NCJ Number
59374
Date Published
1979
Length
9 pages
Annotation
A RATIONALE FOR BROADENING THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY INTO CORRECTIONAL ETHICS IS PRESENTED; EMPHASIZING THE ETHICS OF MANAGING CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL.
Abstract
CURRENTLY, MOST OF THE ATTENTION GIVEN CORRECTIONAL ETHICS IS LIMITED TO TWO MAIN ISSUES: THE DUTY AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS TO SOCIETY, AND THE DUTY AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND EMPLOYEES TO OFFENDERS. THE MORAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND ADMINISTRATORS TO THEIR EMPLOYEES, THE IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS ON THOSE PERSONNEL, AND THE MORAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF ELECTED OFFICIALS AND GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACIES TO CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND EMPLOYEES MUST ALSO BE CONSIDERED. THIS BROADENING OF THE SCOPE OF ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IS NECESSITATED BY BASIC CHANGES IN THE CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM AND PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEWORK. THE MEDICAL MODEL HAS BEEN REPLACED, THE OFFENDER IS NO LONGER CONSIDERED A 'SLAVE OF THE STATE', AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED. IN THE PRESENT CONTEXT, EVERY CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATION IS REALLY A DELIVERY SYSTEM FOR CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, AND THE POINTS OF DELIVERY OF THESE SERVICES TO OFFENDERS ARE THE LINE PERSONNEL OF THE CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATION. LINE PERSONNEL INCLUDE CORRECTIONAL AND PROBATION OFFICERS, PAROLE OFFICERS, COUNSELORS, TEACHERS, CHAPLAINS, AND PSYCHOLOGISTS, AMONG OTHERS. THE PRESENT LIMITED ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS FAIL TO RECOGNIZE THAT LINE PERSONNEL ARE OFTEN SUBJECTED TO ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, AND AUTOCRATIC RULES AND REGULATIONS WHICH REDUCE SELF-RESPECT AND HUMAN SENSITIVITIES. TO ENSURE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM, ADMINISTRATORS AND MANAGERS HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TRAINING LINE PERSONNEL IN THE ETHICAL USE OF CORRECTIONAL POWER AND AUTHORITY, AND APPLYING ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THEIR DEALINGS WITH SUBORDINATE PERSONNEL. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED IN THE PAPER. (LWM)