Ethical Evaluation of Border Patrol Case Study in Dealing with an Employee The daily struggle to not compromise ethical values, morals, and avoid corruption is a challenge for any law enforcement officer, border patrol agents are not immune, and in fact the temptation to deviate from appropriateness may be more frequent. Such was the situation in the case of Michael Gilliland, a former United States Border Patrol Officer. According to the webpage, Border Corruption, in calendar year two thousand five, Gilliland was personally approached by Mexican human smugglers, commonly referred to as Coyotes. Coyotes make an unlawful and unethical wage by facilitating the illegal immigration of Mexican citizens across the shared United States and Mexico
…show more content…
Greed and selfishness to enhance his personal financial status were the primary reasons he agreed to and allowed the illegal border crossings. Once the border corruption taskforce became aware of the alleged misbehavior of Gilliland they had no choice but take the appropriate measures and launch a thorough investigation. Analyzing from a deontological ethical view, clearly the illegal behavior went against written laws and rules and was no doubt an ethical violation of the code of ethics for border patrol personnel. Given the situation of the investigation, the obligations and duties that are necessary to be followed had been violated; simply put Gilliland made an unethical choice to violate the code of conduct. Investigators had little choice but to enforce what is ethically correct and by conducting the investigation as deontologists there was little doubt the actions of this border patrol officer were completely wrong. Gilliland was dishonest and lied; deontologists whole-heartedly believe that it is wrong to lie and any deviation from the truth is not acceptable. "Deontology is the study of duty. Deontologists have argued that human beings sometimes have duties to perform certain actions, regardless of the consequences" (Braswell/McCarthy/McCarthy, 2014, p. …show more content…
I believe and fully support the legal immigration of foreigners into the United States of America, but the entire process must be done in accordance with the written law and legal documentation is absolutely necessary. Very early in my professional career, I was faced with an ethical decision that had to be made in the spur of the moment. At the time I was stationed stateside in the southwestern part of the United States and working a checkpoint. Out of the blue a vehicle of Mexican nationals comprised of a father, mother, and two small children approached my location and I stopped them and identified them, it did not take me long to come to the conclusion they were illegal immigrants. Working in a law enforcement capacity, and upholding a deontological approach, I knew if I allowed them to proceed and did not attempt to detain them and notify the appropriate authorities I would be in violation of the ethical code of conduct I was required to uphold and enforce. Even though I struggled with the outcome, ethically I accepted the outcome and desire to do what was ethically correct. Utilitarian speaking, if I allowed them to proceed, they would not face the risk of deportation and possibly have their family split apart. I was very young in age and even though it tore me up emotionally I detained them and made notification which in-turn generated a response
Greed and selfishness to enhance his personal financial status were the primary reasons he agreed to and allowed the illegal border crossings. Once the border corruption taskforce became aware of the alleged misbehavior of Gilliland they had no choice but take the appropriate measures and launch a thorough investigation. Analyzing from a deontological ethical view, clearly the illegal behavior went against written laws and rules and was no doubt an ethical violation of the code of ethics for border patrol personnel. Given the situation of the investigation, the obligations and duties that are necessary to be followed had been violated; simply put Gilliland made an unethical choice to violate the code of conduct. Investigators had little choice but to enforce what is ethically correct and by conducting the investigation as deontologists there was little doubt the actions of this border patrol officer were completely wrong. Gilliland was dishonest and lied; deontologists whole-heartedly believe that it is wrong to lie and any deviation from the truth is not acceptable. "Deontology is the study of duty. Deontologists have argued that human beings sometimes have duties to perform certain actions, regardless of the consequences" (Braswell/McCarthy/McCarthy, 2014, p. …show more content…
I believe and fully support the legal immigration of foreigners into the United States of America, but the entire process must be done in accordance with the written law and legal documentation is absolutely necessary. Very early in my professional career, I was faced with an ethical decision that had to be made in the spur of the moment. At the time I was stationed stateside in the southwestern part of the United States and working a checkpoint. Out of the blue a vehicle of Mexican nationals comprised of a father, mother, and two small children approached my location and I stopped them and identified them, it did not take me long to come to the conclusion they were illegal immigrants. Working in a law enforcement capacity, and upholding a deontological approach, I knew if I allowed them to proceed and did not attempt to detain them and notify the appropriate authorities I would be in violation of the ethical code of conduct I was required to uphold and enforce. Even though I struggled with the outcome, ethically I accepted the outcome and desire to do what was ethically correct. Utilitarian speaking, if I allowed them to proceed, they would not face the risk of deportation and possibly have their family split apart. I was very young in age and even though it tore me up emotionally I detained them and made notification which in-turn generated a response