Case Analysis 6

After reviewing Case 11 by Ruggiero (120), one notices a few moral issues the sociologist may face. The first issue concerns the legal responsibility to report any crime that may cause harm to society. Secondly, the sociologist, just like any other human being, has the ethical duty to report incidents that harm others. In addition, the sociologist also faces a dilemma regarding confidentiality. On the one hand, she could uphold the confidentiality she has with the group since, as stated by Surmiak, confidentiality is part of the professional code of ethics (230). On the other hand, she could break this confidentiality for the good of society even though this would bring the research to an end, as the trust between the two parties would be broken.

Notably, this case involves various parties. First, the sociologist is involved as she faces the moral dilemma of whether to uphold the professional code of conduct or her moral duty to society and legal duty. Second, the community members are also involved, as they have entrusted the sociologists with private information about themselves with assured confidentiality. The third party comprises individuals in the car theft ring. Lastly, the fourth party includes law enforcement and the whole community in the urban slum.

Some of the virtues at stake in this dilemma include, firstly, trust, whereby the sociologist has to decide whether to break the trust of the community. This would earn the trust of the larger community, but it would also mean that their work and the work of other sociologists may be jeopardized as groups would be more cautious about trusting them. Integrity is also at stake because the sociologist must decide whether to uphold their professional conduct or be honest and fair for the sake of good to society and not their work. Lastly, the relationships of care at stake in this case are between the sociologist and the group, the sociologist and society, and other sociologists and other groups in future studies. The sociologists’ relationship with law enforcement is also at stake, as upholding confidentiality could be perceived as obstruction of justice.

Works Cited

Ruggiero, Vincent Ryan. Thinking Critically about Ethical Issues. 9th ed., McGraw-Hill Education, 2015.

Surmiak, Adrianna. “Should We Maintain or Break Confidentiality? The Choices Made by Social Researchers in the Context of Law Violation and Harm.” Journal of Academic Ethics, vol. 18, no. 3, July 2019, pp. 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-09336-2.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

For this module, you are required to complete a Written Case Analysis of approximately 275 words. Please read Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues, Case 11, p. 120. Identify the moral issue(s) and the parties involved; identify what virtues are at stake or which relationships of care are at stake.

Case 11, p. 120

• In studying the subculture of a particular group, a sociologist must be accepted by the people and gain their trust.  One such researcher is studying the people in an urban slum.  She learns through their confidence that certain members of the community are involved in a car-theft-ring.  She does not report them to the police.
  

  Case Analysis 6

Textbook:

• Ruggiero, Vincent. Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Kindle Edition.
  • Ninth Edition