Ethical Viewpoints
Comments (0) 
Ethical Viewpoints
Written by Shelley Godra
How far would you go to help a friend? Would you risk breaking the law? These questions plagued my conscience last year when I opened my home to a close friend running from the military. In my opinion, I felt like I did the right thing offering my friend, Josh, a place to stay when he needed it the most; however, some people may disagree with my decision. Depending on the viewpoint, this situation could be seen as being ethically right or ethically wrong.
My friend enlisted into the Navy in the spring of 2006. Josh completed boot camp and was staying at a naval base in Virginia. In the beginning of the winter, he ran into some trouble and his punishment was 72 hours in the naval prison. Instead of completing his jail sentence, Josh decided to leave the naval base and was considered absent without leave or “AWOL.” When he showed up on my doorstep, I had the dilemma of deciding whether to let him stay or to send him on his way.
A person with a transcendentalist viewpoint would have not only sent him on his way but would have also turned Josh over to the military authorities. The transcendentalist viewpoint is motivated and committed to judging ethical situations based upon a religious standing. There are either good or bad ethical decisions; there are neither gray areas nor excuses for bad ethical decisions. Someone with this point of view would consider the actions both Josh and I took to be morally and ethically wrong. Like the transcendentalist viewpoint, the legitimist viewpoint would also categorize this situation as being ethically wrong if he indeed broke the law.
The legitimist viewpoint holds the law above all other decision-making influences. When considering if an action is ethically correct, someone with a legitimist point of view would look to see if the action followed government laws and policies. In my situation, both Josh and I did not follow the laws. Josh broke the law when he left the naval base and became AWOL, and I broke the law when I allowed him to stay at my house without turning him over to the military. The individualist viewpoint would also see this situation as being ethically wrong, however, the reasoning is completely different.
The individualist viewpoint is only concerned with the advancement and capitalization of one’s own position in society. Someone with this point of view would believe housing Josh as wrong because there is a chance of being punished by government authorities themselves. This viewpoint also does not take existing relationships into perspective when making ethical decision; therefore, it would not matter to someone with individualist thinking that Josh is a close friend and needs help. In contrast, there are viewpoints that would perceive this situation as being ethical.
The systemicist viewpoint looks at the bigger picture of an ethical dilemma and sees how everyone is affected by the decision. A person holding a systemicist viewpoint believes that the decision is ethically correct if it is good for the majority of the people involved. In this particular situation, not only were Josh and I affected but also his family and the military. Josh would have been out on the streets, running from the government, and on his own if I had turned him away. His family would have been devastated if he had gotten caught and was sentenced to a period in jail. The military has enough issues to deal with and does not need to be chasing an AWOL seaman around the country. The majority of concerned parties’ interests would have chosen to have Josh stay at my house rather than be turned into the government or be denied shelter.
The conventionalist viewpoint also looks at the bigger picture when deciding what is ethically correct. Someone characterized as portraying a conventionalist viewpoint would determine what is ethically right and wrong by looking at what the majority of society would choose. This reasoning is supported by the idea that most people are inherently good. The majority of society would say that breaking the law is bad, however, the greater amount would also say that helping a close friend in need has superiority over the latter action. Fellow peers and family would also agree with the previous decision of helping Josh. Once putting priority to actions, the conventionalist viewpoint would assume assisting and housing Josh is the widely accepted ethical decision. Furthermore, the experientialist viewpoint would consider this situation as doing the right thing.
An experientialist viewpoint relies on “gut feelings” and an intuitive sense of right. A person with this point of view, like myself, does not think the situation through before deciding upon an ethical decision. When I opened my door that day to find Josh, I knew instinctively that I would help him through his hardship. I did not have to weigh the pros and cons to know whether or not I needed to help with his crisis. I do not regret opening up my home to Josh; however, the decision may have been different if the situation was altered.
I would have turned Josh away from my home had a few details been altered in this ethical situation. First, the severity of his charges would have changed my mind; Josh had gotten in trouble at the Virginia naval base for underage drinking. If Josh had injured other people or committed a more severe crime then I would have not allowed him a place to stay. Second, the parties involved could have swayed my decision as well. If the FBI or another type of high profile government agency were chasing him then I would have turned him away based upon the individualist viewpoint. I would not have risked the chance of jail in order to help my AWOL friend.
In conclusion, there are several viewpoints that can be taken for every ethical situation; however, there is no absolute right viewpoint. The concept taken when making ethical decisions depends on the predicament, the severity, and the people involved. In this particular situation, Josh was my friend and needed help. I did not care that he was AWOL and wanted by the military; I felt that our friendship was more important than the law. I do not regret my decision, and I think I was ethically right.
