Decision Point: What Would You Do? Scenario 1: You Are ✓ Solved

Read Decision Point: What Would You Do? Scenario 1: You are The First Pe

Read Decision Point: What Would You Do? Scenario 1: You are the first person to arrive in your classroom and as you sit down you notice an iPod on the floor underneath the adjacent seat. You pick it up and turn it on. It works fine and even has some of your favorite music listed. You realize that you are the only one in the room and no one will know if you keep it. You see other students entering the room so you place the iPod on the floor next to your belonging. You will have the whole class period to decide what to do. Scenario 2: Instead of finding the iPod, you are a friend who sits next to the person who finds it. As class begins, your friend leans over and asks your advice about what to do. Scenario 3: You are now a student representative on the judicial board at school. The student who kept the iPod is accused of stealing. How would you make the decision about the situation? Write a 2 page APA style paper discussing the following questions related to the above scenarios: What are the key facts that you should consider before making a decision, as either the person who discovered the iPod, the friend, or the judicial board member? Is this an ethical issue? What exactly are the ethical aspects involved in your decision? Who else is involved, or should be involved, in this decision? Who has a stake in the outcome? What alternatives are available to you? What are the consequences of each alternative? How would each of your alternatives affect the other people you have identified as having a stake in the outcome? Where might you look for additional guidance to assist you in resolving this particular dilemma? Provide 3-5 APA style references both inline and at the end of the paper to support your analysis. Please write in 3rd person. Note: This is your opportunity to demonstrate your knowledge of the week’s theory linked to personal opinion and outside evidence.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

In contemporary ethical decision-making, individuals frequently face dilemmas that require balancing personal integrity, social norms, and legal considerations. The scenarios presented involve complex moral questions about honesty, responsibility, and the importance of ethical principles in a school setting. This paper analyzes the key facts, ethical considerations, stakeholders, potential alternatives, and consequences involved in each scenario, drawing upon ethical theories and professional guidelines to inform decision-making.

Key Facts to Consider

In Scenario 1, the first individual to find the iPod must evaluate whether keeping the property aligns with ethical standards. Critical facts include the ownership of the device, the circumstances of discovery, the possibility of returning it to its rightful owner, and the absence of witnesses. The ethical weight of possessing someone else's property without attempt at restitution is significant. If the individual keeps the iPod, they risk violating notions of honesty and respect for others’ property (Kohlberg, 1984). Similarly, the friend leaning over in Scenario 2 must consider the moral obligation to advise the owner to return the item or report it appropriately. The judicial board member in Scenario 3 must deliberate on the evidence, intent, and fairness, ensuring the decision respects due process and fairness principles (Rest, 1986).

Ethical Issues and Aspects

These scenarios involve clear ethical issues concerning honesty, integrity, and respect for property. Particularly, they pose questions about whether it is morally acceptable to keep lost property and the responsibilities individuals have toward rightful owners. The act of deciding to keep the iPod raises questions under deontological ethics, emphasizing duty and rules, and consequentialist perspectives, which weigh the outcomes of such actions (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). For the judicial board, ethical aspects include ensuring a fair process and unbiased judgment, grounded in ethical standards of justice and fairness (Rest, 1986).

Stakeholders and Involved Parties

The primary stakeholders in these scenarios include the person who discovers the iPod, the rightful owner, other classmates, teachers, and the school community. The individual's integrity and reputation are also at stake. The owner of the iPod directly faces the loss of their device, possibly affecting their learning experience or personal comfort. The school’s environment depends on upholding ethical norms to foster trust and honesty. Additional involved parties, especially in the judicial context, include fellow judges, administrators, and possibly parents, all of whom have interests in ensuring justice and fairness (Crane, 2020).

Available Alternatives and Their Consequences

Several options exist for each scenario. The first individual could keep the iPod, attempt to locate the owner, or report it to authorities. Keeping it without attempt at return violates ethical standards and could lead to disciplinary action or loss of trust. Reporting it or turning it in aligns with honesty, though it might cause inconvenience if the owner is difficult to contact. For the friend, options include advising the owner to return the device, encouraging stealing, or remaining silent. The judicial board member may decide to dismiss the case, reprimand the student, or pursue formal charges. Each alternative impacts stakeholders differently; honesty and responsibility promote trust and integrity, while deceit or neglect foster mistrust and ethical decline.

Impact of Alternatives on Stakeholders

Choosing to return the iPod positively influences the owner's well-being and maintains the social norm of honesty. Conversely, keeping the device or advising the owner to conceal it could harm relationships and undermine the school's moral climate. In the judicial context, fair judgment supports justice and student development, whereas biased decisions can tarnish credibility and foster dishonesty (Rest, 1986). Ultimately, ethical choices that favor transparency and responsibility tend to strengthen community trust and uphold moral standards.

Sources of Guidance for Ethical Resolution

Guidance can be sought from various sources, including school policies on property, ethical frameworks such as Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, and professional codes like the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Consulting legal statutes on theft and property rights is also relevant. Engaging ethical reasoning models, such as the utilitarian or Kantian perspectives, provides structured approaches to decision-making (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013). Such sources help clarify moral obligations and promote consistency in handling dilemmas.

Conclusion

Decisions involving lost property and accusations of theft challenge individuals to balance moral principles, legal responsibilities, and social norms. Recognizing the key facts, understanding the ethical implications, analyzing stakeholders, and evaluating options are critical steps in reaching a morally sound decision. Upholding honesty, fairness, and respect for property not only resolves the immediate dilemma but also fosters an ethical environment conducive to trust and positive community relations. Thus, a commitment to ethical standards should guide individuals and institutions in resolving such moral challenges.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (7th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Crane, T. (2020). Ethics in Education: A Guide for Professionals. Routledge.
• Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on Moral Development: Vol. One. The Psychology of Moral Development. Harper & Row.
• Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory. Praeger.
• Shaw, W. H., & Barry, V. (2016). Moral Issues in Business (13th ed.). Cengage Learning.