From the Federal Cooperative Grants and Agreements Act of 1977 (31USC 6303-6308):
PUBA 6303 Ethics in Public Administration "The Red River Case" Analysis
2
E. Rey Garcia, MPA Candidate April 7, 2015 PUBA 6303: Ethic in Public Administration Case Study #1 The Red River Case Case Study #1 suggests a great deal of unethical and morally wrong behavior. Was “A” being unjust by refusing to take “X” to “C” without acting morally wrong? Is it morally wrong to kill “G”? Should have “B” and “D” done anything besides act sympathetic? Did “C” act accordingly when “X” confessed to killing “G”? “A” was being morally unethical by asking “X” to kill “G” and “X” was also morally unethical by following through with the request from “A”. Both should be punished for capital murder, which is against the law. “B” and “D” should have reported the intent to kill rather than stood there sympathetically and did nothing. “C” did the right thing by wanting nothing to do with “X” but failed to report a capital murder crime. Kohlberg Stage of Moral Development: “A” and “X” were victims of Stage two (self-interest driven) expresses the "what's in it for me" position.
-
Upload
the-university-of-texas-utrgv -
Category
Government & Nonprofit
-
view
10 -
download
1
Transcript of PUBA 6303 Ethics in Public Administration "The Red River Case" Analysis
E. Rey Garcia, MPA CandidateApril 7, 2015PUBA 6303: Ethic in Public AdministrationCase Study #1 The Red River Case
Case Study #1 suggests a great deal of unethical and morally wrong
behavior. Was “A” being unjust by refusing to take “X” to “C” without acting
morally wrong? Is it morally wrong to kill “G”? Should have “B” and “D”
done anything besides act sympathetic? Did “C” act accordingly when “X”
confessed to killing “G”?
“A” was being morally unethical by asking “X” to kill “G” and “X” was also
morally unethical by following through with the request from “A”. Both
should be punished for capital murder, which is against the law. “B” and
“D” should have reported the intent to kill rather than stood there
sympathetically and did nothing. “C” did the right thing by wanting nothing
to do with “X” but failed to report a capital murder crime.
Kohlberg Stage of Moral Development: “A” and “X” were victims of
Stage two (self-interest driven) expresses the "what's in it for me"
position.
As the Moral Agent(s) did they: No one acted with integrity, provided
high standard service, promoted trust, respect or took
responsibility.
What would you have done? Call the authorities the moment “A” said
it wanted “G”: killed.
E. Rey Garcia, MPA CandidateApril 7, 2015PUBA 6303: Ethic in Public AdministrationCase Study #1 The Red River Case
Alternative Action: Killing is not the way to someone’s heart. If “X”
loved and wanted to be with “C”, there was no need to kill for a love
that was doomed because of his morally unethical behavior.
