Ethical_Dilemma

Two Ethical Dilemmas According to the Miniature Guide of ethics, (Elders 2004) there are two questions to be explored in ethics cases. Is the ethical issue simple to resolve or is it very complicated causing a judgment to be made' Some cases need more analysis than others to determine the proper course of action to find a resolution while others can be solved rather easily. These questions lead the way to a fact finding mission to support the proper handling of an ethical matter. Let us look at an unsolved case. In the matter of Chia- Shun “Rocky” Shih hired 1973 and Alberto Arroyo hired 1982 versus the University of Texas at San Antonio, (Ludwig, 2003) the School also known as UTSA has a code of ethics that advises professors to “not make personal investments that could reasonably be expected to create a substantial conflict between your private interest and the public interest.” These were professors who supposedly benefited from the work of the engineering students that they taught from the prior semester. The professors’ buying of the Helotes 33 acre tract has resulted in definite suspensions because it was their students’ study site from the last semester. Both professors were given paid time off while an investigation was being conducted. According to the UTSA handbook, the process to prove a conflict of interest by university faculty members is a very long one. The unsolved article says and I quote, “According to the University’s handbook, the president must inform a tenured faculty, member in writing that he or she is being terminated for cause. The case then goes to a faculty panel, which forwards its recommendation to the University if Texas System Board of Regents for final decision. The process could take months, even years.” This process has resulted in engineering professor being placed on leave with pay effective January 2008. Once professors were found guilty of violating UTSA Code of Ethics, the termination process was set into motion. The delay for a final decision is with the school’s President Ricardo Romo. Ironically, four months later and Chia-Shun “Rocky” Shih and Alberto Arroyo are still on leave with pay. Could it be the problem that Romo has solely based on the mindset of the professors' The real question is whether the two men had their sights on the property and led the students to the same opportunity or was the discovery a surprise to all of the parties involved which ultimately led to an investment being made after the fact. Here are facts of the case thus far: Spring 2007, the students chose their semester undergraduate project near Helotes. The project was to turn this land into a city park. In, May, the students consulted with industry experts with professor Arroyo present. In June, a student once taught who is now an investment partner saw the advertisement about the Helotes 33-acres tract. Please note that city options had expired on these 33 acres. The student Ortiz did more research and informed professor Arroyo about the results who then quickly made a bid for the land. The price was very expensive so Arroyo got two more investors who were with Shih the other terminated professor and an outsider named Amir Karimi. In July, Arroyo gave Shih a brochure about the Helotes land. This is when Shih said he realized that it was the same land his students studying since the spring. In November 2007, officials reviewed the land purchase. The professors used their student’s findings to take advantage of a bargain. The campus police considered the land purchase to be a possible criminal act by the two men District Attorney’s Office disagreed. Arroyo claimed he reminded Shih about a 2006 department memo that warned staff to deter their students from researching real estate properties that any professor has an investment interest in. Arroyo and Shih agreed to discontinue the Helotes land project for the next term. Documents from the Texas Public Information Act raised questions about the students’ work and the landowner. It shows the students’ findings and the professor’s purchase could be purely a coincidence. The engineer professors say that the school’s spokesperson, David Gabler should not have alerted the media which eventually lead to their pending termination. They decided to continue the fight to remain professors at the University of Texas in San Antonio. The university felt Chia-Shun “rocky” Shih and Alberto Arroyo failed to tell them and the surveying student group about their purchase. This Failure was considered an appearance of impropriety by the university, therefore the former interim Provost Julius Gribou advised the University President Ricardo Romo to terminate both professors. The third point in the Miniature guide Ethical Thinking involves considering the elements in ethics. Identifying how we reason is the first step. The next step is to access our use of intellectual formats. The elements actually start the thinking process and leads to the logic behind ethical reasoning. Then, realize that logic sets the course of reasoning for any goals individual decide to pursue. There is a sense of purpose. A point of view of the matter is Vital to a behavioral response. Assumptions can lead to consequences that could enhance or harm the well-being of others. In the case of the engineering professors versus the university, the professors’ reasoning was, I did not violate university ethics. The July purchase was from a real estate investor’s point of view on an expired city land deal. The students were on a semester long journey of gaining knowledge. The logic is in making the difficult decision of whether to officially terminate the two professors due to a possible conflict of interest, or reinstate them so they can return to the classroom to continue to teach engineering. Our ethical thinking contributions can make this world a better place. Would life at the university be better for the Engineering department if Arroyo and Shih were to be terminated after over 25 years if service' Complex cases like this one are very difficult to prove whether or not ethical reasoning was practiced in the decision making process. This case was definitely unresolved because there was no conclusive decision made on the issue of whether or not the professors should be reinstated. In our second case study the ethical dilemma is well-defined. The decision is basically an easy one to make. In human services there are times creative ways must be found to bond with clients and interact with them in ways that make them feel that they are being understood. The more connection an individual feels, the more likely they will allow themselves to be helped. Hopefully, the clients will listen to wise counsel in order develop a sense of security when they confide in the employee. When trying to be creative, staff members should be careful to ensure that ethical behavior is always followed when they are attempting to counsel a client. A male direct care employee was hired because of his experience and his ability to form connections with some of the clients. He was seen as caring, energetic, and had a distinct way of helping the clients cope with routine of everyday life in a detoxification facility. As time went on, some clients became concerned over how this employee was behaving around some of the female clients. When questioned, he told the supervisors of a few incidents that were blown out of proportion by other staff members. This employee was given copies on the code of ethics and the sexual harassment policy for the company. Eventually complaints started to come in from clients about stories this particular employee was telling about addiction. There was one incident that was not only unethical, but a large trigger for some of the female clients. The stories that the male worker used to counsel the female clients caused them to feel unsafe with this employee in their presence. Once management had a detailed description of one particular incident, the male direct care was terminated for his failure to follow the code of ethics after being warned. There was grace period given to the employee to modify his unethical methods of therapy. Unfortunately, he refused to comply. Rather than find another way to bond with the female clients, he chose to continue putting the rehabilitation of these women at risk with his inappropriate behavior. How circumstances and situations that arise in life are handled largely depend on one’s characteristics and frame of reference. We are responsible for our own actions and, “We are capable of acting towards others in such a way as to increase or decrease the quality of their lives. We are capable of helping or harming. “(Paul & Elder, 2003) Especially in Human Services, there is a distinct need to be professional but personable to a degree that does not place an individual in harm’s way. With such influence on others, ethics is a large part of day-to-day interaction between direct care staff and the clients they counsel. The decision that was made by management in regards to the stubborn direct care worker was an easy one. The course of action was concise and correct. References: Elder, D.R.(2003) The miniature Guide to Understanding the Foundations of Ethical Reasoning. Dillon Beach: The Foundation for Critical Thinking. Ludwig, M. (2008, May 16). UTSA ethics case of professors’ land buy still unresolved. San Antonio Express-News, B.1. Retrieved May 24 2009, from ProQuest Newsstand database. McCullum, Kenya (2009, May) A Way Without Words. Office Pro; May2009, Vol. 69 Issue 4, p28-28, 1p Bulutlar, Füsun Öz, Ela ( Jun2009) The Effects of Ethical Climates on Bullying Behaviour in the Workplace. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 86 Issue 3, p273-295, 23p