One of my childhood friends once told me of the story of his mother who worked as a magistrate in Montgomery. He narrated about a homicide investigation in their neighborhood that had taken some weeks. Several people had been arrested in connection to the murder of a four-year-old child. However, when the investigations were exhausted, the police discovered that a relative to my friend’s mother, was implicated and they arraigned him before a court in which she was to preside over his case. On the decision day, the courtroom was full of relatives of the magistrate who had come to attempt influencing her decision since they had appealed to her to save the accused person and even confessed that the teenager was guilty of the murder. On the other side, the defendant, the parents to the dead boy, sat quietly, sobbing at times at the sight of the accused because he had killed their only child. Therefore, the magistrate was divided between sentencing the perpetrator, who was a minor, in favor of the defendants and feeling for her relatives at the expense of the plaintiff.
Theoretical Analysis and Solution of the Ethical Dilemma
Utilitarianism provides one of the most useful approaches to analyzing the dilemma presented above. First, it is worthwhile understanding that utilitarian theorists consider that the moral uprightness or wrongness of an action relies on the effects they produce (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy 1). Precisely, the only effects that deeds can produce with relevance to the constructs of the theory re bad and good results associated with them. In their application to the legal sphere, the utilitarian approach provides two mechanisms for analysis. The first mechanism is the Act Utilitarian Approach, which analyzes the outcomes the actions of a given person while the second considers the effects of the types of actions (Harsanyi 93).
While the two utilitarian approaches might be confusing, they apply to the case study in duality. The first approach is to consider if the actions of murder with which the teenager was charged was morally correct. The second way is to analyze if the killing in question was desirable for the parents of the victim. In this case, the objective of utilitarianism is always to reduce the bad things that reduce the levels of happiness in life and increase the levels of good things that make people happier (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy 1). Therefore, decision should always be made with the two considerations and the overall idea of happiness.
In application, the act of murder is morally wrong. In fact, the action brought discomfort among the victim’s relative, which is interpreted in the levels of panic they showed before the ruling and inflicted grief among the parents of the victim. In addition, the effect of the action brought grief and regret among the parties involved in the case. Therefore, it is conclusive that the both the action of the accused and the effects of the such a deed were wrong. From the utilitarian approach, everyone should bear responsibility for their actions, which is why they should strive to engage in actions that increase their levels of happiness. Therefore, the accused should be punished because his actions reduced the levels of happiness of the rest of the people around him.
Works Cited
Harsanyi, John C. "Morality and the theory of rational behavior." Social research (2007): 623-656.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy "Utilitarianism, Act and Rule." Iep.utm.edu. N. p., 2018. Web. 18 Apr. 2018.
