The situation that I will address relates to ethical dilemma that correctional officers (COs) face as they perform their duties. COs have the duty to maintain order and safety in jails and prisons in order to ensure that inmates adhere to the rules of penal system. In performing their duties, COs are trained and expected to maintain high standards of professionalism. However, the job of COs characterized by situations that raise ethical dilemmas and legal issues. Regardless of the situation, COs need to ensure that they make an ethical and legal decision.
Legal consequences of boundary violations
For example, an officer may exhibit preferential treatment to an inmate in return for a personal or job-related favors. The typical situations involve CO allowing an inmate to use contraband such as a cigarette or a cellphone in exchange for acting as an informant for the prison officer. The intention of the officer is to use the information provided by the inmate to maintain law and order in the prison, but the means employed appear rather questionable. In another scenario, a CO develops emotional or sexual attraction for a female inmate. Accordingly, the officer chooses to show favors to the inmate, expressing his affection and interest in her.
These incidents are not uncommon in the penal system. COs tend to believe that creating relationships with inmates can help them to be more effective in running the prisons. Furthermore, officers are often in constant and close interaction with inmates because of the nature of the law enforcement system and structure of correctional institutions. Overtime, COs may develop personal relationship with the inmates and become less professional with the inmates as seen in the examples above.
It is imperative to always maintain professional relationships with inmates to avoid ethical dilemmas. The officer has a duty to treat all inmates equally, justly, and fairly. They also have a duty to ensure that the inmates behave according to the rules. Nevertheless, the CO may feel that taking an action against an inmate whom they have a personal (or sexual) relationship is tantamount to betraying a friend or harming an informant who helps the administration in detecting infractions in the institution.
Notable Boundary Violation Cases in Corrections
Deontological approach such as Kantian ethics can be applied when dealing with such an ethical dilemma. Under Kantian ethics, people have a moral duty to take an action that is right regardless of whether the outcome is good or bad. By applying the Kantian ethics, the officer would realize that they have duty to maintain law and order and prevent any unlawful acts by the inmates. As such, although the officer may be having personal or intimate relationship with an inmate for the sake of greater good, such actions can not be justified as they violate the law and fundamental ethical principles.
Reference
Cooke, B. K., Hall, R. C., Friedman, S. H., Jain, A., & Wagoner, R. (2019).
Professional boundaries in corrections. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry, 47(1), 1-7.
DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.003825-19
FAQ
In what areas of virtue at risk does the occupational life of COs confront them with ethics?
Correctional officers inevitably confront such circumstances, where they can establish a relationship which could be personal or even intimate, ending up with partiality or transgression of boundaries. Several smuggled items with girls exchanging for them might also be cited as an instance. Showing extra care for certain prisoners is also an example However, same acts, despite they are meant to maintain public order, can be violating professional might call it ethnics, as well as legal standards.
Why is the need for the COs to maintain a professional distance and not mix with the offenders feeling that important?
Keeping professional boundaries helps one avoid legal suits as well as do not fall into ethical dilemmas. It ensures that every prisoner is treated equally, justly, and fairly, and the rules of the prison are followed – a factor that is extremely crucial in the rehabilitation of people sent behind bars. That is to improve the standard of the correctional system and provide justice to the already inmate through this professionalism.
How about if a counselor is intimate with the convict? Which would be the consequences?
Boundary crossing may result in the removal or termination of CO from their job, legal action against him, and stain on his fieable of professional integrity. Participating in rapes or other vicious crimes inmates can forfeit the fairness of justice of the penal system and end with unjust treatment of prisoners, which is contrary to the correctional policies.
What means do the officers of correction and the inmates use to keep the background acceptably enough?
Bias may appear when COs have personal relationships, especially when the CO starts to treat certain individuals preferably, what can lead to the conflicts inside the inmate population, eventually, injustice. This can really make the CO lose the power and create chaos in the prison environment that will be dangerous and can bring reasonable doubt regarding the fairness in the corrections systems.
What is specifically about Kant’s ethics that allows it to solve the COs’ ethical dilemmas?
Kantian ethics that sought at doing the right thing in spite of the results posits that the guards in conflicts have morally to act themselves ethically and to remain loyal to the law. Consequently, not allowed are any actions which might influence the decision of the officer due to the family problem, relationship, and so on, therefore, the officer will be making the decisions based on what is legally and morally right, not the personal interests.
