianism presumes that one can predict the consequences of actions. 
o There is little concern for individual rights in utilitarianism.
In act utilitarianism, the basic utility derived from an action is alone examined.
In rule utilitarianism, one judges that action in reference to the precedent it sets and the long-term utility of the rule set by that action.
Rule utilitarianism may be closer to the principles of ethical formalism, because it looks at general universal laws; the difference between the two is that the laws themselves are judged right or wrong depending on the motives behind them under ethical formalism, whereas utilitarianism looks to the long-term consequences of the behavior prescribed by the rules to determine their morality.
Can you think of any acts that result in bad consequences but should still be considered good acts?  What about bad acts that result in good consequences?

Ethical Systems 2:

The Ethics of Virtue
The ethics of virtue asks the question, What is a good person?
The roots of this system are in the work of Aristotle, who defined virtues as excellences. 
Aristotle believed that we are, by nature, neither good nor evil but become so through training and the acquisition of habits.
The principle of the golden mean is that virtue is always the median between two extremes of character.
Virtues that a good person possesses include thriftiness, temperance, humility, industriousness, and honesty.
Moral virtue comes from habit, which is why this system emphasizes character. 
Josephson Institute lists six Pillars:  trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, citizenship.
One difficulty is in judging the primacy of moral virtues.

Restorative Justice
Restorative justice is a term used to describe a number of programs that seek to move compensation back to center stage in the justice system, instead of retribution.
Restorative justice includes programs that require the offender to face the victim and provide compensation, and programs that place the victim in the middle of the process of deciding how to punish the offender.
The propositions of the movement are as follows:
o Justice requires restoring victims, offenders, and communities who have been injured by crime
o Victims, offenders, and communities should have the opportunity to be a fully active part of the justice process
o Government should restore order, by the community should establish peace
The roots of restorative justice can be found as far back as Roman and Grecian law.
In the 1970s, a trend toward community justice was part of the larger movement of community empowerment and development.
Hallmarks of community justice models include the following:
o The process of justice employs local leadership, is informal, and invites participation from community members
o The goal is to repair the harm done to a community member by another community member in a way that will restore the health of the community relationship
o The authority of the justice is through the customs and traditions accepted by all members
In community or restorative justice models, crime is viewed as a natural human error that should be dealt with by the community
Types of restorative justice programs include victim-offender mediation, reparative boards, family group conferencing, circle sentencing.
There are potential problems with and some criticism of, these types of programs. For instance victims may feel pressured to forgive before they are ready. There can also be unequal punishments given out for identical offenses.