Felica Robinson is running for school board in a large eastern city. Her opponen

Question

Felica Robinson is running for school board in a large eastern city. Her opponent is conducting what Felicia regards as a highly unehtical campaign. In addition to twisting the facts about school taxes, the opponent is pandering to racial prejudice by raising resentment against African Americans and receently arrived immigants. Five days bfore the election, Felicia, who is slightly behind in the pols, learns that the district attorney is preparing to indict her opponent for shady business practices. But the indictment will not be formally issued until after the election. Nor can it be taken as evidence that her opponent is guilty - like all citizens, he has the right to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Still , new of the indictment could be enough to throw the election Felicia's way, and her advisers urge her to make it an issue in her remaining campaign speeches. Should Felicia follow their advice?

Explain what whould be the most ethlial course of action in her case, and why

Explanation / Answer

Felicia should take their advice. Ethically, the person is innocent until proven guilty. By bringing up the case of her indictment, Felicia will ethically be violating the ethical rights of her opponent. However, we must consider that if Felicia truly believes that her opponent is unethical, then letting him win is an unethical treatment to the entire school as they will then be in the hands of an unethical person.

Thus the problem boils down to unethical treatment towards school(by not bringing up the indictment) or unethical treatment towards her opponent(by bringing up the issue). Thus, I believe that in the larger interest, Felicia should go ahead with mentioning the impending indictment of her opponent.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse F
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.