5c professional ethics

Having read Reader 5, I understand that there are three types of ethics. Organizational (how we do things), Professional (sometimes know as the ‘code of conduct’) and Personal. I feel that personal ethics present themselves as the most challenging as it is often very difficult to ignore what one believes in so passionately. For example, I would find it impossible to kill an animal, even if it were for someone else’s benefit.

What I do find interesting is how some people who believe themselves to have strong ethics, can find themselves being manipulated in certain environments. Reader 5 mentions the Jade Goody/Shilpa Shetty argument on Big Brother back in 2007. Although the people involved protested that they were not racists, it seems they became a product of their environment. Although they were brought up to know right from wrong, this case suggests that our ethics can be easily changed.

Therefore, there doesn’t seem to be a right and wrong when it comes to personal ethics. It is a very grey area and different people have different perceptions. I was particularly drawn to a line from Plato’s play ‘Theatetus’

“whatever in any city is regarded as just and admirable is just and admirable in that city for as long as it is thought to be so”.

This line highlights that really there is no such thing as right and wrong – it is merely what one perceives it to be. 400 years ago it was perfectly acceptable to burn people who did not believe in the same religion as the monarch. These days this seems unimaginable! Though as human beings, there are actions that go beyond ethics or morals and are taken for granted. These include murder, rape and adultery. Most people agree that these examples are things that no human should do to another, whatever the situation. However, there are grey areas when the choice of whether something can be considered right or wrong/ good or bad is left to the individual and some cases, the jury.

Examples of these include: assisted suicide – is it always wrong to help someone end their life if they are living every day in misery and pain?

Theft – is it always wrong to steal if you are starving and have no other means to survive? (possibly applies to other poverty striken countries rather than the UK)  Treason – If people had not fought against the crown in history, we may not be living in a democracy today.

Hobbes, 1651 saw ethics as a necessity in society to prevent everyone doing as they pleased and subsequently leading to an intolerable community. This is still relevant in today’s society and the majority of people adhere to the law, which in the UK, is here to prevent people from harm in some way or another. Nowadays, ethics do not lie as deep as the law. What some people may consider unethical, others may not and without the law to back them up, people find themselves in a position of having to legally tolerate what they believe to be unethical.

For example, I think it is unethical to keep thousands of chickens in a dark room together without being able to spread their wings and having their beaks cut off to prevent them from pecking each other due to living in inhabitable environment.

I was interested in the concept of consequetialism – conducting something unethical for the greater good. Would it be right to torture a terrorist to extract vital information that could save hundreds of lives? I believe so.

I could not, however relate to the second case study of Reader 5. Whilst I can objectively understand the role of the photographer is to observe, the role of a human being is to participate in life and have compassion for others. My ethical stance on this is that it was a terrible, inhumane decision not to help the little girl. Surely there must come a point where you ignore your professional obligations and act on your instinct?

In my profession, I have found myself in situations where my personal and professional ethics have collided. As we live in a diverse country, we can sometimes find ourselves in situations where conflicting ethics and morals come together and do not unite. For example, homosexuality is legally accepted in the UK, but as we know, this does not necessarily mean that every British citizen finds it ethical. At my place of work, I came across someone from the Islamic faith who would not accept homosexuality. To her, her religion and close knit society had brought her up to believe that homosexuality is unethical, regardless of what the law states. She made some very homophobic remarks and this most certainly caused ethical tensions. I was horrified at some of the comments she made regarding homosexuality and she was horrified at some of the remarks that I made regarding her beliefs. People’s views on ethics can lead to not only conflict and tension, but also violence and war. What I learnt from this experience is the importance of professional ethics. These are here to protect the individual in their work place. Of course the law still exists within the work place, but certain ‘codes of conduct’ are essential to the worker and working environment. The outcome of my example was that I was informally disciplined for undermining her faith, and she was disciplined for actually breaking the law due to vocalising homophobic comments.

Reader 5 states that ‘the importance of carrying out functions in a good way was in the Greek’s view, central to contributing to a civil society. This rings true regarding ethics in the work place, as it promotes and implements a civilised working environment. The Reader also notes that some professions now have certain licences in order to function and uphold standards. In schools, the staff can also become members of a union which will act upon any unethical situation that may be imposed upon the staff. This is a similar concept to being a member of ‘equity’ within the entertainment industry.

In conclusion, it is very difficult to determine what is right and wrong due to the individual’s perception and we need laws and codes of conduct to oversee conflicting views.