Wasted Honor -- - Say What you Need To Say......: 11/11/12

Wasted Honor -

Carl R. ToersBijns is the author of the Wasted Honor Trilogy [Wasted Honor I,II and Gorilla Justice] and his newest book From the Womb to the Tomb, the Tony Lester Story, which is a reflection of his life and his experiences as a correctional officer and a correctional administrator retiring with the rank of deputy warden in the New Mexico and Arizona correctional systems.

Carl also wrote a book on his combat experience in the Kindle book titled - Combat Medic - Men with destiny - A red cross of Valor -

Carl is considered by many a rogue expert in the field of prison security systems since leaving the profession. Carl has been involved in the design of many pilot programs related to mental health treatment, security threat groups, suicide prevention, and maximum custody operational plans including double bunking max inmates and enhancing security for staff. He invites you to read his books so you can understand and grasp the cultural and political implications and influences of these prisons. He deals with the emotions, the stress and anxiety as well as the realities faced working inside a prison. He deals with the occupational risks while elaborating on the psychological impact of both prison worker and prisoner.

His most recent book, Gorilla Justice, is an un-edited raw fictional version of realistic prison experiences and events through the eyes of an anecdotal translation of the inmate’s plight and suffering while enduring the harsh and toxic prison environment including solitary confinement.

Carl has been interviewed by numerous news stations and newspapers in Phoenix regarding the escape from the Kingman prison and other high profile media cases related to wrongful deaths and suicides inside prisons. His insights have been solicited by the ACLU, Amnesty International, and various other legal firms representing solitary confinement cases in California and Arizona. He is currently working on the STG Step Down program at Pelican Bay and has offered his own experience insights with the Center of Constitutional Rights lawyers and interns to establish a core program at the SHU units. He has personally corresponded and written with SHU prisoners to assess the living conditions and how it impacts their long term placement inside these type of units that are similar to those in Arizona Florence Eyman special management unit where Carl was a unit deputy warden for almost two years before his promotion to Deputy Warden of Operations in Safford and Eyman.

He is a strong advocate for the mentally ill and is a board member of David's Hope Inc. a non-profit advocacy group in Phoenix and also serves as a senior advisor for Law Enforcement Officers Advocates Council in Chino, California As a subject matter expert and corrections consultant, Carl has provided interviews and spoken on national and international radio talk shows e.g. BBC CBC Lou Show & TV shows as well as the Associated Press.

I use sarcasm, satire, parodies and other means to make you think!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Friday, November 16, 2012

Morality Issues - which one is the right one?

Situational Morality in Correctional Officers

By Carl R. ToersBijns, former deputy warden, ASPC Eyman, Florence, AZ

Situational morality is a 24 /7 issue and concern for those that are exposed to opportunities to do something wrong whether on duty or off duty. I agree that being human is a major element of the formula but the resolution or answer lies in the manner you were brought up and with what values you base your right or wrong on and how it impacts your behavior under certain situations.

We all have to take personal responsibility for our own actions and being human does not excuse you from deviating from your values, the laws, your professional oath or your personal principles.

Compromising your personal moral values and workplace ethics leads to other major flaws in doing your job. Compromising any task, role or decision impedes your abilities to perform according to your oath as a peace officer puts other people in danger.

The consequences outweigh the need to do so in most cases but that does not appear to stop some from committing the act. The severity in receiving possible sanctions e.g. suspension, termination, conviction of a misdemeanor or felony crime should halt you in your tracks but as it has been demonstrated many times over, it doesn’t seem to stop those who take the risks of breaking the rules and disregard the purposes of such rules.

First off, one must distinguish the difference between absolute morality and situational morality. Being human is being mortal thus room for error is given as humans. It is fair to say that to obtain “absolute morality” is impossible as a human being. It’s a concept that can be vigorously debated but is likely to reveal flaws in the concept or expectations since it would require humans to be flawless in nature.

The main difference between absolute morality and situational morality is the fact that situational concepts deals exclusively with an individual’s dealings with life and its temptations. What is valid temptation for one is another one’s vice and deterrent to stay on the straight and narrow sort of speak. It is fair to say that as humans, we will act according to how it benefits us.

The key to this scenario are the words such as “however”, “but” or “unless” that makes morality a situational one for individuals and allows their minds to justify the acts although they can be contrary to common sense or internal moral feelings. Hence the words “greed” and “corrupt” comes to mind and the scenario has been changed where the act to permit an act is justified by the means and the need self-imposed by the individual or a group of individuals.

One could argue that our moral values are infused or originated by the moral inclinations of our cultural upbringings. However there is a distinct difference between cultural morality and situational morality issues as one is basically a socialist viewpoint or values and the other is based on personal or righteous viewpoints thus they could be in conflict with each other as one occupies the same space of the other. One can see how this conflict results in a disagreement and the difference between right and wrong. Therefore, it could be said that situational morality is or can be a derivative of the moral conditions in every sense of the word and can be copied.

Politicians use this concept of situational morality to cover the “good for all or many” while in fact, it may be self-serving and criminal in nature.

Correctional officers may use this scenario scheme to justify the use of force or develop a relationship with an inmate that breaches the security of the facility thus under certain circumstances, they are “right” in their own mindset at the time and fail to see the rational or irrational misbehaviors other see.

Therefore it is the personal gain or outcome of such situational moral confrontations that determine whether it was right or wrong and not the basic human instinct to follow individual societal or personal philosophies, principles or ethics is such cases.

It has been said often that if it makes you happy “do it” but then, this rule should be followed up with “what makes you happy” should conform with your personal values, ethical obligations and principles developed over your lifetime.

Hopefully these basic instincts, feelings, inferences and ideas are instilled by good parenting, educational experiences, basic and advanced job related training and development skills and trainers or mentors that shaped or guided your thinking into the positive light rather than the darkness distinguishing the difference between right and wrong with a clear line rather than an invisible and blurred one.

November 16, 2012