Comparison Of Criminal Justice And Deontological Approaches

Kaloub Kilgore Gomez
Ethics in Criminal Justice
Discussion Board 4
April 30, 2018

Deontological and Consequentialist Ethic Approaches
1. Briefly explain each of the ethical decision-making approaches;
The deontological approach is rooted in the belief that actions are not justified by their outcomes. This view maintains that there is a moral right and wrong that should be abided by. Regardless of the possible outcome this approach scrutinizes the means as the ends. The consequential approach is centered on the belief that the consequences of an action outweigh the action itself. In other words if killing a killer will lead to the safety of numerous people, while not killing him may allow him to escape the consequential approach would lean

towards the former.
2. Discuss how the two approaches are similar;
The deontological approach and the consequential approach have an abundance of things that makes them different. Upon closer inspection there is one major similarity that can highlighted; both approaches involve a certain sense of morality. The deontological approach calls for a morality that right is right, and wrong end of story. The consequentialist approach leans more towards an eye for an eye type of belief, but that is because the morality of this approach deems that equal punishment for equal crimes is in a sense “right”.
3. Discuss how the two approaches are different;
The deontological approach and the consequentialist approach are of course much more diverse than they are similar. deontological ethics maintains that actions are not justified by their consequences. Rather, factors other than good outcomes determine the “rightness” of actions. “ () Under this type of approach it is argued that there is a certain level of integrity that must be taken. It is believe a person knows right from wrong, and the deontological approach is the practice of that ideology. On the other hand the consequentialist approach involves an entirely different ideology that focuses strictly on action and result. While practicing this approach an individual pays strict attention to the result of their actions, and largely ignores the backlash of the actions that garner that result. For example if the police corner a mass murder who has killed 10+ people In a house with two elderly hostages there is an approach the lead/chief officer choice and employ. In the event the chief choses to follow the consequentialist approach he would mot likely examine the chances of the elderly hostages being killed, and deem that it may be worth the risk. After this decision the chief may send in a few of his officers in an attempt to forcibly disarm the murder. In this scenario the officer doesn’t want the hostages to die, but feels if it happens it would be worth it since this dangerous criminal would be off the street. Now if the chief chose the deontological approach he would almost certainly not enter the house. This approach would lead the chief to hesitate as he cant rationalize risking the death of the hostages even to catch the murder. In this scenario the chief doesn’t belief the ends justify the means, and would more likely try to negotiate with the suspect, or keep them distracted, until the hostages can be safely rescued.
4. Decide which approach you think is most appropriate, if any, for criminal justice professionals to aid them in making decisions when faced with ethical dilemmas;
When facing ethical decisions I believe it would be ineffective for a criminal justice professional to employ the consequential or the deontological approach one hundred percent of the time.

However I believe that the deontological approach would make the most sense, and fit many scenarios for the professional in the case. The law that criminal justice professionals follow is based on the premise of right and wrong making it quite compatible with the deontological approach. When faced with an ethical decision law enforcement personnel will usually fall back on their training, and combine that with their own sense of judgement. The training provided to law enforcement personnel is married to the law, and should lead them to approach issues with a deontological view the majority of the time. In hindsight the criminal justice professional must recognize that at times the law will conflict with their personal interpretation of right and wrong, and that ignoring the rules is counterproductive to their intentions.
5. It is possible that one may decide that a particular approach is better suited to a particular segment of criminal justice. For example, one might believe that the deontological approach is better suited for situations involving corrections, or law enforcement, and the consequentialist approach works best with those involved in the parole or probation function. If you believe this to be the case, describe this in

detail
It is my belief that the deontological approach is well suited for corrections and law enforcement personnel. As I mentioned in my previous paragraph the laws we uphold in America relate well to deontology as they both are rooted in right and wrong. Law enforcement is in place to serve and protect and often times that involves using moral judgment in a quick instance. These professionals constantly have an array of ways they can handle a situation and they must show sound moral judgement at every stage to avoid questioning. Therefore I see the deontological approach as a sound fit for corrections and law enforcement. On the other hand the consequential approach can work well in probation situations in America. Probation is considered a privilege and the people on probation are given a strict set of rules to abide by. When an individual violates their probation a swift and equivalent punishment can be deemed reasonable. Violating ones probation is a crime that is known for baring immediate consequences, so naturally a consequentialist approach makes sense for this function.