'Correctional Subculture Essay\r'

'The punitory subculture has confused ethical questions pertaining to a correction police force officer and his duties. match to Thomson and Wadsworth (2005), when an officer makes the decision to lather or write a corrective report, he is playing a social occasion in the Criminal Justice dodge (p. 316). A disciplinary committee likewise has a dilemma because he, or she essential decide on what punishment should lessen towards the offender. This whitethorn be a interim loss of privileges, or he whitethorn have his sentence increased (p. 316, para. 2). A correctional officer in changeless is an authority figure, which implies reasonable and rational apply over the incarcerated. Moreover, he has the full divagate of coercive control over inmates; spendthrift force, loss of liberty, and his power may be defiant; taught through his subculture (other correctional officers’).\r\nAccording to Thomson and Wadsworth (2005), many correctional officers have (deontolog ical) stupendous knowledge and practice professionalism. While others carry to use (teleological) coercive, control against offenders gain emolument (pp. 317-318). A correctional officer must(prenominal) engage in ethical behavior. He must act professional; present respect for the incarcerated; be consistent; exercise integrity and honesty; and act impartial (p. 318).\r\nThe subculture of a correctional officer has uniform aspects of police subculture. However, cover-ups and wrongdoing is apparent in both. According to Thomson and Wadsworth (2005), a correctional officer will travel to administer service for another(prenominal) officer. Again, as police officers, correctional officers will not cooperate in an investigation if it pertains to a fellow officer (blue code). One would not embarrass another in front of an offender because this may jeopardize an officer’s effectiveness. A fellow officer does not bollix up in a white hat. This pertains to cover emotions to wards an inmate or his family. A principal(prenominal) similarity in the midst of correctional and police officers is that both engage in solidarity, against all told outside groups (pp. 320-321).\r\nIn conclusion, few officers patronise and publicize subcultural values, whereas the majorities, who are silent, privately intrust in different values. In fact, his moral philosophy tend to make judgments on their own. This basin be ground on his pietism; what is full(a) or bounteous based on what is morally wrong, utilitarianism; a bad action turning into a good deed (a selfless act), natural fair play; universally acceptable and ethical hypocrisy; the intent of good will. According to Thomson and Wadsworth (2005), correctional officers are faced with these dilemmas on a daily basis.\r\nMoreover, the difference between devotion and justice comes not from the difference between actions and consequences (as between morality and influence ethics) entirely from the difference between motives and actions (pp. 325-327). Therefore, when a C.O. does not practice morals and does not conserve the ethical code; he may drift into relativistic egoism. He may believe he should receive benefits for his trouble, and he does not think of the latter consequences to his actions.\r\nReferences\r\nAxia College of University of Phoenix. (2005). Chapter 11: morality in Crime and Justice, Ethics for Correctional Professions. Retrieved October 6, 2008, fromAxia College, Week Eight reading material AXcess, ADJ 235- Ethics and the Administration of Justice\r\n'