AbstractOur keepers of the peace and enforcers of the law are surrounded by crime and criminals, but something separates them from criminality. The criminal justice system is complex, but one thing grounds it’s practitioners: a foundation of ethics. According to Peak (2012), “ethics involves doing what is right or correct and is generally used to refer to how people should behave in a professional capacity” (p. 278). This paper will explore the role that ethics plays in the three facets of justice: law enforcement, the courts, and corrections. Additionally, this paper will look at the results that ethical criminal justice practitioners have on the criminal justice system, as well as examine what results when ethics are replaced by selfishness and corruption. Ethics are foundational to the criminal justice system and to the achievement of it’s overarching goals: preservation of peace and fulfillment of justice. Without ethics, peace and justice are improbabilities and corruption is a foregone conclusion.Keywords : morals, deontological, absolute, relative, noble cause, corruptionEthics in the Criminal Justice SystemA thin line separates order from chaos. Criminal justice professionals walk that line, and hold it. The criminal justice system is the complex interworking of law enforcement, courts, and corrections. The common denominator among honest and productive criminal justice professionals is a foundation of ethics on which they build everything that they do. Ethics are far from simple, however; they are as complex as the criminal justice system itself, and the lack of ethics are detrimental to the pursuit of justice. Ethical rules of conduct are infinitely important to the successful operation of a criminal justice organization and the successful achievement of the criminal justice system’s overarching goals.EthicsEthics are defined by Merriam-Webster (n.d.) as “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.” Ethics are far from simple, however; the main concern being whose ethics or which ethics we’re talking about. Any discussion of ethics demands further definitions. There are two subcategories of ethics, absolute ethics and relative ethics.Absolute ethics refer to issues where there is either good or bad, right or wrong. These kinds of ethics seem to be sewn into the fabric of our very being, and are nearly universally accepted within a specific society. Examples of absolute ethics include: murder is wrong, extortion is wrong, honesty is good, loyalty is good.Relative ethics, on the other hand, are much more complicated and would be best described as issues that have several shades of grey, rather than being black-and-white. As Khan (2006) wisely says, “ethics can be taught” and continues by saying that ethics must be examined critically in order to fully understand (para. 2). Additionally, Eastvedt (2008) shares, “Without a doubt, there are some philosophical problems when considering ethical concepts … [S]ome people may charge that what may be ethical to one person, may not be considered ethical to others.” Some examples of relative ethical decisions include: the best way to handle homelessness issues within a community and how we can limit the number of drug overdoses. The right or good answer to these questions is mind-dependant.Deontological ethics must also be examined, as it is commonplace within the criminal justice system. Peak (2012) describes deontological ethics as the kind of decision “which does not consider consequences, but instead examines one’s duty to act” (p. 278). Rather than the outcomes motivating the action, it is a sense of duty that drives the action. Criminal justice practitioners are often driven to make ethical decisions out of a sense of duty rather than out of an internal sense of right or wrong. In this case, duty determines right and wrong.Ethics in Law EnforcementEthics is foundational to law enforcement and its importance is highlighted in the intense search for honest, moral, and ethical law enforcement candidates. The average law enforcement hiring process takes between six and eight months and includes a highly invasive background check, a lengthy interview, followed by a polygraph to check for accuracy. Law enforcement organizations expect complete honesty throughout all parts of the application process and demand that honesty to continue through all aspects of the job. Honesty, integrity, and ethical officers are the backbone of any law enforcement organization. Several topics within law enforcement fall into what could be called relative ethical topics and should be explored. Additionally, there are several solutions that will ensure ethicality within criminal justice organizations.Deception, or lying, is in some ways an essential part of the policing process but can also be taken too far into criminality. Accepted lying refers to deception that is generally considered part of the job and can include all kinds of trickery used to apprehend or entrap suspects (Peak, 2012). Deviant lying, however, is described by Peak (2012) as “officers committing perjury to convict suspects or being deceptive about some activity that is illegal or unacceptable” (p. 281). Eastvedt (2008) lists “lying or dishonesty” as “ways for people in the criminal justice community to seriously damage and destroy their integrity” (p. 66). Deception is a curious topic when discussing ethics, but it is clear that the often-debated line must not be crossed.Gratuities is another grey area of ethics. Like deception, minor gratuities are a normal part of a law enforcement officer’s day, but gratuities in excess is synonymous with corruption. Peak (2012) cites the Knapp Commission’s terminology of “grass-eaters” or “meat-eaters” to describe police officers’ relationship to gratuities. A grass-eater is described as on officer who accepts gratuities that are given voluntarily and will sometimes solicit minor gratuities. Meat-eaters, on the other hand, are officers who regularly, and even aggressively, solicit gratuities and search out situations where they can exploit people for person gain. Gratuities are surely a slippery slope that can result in officers sliding into all types of corruption (Peak, 2012).Gratuities have the potential to be the start of a slippery slope to greed, of which there is temptation abound in the criminal justice field. Law enforcement officers are in a seemingly endless cycle of temptation and they are surrounded my crimes and criminality. The temptation to greed can motivate officers to a myriad of types of corruption including crimes relating to drugs, bribes, prostetution, and other abuses of power.Several solutions, or partial solutions, exist for law enforcement organizations when it comes to hiring and maintaining an ethical workforce. As previously mentioned, strict expectations on hiring the right people cannot be overstated. Additionally, proper ongoing ethics training, including regular training on policy and procedure, is necessary. Chilton (1998) asserts that standardization is necessary in ethics training in order to avoid what he calls “the ‘Pinocchio Theory’ problem of personal, idiosyncratic moral judgments in the administration of criminal justice” (p. 40). Law enforcement organizations would also be wise to set strong organizational values in an attempt to “shape the standards of professional behavior”(Peak, 2012, 285). An organization’s culture is often perpetrated by it’s public organizational values.Ethics in the CourtsThe Delaware Judiciary (n.d.) describes one of their core visions as to “insure equal application of the judicial process to all cases, which are fairly decided based upon legally relevant factors.” This equal application and fair decision must be rooted in an ethical foundation. “Because an understanding of judicial ethics is part and parcel of a true appreciation for the core values of the judiciary-judicial independence, integrity, and impartiality-this cannot be an optional project” (Rosenblum, 2007, p. 403). Several standards of conduct exist that relates to ethics in the courtroom, including the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, the Code of Conduct for Federal Judges, and the Ethics Reform Act of 1989. Judges, who preside over a court, and attorneys, who battle each other in court, are both held to high ethical standards.Judges are sworn to administer justice within their courtroom. Judges swear to do this without respect to the people involved but with respect to the Constitution and the laws of the United States (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). This would imply that a judge should not import their emotions, opinions, convictions, or biases into their courtroom decisions. However, this is not the case as judges are human like the rest of us. Ethical behavior by a judge would eliminate favoritism, bias, and impropriety, and carry over into their personal conduct. Appleby & Blackham (2018) assert that there is a current trend toward the “transparent ethical regulation for serving judges” which is said to “promote public confidence in the judicial institution” (p. 506). These ethical codes are independent and do not - can not - eliminate a judge’s personality or emotions to bleed over into their decision making. This is another case of relative ethics, in which there is no specific line between ethical and unethical actions.Attorneys, both on the prosecution and defense side of the courtroom, are also faced with challenges of ethics. Attorneys “must be legally and morally bound to ethical principles as agents of the courts” (Peak, 2012, p. 288). Attorneys are ethically bound to put justice over winning, which unfortunately is rarely the case in today’s court proceedings. Ethical principles also prohibit misconduct such as deception or lying, bribery, concealment of evidence, among other things.Ethics in CorrectionsOn a large scale, there are several ethical issues spanning the correctional system. Albanese (as cited in Khan, 2006) “scrutinizes the moral and ethical ramifications of correctional philosophies, such as retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilitation and sentencing methods” (p. 49). These large scale issues are one of the most heavily debated topics in current politics ad media.On a more personal level, correctional officers are subject to most of the same ethical standards as law enforcement officers. Deception plays a very similar role in the day-to-day functioning of a correctional officer. Additionally, several norms exist for correctional officers that function as a sort of code of conduct. These norms include: “always go to the aid of an officer in distress, do not ‘rat,’ never make another officer look back in front of inmates” (Peak, 2012, p. 289), among others. While these norms are important and necessary, it is important for correctional officers to not elevate their code of conduct over absolute ethics.Contraband is a significant facet of how correctional facilities operate, and poses similarly significant ethical issues for correctional officers. Everything from drugs to weapons to cell phones are smuggled into prisons, sometimes at the knowledge of officers or even by officers themselves. This creates numerous opportunities for corruption, greed, and other unethical behavior.Eastvedt (2008) declares that unethical behavior by correctional officers can have significant effects on the organization as a whole:Granted, it may be true that unethical behaviors occurring behind the walls of correctional facilities rarely hit the 6 o’clock news or the front page of the newspaper. However, when it does happen, everyone within the organization is seriously affected. Administrators are held accountable, and staff may be discredited. Morale among the troops can plummet dramatically. Inmates may use the incident to question and challenge line officer authority, making it increasingly difficult for correctional staff to do their jobs. Maintaining security within the jail or prison becomes, at least for a time, a more challenging and daunting task and increases risk to staff and inmates alike. (p. 62)Unethical behavior has a significant negative effect on the entire organization, but that correlation is not limited to just corrections, but extends into all facets of the criminal justice system. Unethical behavior does not just impact the individual, but it sheds negative light on the system as a whole. A single unethical person can be the proverbial bad apple that spoils the whole bunch.ConclusionIt is clear that ethical criminal justice practitioners have an infinitely positive impact on the criminal justice system and that justice crumbles when ethics are replaced by selfishness and corruption. The lack of ethics creates an untrustworthy system, which is not supported by the public. Upholding ethics within the criminal justice system will not only result in justice, but it will also ensure cooperation with the public. Ethics are foundational to the criminal justice system and to the achievement of it’s overarching goals: preservation of peace and fulfillment of justice. Without ethics, peace and justice are improbabilities and corruption is a foregone conclusion.ReferencesAppleby, G., & Blackham, A. (2018). The Shadow Of The Court: The Growing Imperative To Reform Ethical Regulation Of Former Judges.International and Comparative Law Quarterly , 67 (3), 505–546. doi: 10.1017/s0020589318000143Chilton, B. S. (1998). Constitutional conscience: Criminal justice and public interest ethics. Criminal Justice Ethics , 17 (2), 33–41. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.libraryresources.waldorf.edu/docview/209772011?accountid=40957Eastvedt, S. R. (2008). Criminal Justice Ethics: A View From the Top.American Jails , 22 (5), 61–62,65-67. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.libraryresources.waldorf.edu/docview/222222387?accountid=40957Khan, E. (2006). Professional Ethics in Criminal Justice: Being Ethical When No One is Looking. Corrections Compendium , 31 (5), 48–49. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.libraryresources.waldorf.edu/docview/211858471?accountid=40957Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 28 U.S. Code § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/453.Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Ethic. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethic.Peak, K. J. (2012). Justice administration: Police, courts, and corrections management (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Rosenblum, E. F. (2007). Judicial Ethics For All: An Expansive Approach to Judicial Ethics Education. Justice System Journal ,28 (3), 394–404. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.libraryresources.waldorf.edu/docview/194780465?accountid=40957The Delaware Judiciary. (n.d.). Mission, Vision & Goals. Retrieved from https://courts.delaware.gov/jpcourt/mission.aspx.
Schizophrenia is one among the most recognizable mental illness, but is also one of the least understood. Typically understood by the entertainment media and the public to be synonymous with crazy, schizophrenia is one of the most devastating, and misunderstood, mental illnesses. “Schizophrenia is the most common of the psychotic disorders and is characterized by fundamental distortions of thought (delusions), perception (hallucinations) and emotional response” (Morgan et al., 2008, p. 1). This paper will further examine the characteristics of schizophrenia, as well as delve into explanations and etiology. Understanding schizophrenia also requires a look at it’s connection with crime and its interactions with the criminal justice system.CharacteristicsSchizophrenia is just one of several similar mental illnesses in a larger class called psychotic disorders, which are broadly characterized by delusions and hallucinations. According to the American Psychological Association (as cited by Schug and Fradella, 2015), the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia are delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior, and negative symptoms (diminished emotional expression or avolition). In order for someone to be diagnosed with schizophrenia, two or more of these symptoms must be present for a significant portion of a 1-month period, one of the first three symptoms must be present.Symptoms are categorized into positive and negative symptoms. Positive and negative are used in a numerical sense here, rather than in a connotational good and bad sense. Positive symptoms are thoughts, feelings, or behaviors that seem to be added to the way a normal person would think, feel, or behave. These positive symptoms include delusions, hallucinations, catatonic behavior, and disorganized speech. Negative symptoms are thoughts, feelings, or behaviors that seem to indicate that something is lacking compared to a normal person’s thinking, feeling, behaviors. These negative symptoms include diminished emotional expression and avolition (Schug & Fradella, 2015). Now that the basic characteristics of schizophrenia are understood, an examination of theoretical explanations and etiology is requiredTheoretical Explanations and EtiologyNeurobiological and psychosocial factors are two of many theoretical explanations for schizophrenia. The overarching thought that those with schizophrenia may be biologically distinct is indicated by brain imaging. Walsh & Yum (2013) discuss a “neurodevelopmental model that incorporates genetics, neurological functioning, and immunological factors” (para. 1), highlighting that multiple factors must be assessed when examining this theoretical explanation. Various research over the years has looked at the neurobiological factors that may lead a diagnosed schizophrenic to become violent and criminal. Similarly, links with violent schizophrenia have been made between a person’s upbringing, parents, early childhood deprivation, previous abuse or trauma, religiosity, and current or prior homelessness. Schug & Fradella (2015) conclude their thoughts on these points by saying that finding from multiple studies “may suggest that biological, psychosocial, or interactional trajectories may lead to homicidal violence in schizophrenia” (p. 211) and “potential pathways to crime and violence among those with schizophrenia may not necessarily be illness related (p. 213).Schizophrenia rarely occurs along as a diagnosis and is usually accompanied by comorbid substance abuse. Substance use, and abuse, is high among those diagnosed with schizophrenia. This is likely due to an attempt to self-medicate and reduce psychotic symptoms (Schug & Fradella, 2015). It is a generally accepted fact that people diagnosed with schizophrenia are much more likely to abuse substances which leads to higher crime and violence rates. “Much of the increased risk for criminality and violence among persons with major psychotic disorders (e.g., schizophrenia) can be attributed to co-occurring substance abuse” (McCabe et al., 2012, p. 272). This fact adds to the complexity of this disorder’s effect on the general public, and more specifically, it’s link to the criminal justice and the criminal justice system.Connections with CrimeSchizophrenia is one of the most interesting disorders due to it’s perception by entertainment media and it’s common association with crime and violence. While not among the most prevalent of mental illnesses, it is one of the most well-known by name, though not by definition, and it captures the intrigue of more people than most any other mental illness due to it’s apparent link to crime. “It must be remembered… that most individuals with schizophrenia are not violent” (Schug & Fradella, 2015, p. 169-170). Statistically speaking, 80% of people diagnosed with schizophrenia have been found to not be violent, however multiple studies of criminal populations have found higher rates of schizophrenia compared to the general public. Interestingly, there are also studies that show an increased rate of criminal schizophrenia over the years.The crime rate of schizophrenia patients was lower than that of the general population until the 1960s (Rabkin 1979); however, population-based studies (Swanson et al. 1990; Stueve and Link 1997) and birth cohort studies (Brennan et al. 2000; Hodgins 1992; Arseneault et al. 2000; Räsänen et al. 1998) convincingly show that criminality is now more prevalent among people with schizophrenia than in the general population. (Munkner, Haastrup, Joergensen, & Kramp, 2003, p. 1). Nonetheless, “the joint prevalence of schizophrenia and offending is rare” (Morgan et al., 2008, p. 5).Schizophrenia has a concrete link to violence. The National Institute of Mental Health (as cited by Schug & Fradella, 2015) shows over a 15% prevalence of minor violence and just under 4% prevalence of serious violence. Kinworthy (2016) concurs by saying that “only a small minority of patients with Schizophrenia commit violent crimes” (p. 54). While this shows that the vast majority of those with schizophrenia are not violent, no one should doubt it’s connections to violence and violent crimes. However, a 2009 meta-analysis concluded that the majority of violence (both criminal and non-criminal) among individuals with schizophrenia was due to substance use disorders (McCabe et al., 2012, p. 272), which shows a more significant correlation between substance abuse and violence rather than schizophrenia and violence. The comorbidity of these two mental illnesses blurs the lines when thinking about correlation.As previously mentioned, the vast majority of those diagnosed with schizophrenia have been found to be not violent. The connection between schizophrenia and nonviolent or property crimes has not been studied significantly. Interestingly, Kinworthy (2016) asserts that non-violence is linked to higher cognitive functioning in those with schizophrenia.Moreover, it is believed that individuals with Schizophrenia that are prone to violence can be distinguished from both those with Schizophrenia who are non-violent as well as controls based upon performance on neuropsychological tasks (Naudts and Hodgins, 2006; Schug and Raine, 2009), thus suggesting that cognitive impairment in individuals with Schizophrenia may contribute to violent behaviors and the presence of cognitive impairment can be utilized in determination of risk of future violence. (p. 20-21)Additionally, McCabe and colleagues (2012) found that “individuals with serious mental illness are more likely to commit and be prosecuted for minor nuisances than for serious crimes as compared to those without mental illness” (p. 281).Schizophrenia’s link to sexual crimes is one fraught with dramatization. “Despite sensationalized media accounts of violent schizophrenic sexual attackers… and reports of the bizarre and terrifying nature of these attacks…, sexual crimes appear to be comparatively rare among schizophrenic persons” (Schug & Fradella, 2015, p. 201). Studies by Alish and colleagues (as cited by Schug & Fradella, 2015) show that only a very small percentage - between 2-5% - of sexual offenders are diagnosed with schizophrenia. Additionally, psychotic offenders comprised a significantly lower percentage of sexual offenders than their nonpsychotic counterparts, according to Nijman and colleagues (as cited by Shug & Fradella, 2015). “Ultimately, however, schizophrenic sex offenders comprise a small subgroup of schizophrenic criminals requiring highly specialized treatment” (Schug & Fradella, 2015, p. 205).Interactions with the Criminal Justice SystemWith the obvious connects between schizophrenia and crime, it logically follows that schizophrenia regularly comes into contact with the criminal justice system. People with schizophrenia, like people with other mental illnesses, pose specific challenges to each level of the criminal justice system: law enforcement, the courts, and corrections.Law enforcement is the first line in the criminal justice system, and serve as the boots on the ground for much of what enters the criminal justice system. Law enforcement are often in contact with schizophrenics, who are either the perpetrator of a crime or the victim of one. Calls involving the mentally ill have increased potential to be unpredictable and possibly violent. Most law enforcement departments have a Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT), or an equivalently designated team, for incidents regarding someone with a known mentally illness such as schizophrenia. For example, the Escondido Police Department (n.d.) has a dedicated police officer partnered with a licensed medical health clinician that work together to assess mentally ill individuals and determine the next steps to take. However, these kinds of specially trained teams are not always available, and officers rarely knows the mental condition of suspects prior to their first engagement and are typically undertreated prior to contact with law enforcement (McCabe et al., 2012). As such, it is important for those on the front line of the criminal justice system to be given adequate training to understand and handle situations with the mentally ill. “Officers must possess an understanding of schizophrenia so that they realize that individuals suffering from schizophrenia may not readily understand or comply with police commands, or be able to communicate details of an offense where they are victims rather than perpetrators” (Walsh & Yun, 2013, p. 9).The courts are given the challenge of determining the culpability of those with mental illness. Additionally, they are responsible for determining if punishment or rehabilitation is the proper course of action for those with schizophrenia. Unfortunately, many schizophrenics go undiagnosed or untreated and end up getting sent to prison or jail for their criminal offenses, which according to schizophrenia.com (n.d.), are mostly minor offenses such as trespassing. According to McCabe and colleagues (2012), “the fact that the majority of mentally ill detainees do not receive adequate treatment before arrest, while incarcerated, or upon reentry makes successful transition into the community all the more challenging” (p. 281). In order to best serve this challenging population group, the courts must prioritize treatment at mental health facilities over incarceration in jails or prisons.Statistically, “at least 10% of jail populations, 18% of state prison populations, and 16% of federal prison populations have severe mental illness” (McCabe et al., 2012, p. 272). Schizophrenia is a major mental illness that is well represented in correctional facilities across the country. According to schizophrenia.com (n.d.), “the vast majority of people with schizophrenia who are in jail have been charged with misdemeanors.” Prison life is not easy for any inmate, but it is especially poor for those with schizophrenia and can even lead to worsened symptoms. According to Blitz, Wolff, & Shi (2008), “Overall, both males and females with mental disorder are disproportionately represented among victims of physical violence inside prison.” In addition, a well representation within jails and prisons, a significant number of people with schizophrenia exist within this country’s probation/parole system. Walsh & Yun (2013) postulate that proper mental health training is even more necessary for probation and parole officers than for law enforcement officers, due to their more frequent contact with the mentally ill. They note that supervising people with schizophrenia is disconcerting and a large task given the mandatory treatment orders, a medical concern that must be enforced by the officer, who has no medical training.ConclusionSchizophrenia is a calamitous mental illness that is linked to increased criminality. This link is best understood by looking at its characteristics and etiology, which show schizophrenia to be a challenging and complex mental illness This complexity leads to much misinformation and misunderstanding on the part of the public and our law enforcement professionals. Schizophrenia’s interaction with the criminal justice system is excessive and is often fruitless to the never-ending pursuit of peace in our communities. It seems that the best course of action is for our criminal justice system to advocate for and implement public services that reduce its future involvement in the affairs of mental illness. In this way, the criminal justice system is best able to serve the community while also ensuring proper treatment of those with schizophrenia.ReferencesBlitz, C. L., Wolff, N. L., & Shi, J. L. (2008). Physical victimization in prison: The role of mental illness [Abstract].International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 31 (5), 385–393. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.08.005 Escondido Police Department. (n.d.). Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT). Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://police.escondido.org/pert.aspx. Kinworthy, K.M. (2016). Relationship between crime, psychological diagnosis and cognitive functioning (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Accession 10193342) McCabe, P. J., Christopher, P. P., Druhn, N., Roy-Bujnowski, K. M., Grudzinskas, A. J., & Fisher, W. H. (2012). Arrest Types and Co-occurring Disorders in Persons with Schizophrenia or Related Psychoses. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 39 (3), 271–284. doi: 10.1007/s11414-011-9269-4 Morgan, F., Morgan, V., Clare, J., Valuri, G., Woodman, R., Ferrante, R., … Jablensky, A. (2008). Schizophrenia and offending: area of residence and the impact of social disorganization and urbanicity.Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, (365), 1–6. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.libraryresources.waldorf.edu/docview/189452455?accountid=40957 Munkner, R., Haastrup, S., Joergensen, T., & Kramp, P. (2003). The temporal relationship between schizophrenia and crime. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38 (7), 347–353. doi: 10.1007/s00127-003-0650-3 Schizophrenia.com. (2010). Schizophrenia and Poverty, Crime and Violence. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from http://schizophrenia.com/poverty.htm#. Schug, R., & Fradella, H. (2015). Mental illness and crime . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Walsh, A., & Yun, I. (2013). Schizophrenia: Causes, crime, and implications for criminology and criminal justice. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 41 (2), 188–202. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlcj.2013.04.003