Newsletter - Policetraining.net

By John Reid & Associates

As a general guideline, an investigator should not address consequences during an interrogation. In fact, the investigator goes to great length to avoid discussing any possible consequences the suspect faces if he or she decides to tell the truth. After all, it is precisely because of those consequences that the suspect is lying. However, there are occasions where it may be appropriate or even necessary to discuss possible consequences with a suspect. Obviously the focus of this discussion should not be on the severity of consequences, but rather on the possible benefits of consequences.

So what possible benefits can the investigator offer a suspect who is facing a fifteen year prison sentence or the loss of a $120,000 annual salary? Pat McCarthy, who teaches a three day course on street crime investigations, is a master at making a lengthy prison sentence sound like a stay in a five star hotel. His tactic at selling the benefits of prison resembles the following:

"Tim, I'm not going to lie to you and tell you that you're going to walk on this one. If you are found guilty you're probably going to end up doing some time. But some good can come from this. For one thing, you can get your GED and other technical training so you'll be able to get a decent job, maybe pulling down $60 or $70 grand a year. Then you won't even be tempted to fool around with selling drugs or gang activity anymore. You'll get free dental and health care so you can get your teeth fixed and get regular checkups so you can stay healthy. You won't have any monthly bills to pay; you won't have to shop for food, cook meals or even do dishes. Plus, you'll get free cable and internet!

After hearing his "prison spiel", suspects ask Pat where they can sign up. Especially when a suspect is debating whether or not to tell the truth (Step Six in the Reid Technique) it may be very persuasive for the investigator to introduce the possible benefits of confessing. Examples of other benefits of confessing include:

1. Embezzlement:

"Sally some good can come from this. Because this happened, the company now knows that they need better controls and need more frequent audits so other honest employees won't be tempted to do the same thing you did. If someone else had found these problems earlier, I'm sure you never would have done this."

2. Treatment for an addiction:

"George, If you think back on why this thing happened, and you were completely honest about it, you would have to acknowledge that it really boils down to the fact that you do not have control over your (gambling, drinking, drug use, sexual urges). What that means is that there is something happening in your brain that you cannot control. Because of this abnormal brain activity you did something you normally would not have done. There are advances being made every day in treatment programs. George, some good can come from this. The state has treatment programs that you can take advantage of so you will no longer be tempted to (engage in criminal behavior). I could give you dozens of examples of people who did something wrong because of the same problem you have. Because they expressed a willingness to cooperate and get the matter resolved, they were able to get into a treatment program and almost all of them were able to turn their life around. But the first step is to tell the truth."

3. Juvenile interrogations:

"Johnny, it's really fortunate that you got caught this early. Right now we're just looking at taking someone's car. But if you don't get this resolved you're going to go out and do more serious things in the future, like breaking into homes. During one of those burglaries you're going to steal a gun and use it to rob someone. During a robbery either you're going to shoot the clerk or a clerk or cop is going to shoot you. If you play this thing out, your future consists of two options. Either you're going to end up in the morgue with a tag tied around your big toe or I'll be talking to you about murder and you'll be looking at spending the rest of your life behind bars. Right now we're just looking at taking someone's car. Either you can learn from what you did and promise me that you will not get involved in further criminal behavior or you can play the tough guy and sit in that chair and continue to tell me that you didn't do it. The choice is yours. If you want to turn your life around I want a promise from you right now that you will stop taking things that don't belong to you. Can you make me that promise?"

4. Theft interrogation:

"Mary, lets look at this thing practically. What the company wants is to have their money back. I'm sure you needed this money for something important and no one expects you to be able to pay it back all at once but it will be important for them to know that you are sorry about what you did and that you are willing to work with them to reimburse these funds. I mean, if you're not even willing to pay this money back that tells me you're simply a dishonest person and I'm just wasting my time talking to you. You are willing to eventually pay them pack, aren't you?"

Legal Caution

One of the reasons we teach not to bring up consequences during an interrogation is because once the investigator mentions treatment for a drug problem, counseling, or a willingness to reimburse stolen funds it opens the door to an allegation that the investigator transmitted a promise of leniency to the suspect. In fact, some courts have prohibited statements that even imply a promise of leniency such as telling a suspect, "I would like to help you out on this thing," or, "The best thing you can do is tell the truth."

When discussing the possible benefits of telling the truth, it is imperative that the investigator never suggest or imply that a suspect may avoid punitive consequences if he or she agrees to receive counseling, treatment for their addiction, or reimburse stolen funds. These incentives can be mentioned as a possible future benefit to telling the truth, but not in lieu of incarceration or job termination.

Especially in light of the trend toward electronic recording of interrogations, investigators need to protect themselves against claims of implying a promise of leniency. An effective technique to accomplish this is by incorporating a prophylactic statement within an interrogation theme. This is simply a statement that removes any doubt as to the fact that the investigator is not offering a promise of leniency, as the following dialogue illustrates:

"Larry, if you did this because you got hooked on some sort of drug, that would be darn important for people to know. When someone takes money to feed a drug habit that's a lot different than a dishonest person who steals money and blows it on a fancy car or a vacation to the Bahamas. If this happened because you needed money to buy cocaine or heroin I want to be able to include that in my report so people understand that this is something that can be fixed. I mean, I've talked to dozens of people who were hooked on a drug and were able to get into treatment and completely turn their life around. That's what I want to see happen to you. Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that if you get treatment nothing else will happen to you. I don't have any control over what happens to the people I investigate. But what I am saying is that we need to focus on the positives here. One positive is that you can get your drug problem treated which will allow you to get on with your life.

Conclusion

An investigator certainly does not have the authority to offer the suspect any sort of plea bargain or other promise of leniency in exchange for a confession. However, it is permissible to make truthful statements to a suspect during an interrogation. An investigator is not lying when he tells the suspect that he can receive counseling and therapy in prison; it is an accurate representation when the investigator says that the suspect will not have to pay room or board while in prison and it is a fact that stolen money can be reimbursed.

It is a basic principle of persuasion to focus on the positive aspects of an argument. During an interrogation, however, the investigator must be careful that the proposed benefits of confessing do not cross the legal line of transmitting an implied promise of leniency. Therefore, we would recommend that when an investigator discusses the possible benefits of telling the truth, a concluding prophylactic statement should be made which clearly tells the suspect that the investigator is not offering a promise of leniency and that the investigator does not have control over what may happen to the suspect.

Credit and Permission Statement: This Investigator Tip was developed by John E. Reid and Associates Inc. Permission is hereby granted to those who wish to share or copy the article. For additional 'tips' visit www.reid.com; select 'Educational Information' and 'Investigator Tip'. Inquiries regarding Investigator Tips should be directed to Janet Finnerty johnreid@htc.net. For more information regarding Reid seminars and training products, contact John E. Reid and Associates, Inc. at 800-255-5747 or www.reid.com

by Olivia N. Johnson, DM*

Diseases of the soul are more dangerous and more numerous than those of the body.
~Cicero

For additional information reference Dr. Johnson's training programs, please visit

www.pg-ti.com or call 847-875-3620.

The National Institute of Mental Health (2009) estimated at any given time, one-quarter of American adults (over 18) experienced at least one psychological disorder. In fact, research suggests the United States is on the verge of becoming the global leader of mental disorders (Weiss, 2005). One of the most common and concerning mental disorders in the U.S. is depression.

Depression is “a medical illness that involves the mind and body… it affects how you feel, think, and behave” (Mayo Clinic, 2011, p. 1). Described by bouts of sadness, numbness, sleep disturbances, weight loss or gain, altered moods, feelings of emptiness, irritability, fatigue, worthlessness, anxiety, hopelessness, helplessness, and an overall loss of interest in once pleasurable activities; this often debilitating illness is categorized by levels of severity ranging from mild to severe.

Nearly 35 million Americans will suffer from some type of depression in their lifetime (Kessler, Chiu, Demler, & Walters, 2005), with depression as the leading cause of disability and suicide worldwide (World Health Organization [WHO], 2011). Nationwide, 60-90% of individuals completing suicide are diagnosed with depression (“Treating depression”, 2009, p. 580). Based on the World Health Organization’s “Disability Adjusted Life Year” [DALY] scale, projections indicate by 2020, depression will be the second leading cause of death for all ages and sexes worldwide (2011). The DALY scale equates “life lost to premature mortality” and “years of productive life lost due to disability” (WHO, 2011). DePaulo & Horvitz (2002) suggested:

One of the most disabling aspects of depression is that often you don’t know that you

have it at all. That doesn’t happen with most other painful diseases that are usually

quick to announce their presence and location. But depression can sneak up so

insidiously that you literally don’t know what it is, sometimes until years later. (p. 10)

Depression sufferers should remain optimistic, as depression is highly treatable. However, less than one-third of depressed individuals ever seek treatment (Washington University School of Medicine, n.d.). The large numbers of individuals refusing to seek treatment is a direct result of stigmatization of mental health issues (Department of Mental Health, 2006). “Atypical manifestations of depression often mask the underlying disease” (Johnson, 2010). Self-medication contributes to difficulties in a proper diagnosis and treatment of depression.

Depression alone does not have a single origin, but rather, has been linked to an assortment of causes (i.e., genetic predispositions, learned behaviors, biochemical changes, prescription drugs, a life changing event, psychological issues, and can be present in conjunction with other illnesses) (All Family Resources, 2005; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010).

Besides the multiple origins of depression; certain occupations are at greater risk for acquiring this debilitating illness.

According to Christopher Willard, Psy.D., Tufts University, Clinical Psychologist, occupations experiencing the worst of society (i.e., police officers, judges, and lawyers) are at increased risk for depression, due in part to the repetitive and negative nature of the job and changes in world perspectives (Worth, 2010). Diamond (2003) explained there was “no reason to expect law enforcement officer possess any special immunity from this disease [clinical depression], or its fatal consequence” (p. 55).

[C]ertain jobs, like law enforcement … have the paradoxical effect of the fact that to

be good at them, a pessimism bias is adaptive…that becomes problematic in other areas

of life. Law enforcement is also an unfortunate combination unpredictable, boring,

sometimes dangerous, and often without room for much autonomy, and often interactions

with people at their worst (either perpetrators of crimes, or people who have just been

victimized by crimes) all of which are known contributors to unhappiness. (C. Willard,

personal communication, June 20, 2011)

Occupational hazards for law enforcement personnel are far reaching. The appearance of physical ailments, injuries, and accidents are much easier to detect. However, occupational hazards resulting from trauma, exposure to death and violence, and grotesque forms of death, often result in emotional and psychological injuries - much more difficult to identify. Mental functioning and decline are influenced by extended exposure to stress and trauma (Heim et. al., 2009).

As a result of trauma and exposure, law enforcement personnel also experience “… repetitive adrenaline dumps in the body where the fight-or-flight response is triggered” (Wasilewski & Olson, 2010). This automatic response is the body’s internal defense against real or perceived threats of harm (Siddle, 1995). Nevertheless, frequent releases of these stress hormones (i.e., adrenaline, nor-adrenaline, and cortisol) contribute to numerous physical, emotional, and psychological ailments, including depression.

Initially, adrenaline produces a natural painkilling effect, resulting in feelings of almost super-human strength, power, and ability. Subsequently, numerous adrenaline dumps can be catastrophic. As alluded to by Wasilewski & Olson (2010), (e.g., Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and Newton’s Law of Gravity), “what goes up must come down” (p. 3). Individuals are left dealing with the adrenaline high and ultimate crash. Adrenaline dumps occur hundreds, maybe thousands of times in the average law enforcement career. Residual affects resulting from these ups and downs leave dangerous chemical deposits in the body, contributing to illness, susceptibility to injury, increased pain, stress, and burnout (Benjamin & Werner, n.d; Smith et al., 2011.). Prevention limits exposure, while brining attention to such occupational hazards. Smith et al. (2011), provided three key factors for the prevention of stress and burnout (i.e., recognize, reverse, and resilience), which can and do contribute to depression and other mental disorders.

Recognize: signs and symptoms of stress and burnout
Reverse: understand the effects of stress and burnout and seek assistance
Resilience: being accountable for your personal health and well-being.

Depression is a debilitating illness, affecting millions of Americans every year. The largest detriment for individuals seeking treatment for depression is stigmatization. In addition, manifestations of atypical symptoms replicating other illnesses and self-medication with drugs and alcohol make diagnosing depression difficult. However, those suffering from depression should remain optimistic; as this devastating illness is highly treatable. The debilitating effects of depression are far reaching and can affect anyone at anytime in life. Occupations, which experience “the worst in people and circumstances,” such as law enforcement, seem to have higher than normal rates of depression. The nature of police work places officers in danger of many occupational hazards, including physical injury, depression, stress, and burnout. Law enforcement personnel possess no extraordinary resistance to depression or the effects of this deadly disease. Acknowledging and understanding the occupational hazards faced by law enforcement personnel will better prepare them for the immediate and residual effects of stress, trauma, and burnout on their bodies and their minds.

About the author: During her research on police safety issues, Dr. Olivia Johnson discovered the leading cause of officer death was not accidents or homicide, but rather suicide. This compelled her to refocus in the area of officer suicide and through her research was named the Illinois State Representative for the National Police Suicide Foundation. In March 2010, she received her doctorate degree in Organizational Leadership Management, from the University of Phoenix. In June 2010, she was invited to speak at the Beyond Survival Toward Officer Wellness [BeSTOW] Symposium sponsored by the FBI Behavioral Science Unit. Dr. Johnson is the founder and President of Blue Wall of Silence, an organization aimed at providing hope, help, and support to those behind the badge. She currently collaborates with several journals regarding law enforcement and military issues and is the expert in police leadership write for Law Enforcement Today. Her services were contracted out by Crisis Systems Management to train military personnel worldwide on Critical Incident Peer Support (CIPS). Dr. Johnson is a current member of the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA).

References

All Family Resources. (2005). Depression: A serious but treatable illness. Retrieved June 20,

2011, from http://www.familymanagement.com/aging/depression.html

Benjamin, B.E., & Werner, R. (n.d.). You and your nervous system: How stress affects your

body. Health Touch News, 6, 1-4.

Department of Mental Health. (2006). Erasing the stigma of mental illness. Retrieved June 22,

2011, from http:www.state.sc.us/dmh/erasing_stigma.htm

DePaulo, J. R., Jr., & Horvitz, L.A. (2002). Understanding depression: What we know and what

you can do about it. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Diamond, D. (2003). Departmental barriers to mental health treatment: A precursor to police

officer suicide. In D.P. Hackett & J.M. Violanti. Police suicide: Tactics for prevention (pp.

54-65). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Heim, C., Nater, U.M., Maloney, E., Boneva, R., Jones, J.F., & Reeves, W.C. (2009). Childhood

trauma and risk for chronic fatigue syndrome: Association with neuroendoctrine

dysfunction. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66(1), 72-80.

Johnson, O. (2010). Blue wall of silence: Perceptions of the influence of training on law

enforcement suicide. Minnetonka, MN: Global Health Care Systems.

Kessler, R.C., Chiu, W.T., Demler, O., & Walters, E.E. (June, 2005). Prevalence, severity, and

comorbidity of twelve-month DSM-IV disorders in the national comorbidity survey

replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 617-27.

Mayo Clinic. (February, 2011). Depression (major depression): Definition. Retrieved June 19,

2011, from http://www.mayoclinic.com/heath/depression/

National Institute of Mental Health. (2009). The numbers count: Mental disorders in America.

Bethesda, MD: Author.

Siddle, B.K. (1995). Sharpening the warrior’s edge: The psychology & science of training.

Millstadt, IL: PCT Research Publications.

Sipkoff, M. (2006). Depression in the workplace costs employers billions per year: Employers

take lead in fighting depression. Managed Care Magazine, 1(1), 1-22.

Smith, M., Jaffe-Gill, E., Segal, J., Segal, R. (2011). Preventing burnout: Signs, symptoms, and

coping strategies. Retrieved June 22, 2011, from

http://www.helpguide.org/mental/burnout_signs_symptoms.htm

United States Department of Health and Human Services. (2010). Depression. Retrieved June 20,

2011, from http://www.athealth.com/Consumer/disorders/nih_depression.html

Washington University School of Medicine. (n.d.). Depression facts. Retrieved June 16, 2011,

from http://www.psychiatry.wustl.edu/depression/depression_facts.htm

Wasilewski, M., & Olson, A. (August, 2010). Depression in law enforcement: What is it & what

do you do about it? Retrieved June 20, 2011, from

http://www.lawofficer.com/article/leadership/depression-law-enforcement

Weiss, S. (June, 2005). Study: U.S. leads in mental illness, lags in treatment. Retrieved June 21,

2011, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conetent/article/2005/06/06/

AR2005060601651.html

World Health Organization. (2011). Mental Health: Depression. Retrieved June 22, 2011, from

http://www.who.int/mental_health/management/depression/definition/en/

Worth, T. (October, 2010). Why is your job making you depressed? Retrieved June 20, 2011,

from http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/10/01/health.job.making.depressed/index.html

I realize that this is a great deal of information to learn. However, it is the foundation on which ethical decision are made. A firm ethical foundation, on which one can build a personal ethical system, for making decisions and explaining those decisions to administrators or in court, is absolutely necessary.

In addition, law enforcement agencies normally delineate a code of ethical behavior to guide their officers. This should be compared to the IACP code and if there are any differences an officer’s supervisor should be able to explain the lack of congruity.

Officers will have the laws, statues and regulations that apply in their jurisdiction. Updates are supplied if these change. Constitutional law, which is relatively stable, is taught at all training academies.

All of this information is essential in forming the underpinning of one’s decision making process.

Here is an example of an ethical dilemma. What will you do, quick, time is passing...

Oscar is taking his daily walk near the train tracks when he notices that the train that is approaching is out of control. Oscar sees what has happened: the driver of the train saw five men walking across the tracks and slammed on the brakes, but the brakes failed and the driver fainted. The train is now rushing toward the five men. It is moving so fast that they will not be able to get off the track in time. Fortunately, Oscar is standing next to a switch, which he can throw, that will temporarily turn the train onto a side track. There is a heavy object on the side track. If the train hits the object, the object will slow the train down, thereby giving the men time to escape. Unfortunately, there is a man standing on the side track in front of the heavy object, with his back turned. Oscar can throw the switch, preventing the train from killing the men, but killing the man. Or he can refrain from doing this, letting the five die.

Yes or No?

(Source: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/1932594019.html)

Always do right—this will gratify some and astonish others.—Mark Twain

The Ethical Dilemma

An ethical dilemma forces you to choose a solution you do not entirely like. Hence the dilemma: If doing what is right produces something bad, or if doing what is wrong produces something good, the force of moral obligation may seem balanced by the reality of the good end. We can have the satisfaction of being right, regardless of the damage done; or we can aim for what seems to be the best outcome.

(source: http://www.friesian.com/dilemma.htm)

Assuming that you had all of the time in the world to resolve an ethical dilemma, how could you make an informed, logical decision? A possible course would include asking who would be helped and who would be harmed. Also to what degree would they be helped or harmed? What if the harm were a broken finger nail? We can probably agree that a broken finger nail is less harmful than a broken arm. Saving someone’s life is a few degrees higher than bandaging his or her knee.

What will be the consequences of your actions in the long run as compared to the short run? Long term positive consequences are more desirable than short time positive consequences.

Would actions be likely to engender feelings of guilt? Dishonesty? Cowardliness? Insensitivity? Disloyalty? Unscrupulousness? Inhumanity? Remember, negative, self-deprecating emotions are also injurious.

Use this model to decide on a course of action for Oscar as he sees the runaway train rambling toward him at breakneck speed, with an unconscious engineer at the wheel.

After you resolve Oscar’s problem lets look at a law enforcement ethical decision.

Various student and colleague answers to this question are in the index.

Case Study

A rookie police officer smelled alcohol on his partner's breath as he entered the squad car at the beginning of the shift. The senior officer admitted he drank one glass of wine with dinner but insisted that he could drive safely. To avoid a confrontation, the rookie did not protest. Shortly thereafter, the squad car driven by the senior officer collided with another vehicle. The driver of the other vehicle died 3 weeks later from the severe injuries sustained in the accident. The traffic officer investigating the accident smelled alcohol on the senior officer's breath but did not report this fact nor did he ask the senior officer to take a breath test. A subsequent lawsuit alleged that the senior officer caused the accident because he drove under the influence of alcohol. During the internal affairs inquiry, the rookie faced a high-stakes ethical dilemma, tell the truth or lie to protect the senior officer. Because the rookie failed to take action when he encountered his first ethical dilemma, he struggled with an even greater ethical quandary. If the rookie lies, he gains immediate trust and acceptance from fellow police officers. If the rookie tells the truth, he risks alienation and the possibility of administrative action.

Discussion:

What do you think should be done?
What would you do?
On what do you base your decision?
What if your decision is unpopular
What do you think the average officer would do?

This is a great opportunity for students to question their beliefs about integrity. A discussion in small groups would be especially helpful. This is one of the controversial subjects to which I refereed in another chapter. Unfortunately, some students will not be entirely truthful when answering the questions. However, the exercise still gives those students an opportunity to learn to think in a more critical and ethical way.

Ethical conflict is created when we ask ourselves four questions. What Should I do? What will I do? How will my decision affect my future? How will my decision affect other people? I think the conflict also asks, “What would others think of me if they knew my decision?” These last two questions include many subtle sub-questions, such as, “How will my character and my self-respect be affected if I do the popular thing?” Will I like myself? “Will I lose my reputation as a “good” (one of the guys) cop if I chose the unpopular decision?” “What will my wife/husband think about me?”

Rules Based Theory

This model of decision making is relatively easy to understand. It simply says, “Follow the rules.” You know the rules, because we have already covered them. Using this model you refer to the rule that coverers the specific behavior you are considering.

If we use our case study as an example, you will find some help if you look under the first “I Will” at the bottom of the IACP Ethical Standards for Law Enforcement.

It reads:

… I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of the land and the regulations of my department.

If the senior officer was impaired, as it appears that he was, he has broken the rule, I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of the land, and thereby “the law.” It is unlawful to drink and drive.

Also, rule 1.4 under the IACP Ethical Standards says:

1.4 --Police officer, whether on or off duty, shall not knowingly commit any criminal offense under any laws of the United States or any state of local jurisdiction in which the officer is present, except where permitted in the performance of duty under proper authority.

In addition, rule 2.6 requires officers to report violations of law or policy. Therefore, according to this rule the rookie is required to report his senior officer even if an accident had not occurred.

2.6 Police officers learning of conduct or observing conduct which is in violation of any law or policy of this Department shall take necessary action and report the incident to the officer's immediate supervisor, who shall forward the information to the Chief of Police. If the misconduct is committed by the officer's immediate supervisor, the officer shall report the incident to the immediate supervisor's supervisor.

Rule 4.1 specifically address drinking on duty or in uniform.

4.1 Police officers shall not consume alcoholic beverages or chemical substances, while on duty, except as permitted in the performance of official duties, and under no circumstances while in uniform, except as provided for in Rule 4.3 below.

In this case, the rules defined what behaviors were or would be ethical. In summary,

· Drinking on duty and/or in uniform is unethical

· Breaking the law is unethical

· Failing to report unethical or illegal behavior is unethical

The rookie may still choose unethical behavior, nonetheless he would, after reviewing the ethical rules, know that his decision and behavior were unethical. A mentor with strong ethical values would be invaluable to this new officer as he/she struggled to make a choice.

Critical Thinking and Ethical Decision Making

Here is a very simple model of a decision tree used in critical thinking:

Decision trees allow you to enter data (information) and plot paths and dead ends. As you see, in the drawing above, we have a frog on a lily pad. Our frog is attempting to capture his supper. The satellites tell us everything we need to know about frogs.

Many lines radiate from the central “issue,” in this case—frog. You will also notice that lines connect some of the satellites. Tadpoles also live in ponds and ponds have lily pads. In addition, you were told that frogs are amphibians and they are related to salamanders.

In a formal decision tree the sign for a decision is the rectangle and the sign for a chance event is the circle without the smiley face.

Let’s use a very simple example of a modified decision tree. What if Officer George is trying to decide whether to say home from work and watch movies or get dressed and equipped and work his shift?

Work the Shift Diagram:

If I go another officer won’t have to work in my place

Stay home and watch movies Diagram:

Work my shift as assigned

Though these simple diagrams provide only three reasons in favor of each decision, this decision making tool hits the important points for Gomez. Naturally, he can make the diagram as large (as many variables) as he needs it to be. Officer Gomez may be able to make his choice based on the two diagrams. In other words, which set of reasons are most important to him. If he cannot, then he may need to add more reasons. Or, he can add weight to each reason. Weight shows how important that particular reason is to Gomez. The weights are:

5 most important

4 very important

3 moderately important

2 slightly important

1 not important

Decision Weighted Chart

Go to Work Stay Home and Watch Movies

I won’t have to lie (5) I won’t have to put on my uniform (3)

It is the right thing to do (5) I won’t have to deal with supervisor (4)

Another office will not have Watching movies is fun (1)

work in my place (4)

Total 14 Total 8

It looks as he is going to work. Good choice, Officer.

Personal Standards

Every officer will have his or her personal standards of behavior. He or she will base decisions on those standards. However, using the IACP ethical code and asking his or her mentors for advice in making professional decisions if a more objective and ethical guide.

Ethical Puzzle

The ethical puzzle is another way of looking at decisions (still using the above ethical guide).

If any of the pieces of the ethical puzzle are missing, it may not be an ethical decision. Ethical decisions generate and sustain trust; demonstrate respect, responsibility, fairness and caring; and are consistent with good citizenship. If we lie to get something we want and we get it, the decision might well be effective, but it is also unethical.

If Possible, Take As Long As You Need

Sometimes an ethical answer to a question requires time. Often with subsequent information we regret our actions but we also realize that we make decisions with the information available at the time. If the decision does not need to be made immediately, then take the time to evaluate the variables and gather adequate information before you act. Ask yourself, “Have I given my proposed action enough reflection and do I feel confident about the outcome?”

Three More Ways to Make a Decision

If I was Transparent

When making a tough decision, ask yourself what you would do if all parties involved knew your true intentions and your true desires.

Imagine you lived in a world where everyone could tell if you were speaking the truth, or lying, or hiding something. What actions would you take then?

My Obituary

If you were at the end of your life and you must decide on a message for your tombstone. You decide that you want everyone to know what had been most important to you in your life. Therefore your values will be written on the tombstone for God and everyone to see. What would be written? Would your behavior be congruent with your values?

Plan C

You have been anguishing over whether you should choose plan A or plan B and you cannot come to a decision. Perhaps there is a plan C that would work better for you. Spend some quiet time thinking about a third course of action.

Recognizing the Moral Dimension

The only tyrant I accept in this world is the ‘still small voice' within.—Mahatma Gandhi

The first step in ethical decision making is recognizing the decision as one that has moral importance. Important clues include conflicts between two or more values or ideals. This decision making process can be used by law enforcement officers and instructors.

Who are the interested Parties? What are their relationships?

arefully identify who has a stake in the decision. In this regard, be imaginative and sympathetic. Often there are more parties whose interests should be taken into consideration than is immediately obvious.

Look at the relationships between the parties. Look at their relationships with yourself and with each other, and with relevant institutions. Do those relationships bring special obligations or expectations?

What Values are involved?

Think through the shared values that are at stake in making this decision. Is there a question of trust? Is personal autonomy a consideration? Is there a question of fairness? Is anyone to be harmed or helped?

Weigh the benefits and the burdens

Benefits – are rewards or behaviors that create positive emotions or take away negative emotions.

Burdens might include causing physical or emotional pain to various parties, imposing financial costs, and ignoring relevant values. Burdens normally create negative emotions.

Look for analogous cases

Can you think of other similar decisions? What course of action was taken? Was it a good decision? How is the present case like that one? How is it different?

Discuss with relevant others

The merits of discussion should not be underestimated, because we can talk ourselves into doing something which is not in our best interest. Logic and ethics can be sacrificed to emotional thinking. A trusted “other” will question us about important considerations and self delusion.

Time permitting; discuss your decision with as many persons as have a stake in it or are trusted advisors. Gather opinions, and ask for the reasons behind those opinions. Remember that your ability to discuss with others may be limited by the other person’s expectations of confidentiality and their ability to make ethical decisions.

Does this Decision Accord with Legal and Organizational Rules?

Some decisions are appropriately made based on legal considerations. If one option is illegal or unethical, we should think very seriously before taking that option. Normally, the consequences of illegal behaviors are dangerously high.

Decisions should also be affected by rules set by your agency and the organizations that set ethical guidelines for police officers.

My basic principle is that you don't make decisions because they are easy; you don't make them because they are cheap; you don't make them because they're popular; you make them because they're right—Theodore Hesburgh

Am I Comfortable with this Decision?

Sometimes your “gut reaction” will tell you if you have missed something. There will be that nagging little voice that says, “If you do this you will be very, very sorry.”

Questions to be asked in this regard might include:
1) If I carry out this decision, would I be comfortable telling my family about it? My clergyman? My mentors?

2) Would I want children to take my behavior as an example?
3) Is this decision one which a wise, informed, virtuous person would make?
4) Can I live with this decision?

(Source: Inspired by Chris McDonald, 2002, A Guide to Moral Decisions)

Summary

There are no easy answers for ethical decisions. However, the path less traveled is normally the moral high road. Several guides to making ethical decisions are included in this chapter. Perhaps, you did not see one that worked for you. In that case more reading may be necessary.