Demonstrate the ability to identify and understand the basic ethical and philosophical tenets of criminal justice.
Demonstrate the ability to think critically on ethical issues in criminal justice, analyzing and interpreting situations, events, practices, and cases.
Demonstrate the ability to link ethics and philosophy to criminal justice decision-making in law enforcement, courts, and corrections.
Demonstrate a sound general knowledge of the ethical and philosophical concepts to address criminal justice ethical issues.
Discussion Documents
All Module 4 materials, readings, and video lecture.
Instructions for this Discussion
Purpose:
The purpose of the assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of the material learned in Module 4 on the development of morality and whistleblowing. The student will apply Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development to the Heinz dilemma. This is an exercise in moral reasoning, not a moral action. The student will also identify and discuss a unique case of whistleblowing. Finally, the student shall explain their level of intellectual growth from this module.
Task(s):
Answer all of the following discussion prompts in at least 350 words. You must post first before you can respond to your classmates.
The Heinz Dilemma
In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done that? (Kohlberg, 1963, p. 19)
Answer the above question, “Should the husband have done that?” based on what YOU would do and explain why.
Finally, after having finished the lecture and reading on Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development, what stage of moral reasoning does your answer reflect? Explain by citing material from the video lecture.
Find a unique case of a whistleblower. Summarize your case and then explain why you think this person chose to do the right thing despite the consequences or potential consequences whistleblowers face? Though you will never know 100% the reasons for why this person chose to be a whistleblower, which theoretical perspective(s) from the Module 4 video lecture do you think best applies to why your whistleblower chose to do the right thing? In other words, where did their morals come from? Provide all sources in APA formatting.
Finally, explain how Module 4 expanded your growth as an individual and as a “learning expert” on how we become moral individuals. Which theoretical perspectives do you think apply most to how we become moral (or immoral)? Or do you think a combination of them best explains how we become moral (or immoral)?
