Ethics

Stigmatization  Stigmatization refers to the assignment of a particular character trait or a set of personal attributes to individuals and groups of people.  This creates important criminal justice problems, both in terms of administration and ethics, because stigmatization has been established as a basis upon which criminal justice decisions have been made and continue to be made it is a problem because stigmatization refers to negative traits, such as a propensity to steal or to deal drugs, and the ethical integrity of any criminal justice system demands an objective analysis rather than reliance on often false premises based in stigmatization.  A common criminal justice concern, for example, is racial stigmatization.  One scholar, lamenting how racial characteristics lead to stigmatization, argues that there is a mutually reinforcing relationship between criminal stigmatization of blacks and racial subordination HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5002443832(Coker, 2003, p. 838) and that equality in the criminal justice system requires an understanding and elimination of stigmatization in policy formulation and operational activities.

Principle of Double Effect  This principle, sometimes also referred to as a doctrine, describes a situation where some type of harmful action or consequence is treated as ethical or allowable because it leads to some positive result in the end.  This is not very different from a statement to the effect that, in certain circumstances, the end justifies the means.  In the ethical context of criminal justice, for instance, this may be used to attempt to justify the use of deadly force in self-defense HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5001360859(Draper, 1998) or the withdrawal of medical care in certain medical situations.  This type of ethical principle treats criminal justice issues as relative ethical problems rather than in black and white terms.  It also recognizes the reality that, in certain cases, a greater good may be best achieved by permitting limited types of harmful actions.
Whistleblower  Characterizing and individual as a whistleblower refers to an individual with some type of special inside or privileged information who makes a decision, either voluntarily or through a compulsion generated through fear of punishment, to provide information to law enforcement, the media, or regulatory bodies.  With respect to whistleblowers in the criminal justice context, as it has been noted in the academic literature, there are closely related benefits and ethical pitfalls HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5036053607(Simons, 2003).  Prosecutors and regulators frequently seek out and embrace whistleblowers because they can provide information otherwise difficult to obtain because of statutory and constitutional restrictions.  Whistleblowers tend to be those offering information more voluntarily, and more through their own initiative, than is typically true of informants more generally.  Ethically, however, dealing with whistleblowers raises several ethical concerns because the whistleblowers credibility and motives must be assessed in order to prevent legitimate investigations from being manipulated to serve private issues related to bitterness or revenge.

4. Pluralistic Ignorance Pluralistic ignorance refers to a socio-psychological phenomenon in which the members of a particular group choose to disregard or other wise not believe some established truth or social norm while simultaneously adhering to the mistaken belief that others also share this mistaken idea or conception.  An excellent illustration in the criminal justice context is seen in group interactions in prisons specifically, as noted by one scholar, in prison this concept is frequently manifest in the form of In these types of situations, the attitudes with visible adherents appear to be more widely held than they actually are. This appearance of support turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5001316583(Grekul, 1999, p. 513).  False believes can therefore become motivating beliefs, even if incorrect, and pressures toward conforming to the social group blurs ethical realities for members of the group and poses special challenges for criminal justice professionals.

5. Net-widening  A reference to net-widening generally refers to social control policies and programs designed to expand traditional structures in order to accomplish positive social objectives.  In a criminal justice context, for example, net-widening is often used to refer to structural expansions in which options such as diversion are implemented in order to promote goals such as rehabilitation in the hope that widening the net in such a way will be more humane and divert individuals from becoming repeat offenders.  One corrections researcher has argued that the distinctions between net-widening and system expansion are frequently blurred in practice and that stated goals such as saving costs and preventing individuals from becoming repeat offenders are dubious HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod95134316(Mainprize, 1992, p. 164).  The main ethical concerns are creating a more humane criminal justice system, saving costs, and protecting society from dangerous people in the process.  Electronic monitoring is another currently popular example.