Drugs at a Friend\'s House the Ethical

Drugs at a Friend's House

The ethical dilemma of this scenario revolves around the question of what an officer's duties are when he or she is technically 'off-duty.' There is little question that when someone's life is at stake, such as during an armed robbery, that an officer has a moral obligation to intervene. However, the terms of this scenario are far more ambiguous. There is no immediate, obvious risk to life but persons are engaged in illegal drug use.

In this situation, it is unlikely that the officer's friend knows there is drug use going on at his house -- he would probably not invite a police officer into his house and allow his friends to use drugs. However, making an arrest would be profoundly disruptive and embarrassing to the friend's party. According to police protocol, "remember, you have NO LEGAL OR DEPARTMENTAL obligation to get involved, especially if such intervention places you in a position of peril or such intervention requires that you behave recklessly, carelessly or in a suicidal manner" (Ryan 2007). Apprehending the users would likely not put an officer in 'peril,' but given the non-life-threatening nature of the offense, identifying one's self as an officer, given the users a stern 'talking to,' and reprimanding them without arresting them would likely be the best 'middle ground' path to take. This would alert the persons that their behavior was wrong, without placing the officer in a position of monitoring security at the party, a capacity he was not asked to fill by his friend.

Scenario 2 - Accepting a Gift

In this instance, the gift was clearly not intended as a bribe or in any way to influence the officer's actions towards the market. However, virtually all police departments across the country explicitly prohibit officers accepting gifts in any way, shape, or form. The argument against accepting a gift is that even something small like a free doughnut and coffee sets a bad example. "The issue goes deeper than whether the gratuity influences an officer's judgment…In the fight against crime, police departments depend on public cooperation, which in turn depends on how much respect the public has for police officers…When people see an officer getting something free, they question whether that officer will be impartial, or they may resent the fact that officer gets special treatment" (Berry 1991).

However, the argument in favor of accepting the gift is the fact that this seems to be a one-time personal expression of appreciation, rather than a public offering. Moreover, it may be that in the culture of the owner of the small market, such gifts are not only acceptable but expected and in the interests of advancing good will of the department towards the police department, it might behoove the officer to accept it. Most departments do allow officers to use a certain amount of discretion and common sense. This means that officers can accept "articles of negligible value'" or "social courtesies which promote good public relations" (Berry 1991). Thus, in this once instance, I would accept the gift but tell the man that in general it is not department policy to accept gifts and tell him it would be not necessary in the future, much as the thought was appreciated.

Scenario 3 - Homosexual Partner

Sensitivity training is an important component of becoming an effective officer. Officer Davis must understand that his personal feelings about the sexuality of Office Jones are irrelevant to his ability to work well with the officer. Just as if the officer was an African-American, a woman, Jewish, or a member of another historically-discriminated against minority, police officers do not nor should not have the ability to allow personal prejudice to dictate with whom they partner. I would suggest that Davis go for further sensitivity training and education. Not only is it essential that he learns to work well with his fellow officer, but should he be in a position to defend a gay man or deal with an altercation of gay-bashing, the police department must be assured that the officer is 100% 'on board.'