Use three (3) of the ethical approaches to analyze the following scenario
1. Consequentialism: Is the act morally justified
2. Rule consequentialism: Following of rules that will normally
produce good consequences
3. Deontology: – Moral rules that must be followed,
regardless of circumstances
4. Principlism: – Applying set of prima facie principles
to an ethical dilemma
5. Intuition: – Gut feeling that something is right of
6. Hermeneutics: – Promotes listening and talking through
7. Casuistry: – Deal with one case at a time, then rely
on that case in other cases (precedent)
8. Feminist Ethics: – Ensuring that outcomes do not
9. Ethics of Care: – Care as the core ethical value
10. Virtue Ethics: – Promotes development of good
characteristics that are seen to promote human
11. Relativism: Extreme No right or wrong answer, Moderate Nearly always a range of acceptable moral answers, we cannot choose between them
You are advising a company defending against a claim for sexual harassment brought by an employee who cannot afford a lawyer and so has brought the proceedings herself. It is clear from your investigations that the claim is justified and that a serious wrong has been done to the employee. However, you notice that, in the paperwork, the claimant has made a technical error on which the company could rely to make a legal defense. What do you do?
Write a thesis paragraph for your roadmap/overview.
Use the CREAC method to organize your response.
CREAC (Conclusion, Rule, Explanation of Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is a common approach to organizing analysis of a specific legal issue.
The Rule for this scenario will be the definition of the ethical approaches: See book terms above
The Explanation will be an explanation of the rule in your own words because there are no precedents for the ethical approaches.