The Purpose of a Code of Ethics within Police Agencies - Term Paper Example

of Ethics of Ethics In general perspective, ethical s encompass s of conduct, s of business ethics s guiding professional practice. An institution will adopt a code of ethics for the purpose of assisting its members to understand and differentiate between wrong and right (Westmarland, 2005). Essentially, such understanding is intended to be applied to decision-making processes. Usually addressing parties interested in an institution’s activities, a code of ethics is made publicly available and underpins an organization’s obligation to the stakeholders. The police department is one such institution whose operations are guided by a code of ethics. As an institution charged with the responsibility of enforcing law, its members’ primary duty of serving mankind include protecting life and property, safeguarding innocent civilians against deception and the weak from intimidation and oppression (DPS, 2009). The police code of ethics requires them to be respectful of all people’s Constitutional rights to justice, liberty and equality. This paper will critically assess and discuss the relevance of codes of ethics in relation to the police department. The code of ethics prescribes and describes the basics of ethical conduct in relation to the responsibility owed to the persons served. It is vital for police officers to preserve the highest ethical and integrity principles in order to discharge their obligations responsibly. Violating the purpose and spirit of the code of ethics is unethical (NASW, 2008). Further, upon critical assessment in the event that particular practices and responsibilities are not specified in the code of ethics, members of the police department should not mistakenly take it to mean that such practices and responsibilities do not exist. Rather, the existing principles stipulated by the code of ethics should serve as a source of inspiration and aspiration. They should form the moral rationale for officers to prudently handle and make decisions about circumstances that may not be sufficiently addressed by the code of ethics. According to the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), a code of ethics merely states professional conduct that is minimally acceptable and what is prohibited (Travers, 2007). In this sense, it means most of the responsibility in adhering to what is explicitly and implicitly stated by the code depends on the officer’s discretion. In every situation of professional activity, officers are expected to observe the principles stated in the code as affirmative obligations and use their unprejudiced judgment in ambiguous situations. All codes of ethics, not only those guiding police practice, require professionals to hold their responsibilities in honor and consider the welfare of the people they are obligated to serve as paramount. In the case of police officers, this calls for the use of available resources to provide competent services. However, competence may be challenged by discrimination arising from prejudices, personal feelings, stereotypes and animosities, which are all natural human characteristics (DPS, 2009). Again, this is an implication that the code of ethics is merely an ethical benchmark for the officers. It, therefore, becomes part of their duties to be as neutral as possible in the dispensation of their core roles regardless of obstacles such as, for example, cultural difference or job titles. Although the code of ethics stipulates that officers place the profession’s integrity and their clients’ interests above their own, it takes more than the training they receive at the academy to have and maintain such values (Thurnauer, 2001). Service to citizens and professionalism can be taught, but the attitude of loyalty, commitment and wholeheartedness must be inherently present in an individual who chooses to serve in the police department. In recognition of this, the police code of ethics also touches on the private life of officers by requiring them to remain untarnished in their conduct even when not on duty. According to the Whatcom County’s Sheriff’s office in Washington, this is intended to give credit and uphold the public image of their agencies as well as themselves (WCSO, 2014). Police departments are among the most significant bodies that provide public and social service. Viewed from that perspective, morality and ethics must work alongside law and etiquette. Morality and ethics may have traditionally been used in reference to rules of conduct and customary values, but the terms have evolved to encompass moral philosophy. The terms have their focus on the critical analysis of justification and interpretation of moral beliefs (Travers, 2007). Therefore, the basic responsibility of law enforcement to be fulfilled by the police cannot be separated from ethics because a critical analysis reveals that law and ethics and also etiquette and ethics overlap considerably. Key aspects of ethical principles are embodied in the law through the fundamental provision of respecting the right to life and property. Specific obligations required by police officers as public officials dictate the use of impartial judgment, which can best be achieved by avoiding conflicts of interest. According to the New York Police Department, conflicts of interest only serve to undermine one’s objective judgment (Westmarland, 2005). In breach of their moral and ethical obligations, some police officers have been accused of showing favoritism towards friends and family and accepting or soliciting bribes in order to influence official decisions. For example, in Canada, political and public debate on the effectiveness, efficiency and desirability of complaints and misconduct allegations against the police being investigated by their colleagues reached critical heights in 2000 (Travers, 2007). The debates were centered on the fairness and role of the police in the investigation of incidents and complaints against their own actions and conduct. A critical analysis of the debates shows that what was being put to question was the police’s ability to use discretion responsibly in the manner in which it is vested in their positions and apply it within the law. It is evident that the conclusions made by the officers are not guided by the standards of reasonableness when they investigate allegations made against them or their agencies (Westmarland, 2005). Agreeably, it is not always easy to use discretion wisely and consistently due to conflicting interests, but professional competence in policing, which can be learned, must be exercised to preserve healthy relationships with the public and retain their confidence. In the event that police officers cannot honor their code of ethics, whether intentionally or not, the only other alternative to investigate their misconduct would be by the private sector with the objective of improving police accountability. Drifting away by some of the police officers from their code of ethics is the main cause of the growing public criticism the police departments are receiving in most Western countries (Travers, 2007). The officers’ governance of their own actions and conduct, and in particular deviant conduct, is evident of the lack of observing the code of ethics. The public outcry is further fueled by the belief that corruption and abuse or misuse of powers vested in police officers and their agencies mirrors what generally happens inside most authoritative institutions. The officers may rightfully be accused of taking advantage of the nature of their occupation, which has remained highly secretive at least until recent years. They have long been protected from the public’s and media’s critical scrutiny. Police officers have for a long time been responsible for the accounts of their own as well as their agencies’ activities, characterized by limited and only favorable media coverage (Thurnauer, 2001). This is in direct breach of the last provision of the code of ethics for law enforcement officers. Their badges are supposed to symbolize public faith, which the officers should accept and hold as a public trust and be true to the police service’s ethics (DPS, 2009). However, it was always due to the service’s secretive nature that the media had no option but to be content with reporting and endorsing the accounts the police gave of their own activities. Again agreeably, the nature of policing must have certain levels of secrecy for obvious security reasons, but abuse and misuse arising from ulterior motives by some authoritative members and stakeholders is what taints the very purpose of the secrecy. In conclusion, codes of ethics are adopted by both public and private professions for the sake of regulating the professions. A code of ethics addresses what is prohibited and permitted in the exercising of one’s profession, covering areas of difficult issues and decisions (NASW, 2008). In the case of the police code of ethics, they are adopted by the service not for the purpose of promoting certain moral theories, but rather for being practical and realistic necessities for running the complex institution. Basically, this is because the police service works in a society in which moral and ethical concepts and values play key roles (Westmarland, 2005). However, it can be argued that a code of ethics is only a written standard guiding individuals on how to conduct themselves acceptably in the execution of their obligations. In the case of the police department, which is an authoritative institution, adhering to a code of ethics presents challenges and calls for individual efforts and discretion. Essentially, police officers should recognize and acknowledge the significance of a code of ethics in relation to their duties, because the law embodies ethics primarily by requiring the right to life be respected. However, discretion, which police officers are required to exercise responsibly, may be clouded by prejudices and personal feelings. References Department of Public Safety (DPS). (2009). Law enforcement code of ethics. Retrieved from http://www.dps.unc.edu/DPS%20Policies%20&%20Procedures/Contents.pdf National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2008). Code of ethics of the national association of social workers. Retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/nasw/ethics/educationtraining.asp Thurnauer, B. (2001). Internal affairs: a strategy for smaller departments. Washington, D.C.: International Association of Chiefs of Police, Smaller Police Departments, Technical Assistance Program (Best Practices Guide). Travers, M. (2007). The new bureaucracy: quality assurance and its critics. Bristol: The Policy Press. Westmarland, L. (2005). Police ethics and integrity: Breaking the blue code of silence. Policing & Society, 15(2), 145-165. Whatcom County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO). 2014. Law enforcement code of ethics. Retrieved from http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/sheriff/ethics.jsp Read More