Ethical Dilemma in the Military - Research Paper Example

? Ethical Dilemma in the Military 31st, May Ethics is an important aspect in different professions. These have a of ethics, which serves as a guide to the professionals and their practice. Similarly, ethics is of great importance in the military, and is the backbone of the military. The military are taught to employ ethical reasoning in areas, where there they will need to make crucial decisions, whose outcome might have great a influence the image of the military. In addition, the military has a code of ethics, which the military are expected to adhere to. Therefore, they might base on it when making important decisions in their practice. However, like in other professions, there are different issues in the military, which pose a challenge to them in their ethical decision-making. Military personnel are expected to respect life, and uphold high moral standards (Snider, 2009). However, there are incidences, where the army is ethically challenged. I perceive the use of torture by the army as resulting from an ethical dilemma. When the army goes on a mission, they are exposed to insecurity and harm, danger, and attacks from their enemies. Therefore, the military have to be cautious and protective, while bearing in mind that the military standards expect the army to act ethically in all situations. Sometimes, the set military standards might conflict with the attitude of the military. This way, it becomes challenging for them to make an ethical decision. As identified, the military might torture their enemies in order to protect their other military colleagues, as a form of revenge, or in order to extract information from them, among other reasons. The military policy, which is important for handling this type of ethic and addressing its violation is found in the military code of ethics, and relates to the battlefield ethics. Here, all military personnel are expected to protect their fellow colleagues, the nation, the constitution, and civilians. The army is also required to cater for the captured enemies by providing them with first aid, and other basic human needs. Therefore, torture of enemy prisoners by the military is forbidden, and the army is expected to treat civilians in a humane manner (Cassey, 2009). Nonetheless, this regulation is not adequate, as it does not provide clear information on what how the army should act when faced with a dilemma. This regulation therefore, expects that the military respect life, including the life of their enemies. However, its failure to offer more provisions, which could address complex issues that might arise, has influenced the military at the individual and group level. For instance, the army engages in torture in order to protect their colleagues. This might be done individually or as a group. Therefore, torture might be undertaken by the army for different reasons, some of which are in line with the code of ethics. Therefore, the regulation on this issue should have come out more clearly, with clear circumstances under which torture is prohibited. In this case, the military will follow their personal convictions. This issue also affects my practice. Therefore, I have a role to play to promote ethics among the military. Although various aspects factor in to cause the army to turn to torture, sometimes it is possible to act ethically without employing torture. For instance, in one study among the US army, findings showed that the army deployed for a long time experience mental health problems including depression and trauma (Ricks & Tyson, 2007). Although this might influence the decision-making of the military, it is important that they seek medical assistance when they exhibit these signs. Raising awareness on this among fellow colleagues would help to promote ethics in the military. In another research conducted among the navy, approximately two-thirds of the Marines interviewed, as well as half of the army agreed that they would not report their colleague, who engaged in torture and property destruction of civilians unnecessarily (Ricks & Tyson, 2007). Although this might be challenging thing to do, I consider myself, and other military personnel to be responsible for reporting any unethical acts, even though this might be considered being disloyal to fellow military. No major resolution has been developed to address this issue. The military continues to rely on their intuition in matters concerning torture. When torture protects them, their colleagues, and country, they will engage in it. In the 1960’s, the French army engaged in torture on the Algerian civilians, as a sign of revenge, and desire to conquer (Dittman, 2005). Addition, a research conducted on the US soldiers in Iraq showed that approximately 10% among the 1,767 soldiers interviewed agreed to have participated in the torture of the Iraqi civilians, including kicking them and destroying their possessions (Ricks & Tyson, 2007). Nonetheless, since the military code of ethics is not clear on this, both sides of the coin might be right, as long as the military uphold personal and professional responsibility. However, one must be ready to take responsibility for their action, and justify it on professional and moral grounds (Schafer, 2002). In conclusion, the military experience ethical dilemmas at the individual or group level. Torture results from an ethical dilemma. The military might engage in torture of the civilians in order to protect their fellow military or to get important information about the enemy. Although the military code of ethics forbids torture of civilians, the military might engage in this with good intentions. Therefore, the fact that the military code of ethics bears partial information about this issue, this hampers enhanced decision-making on the side of the military. Therefore, only a detailed code of ethics for the military will help in making more ethical decisions, whenever the life of their fellow military is at risk, or when they are denied important information. Nonetheless, a good military will adhere to the code of ethics, even if it conflicts with his or her personal values, as this is legally expected, and obedience lays the foundation for the military to do what is expected of them. References Cassey, G. (2009). Advancing the Army: Professional Military Ethic. JFQ, 54: (3): 14-15. Dittman, M. (2005).Peace psychologists, military leaders highlight soldiers' ethical dilemmas. American Psychological Association, 36(6): 17. Ricks, T. & Tyson, S. (2007). Troops at Odds With Ethics Standards. The Washington Post, 5 May. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402151.html?hpid=topnews Schafer, J. (2002). Making Ethical Decisions: A Practical Model. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/ethical_dm.pdf Snider, D. (2009). The Army’s Professional Military Ethic In An Era Of Persistent Conflict. Retrieved from http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB895.pdf Read More