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

Racial Profiling hurts community Policing

Racial profiling exists only in the mind of those who make it their own agenda either con or pro compliance with the laws and their own personal believe that it is happening to them or others.

Therefore, conditionally, it does exist. It is not a universal concept applied by everyone or every police agency since we are talking about cops. It is conditional in every sense of the phrase and subject to many moral values as well as existing laws and norm values in our society. This can be defined by demographics as well as geographical histories, customs, practices and traditions but nevertheless, a negative input on how we perceive things in our head.

What we have here is two arguments. The first finding the objective definition of racial profiling that includes compelling reasons that it does exist in content and context given. The second is what "we" believe is racial profiling. The truth lies somewhere in between and whenever you are subjective about any issue, then the power is swayed towards that "believe" and that you are right no matter how the law or truth is read. However, this is not a method of compelling reasoning and is flawed severely.

Contextuality expresses the fact that an action does not exist in a vacuum. When we examine an action, we cannot ignore that the action takes place in a given context. This context is necessary to evaluate the consequences of an action, because it informs the values that are affected by the action. Unlike the phrase “a picture tells a thousand words” there should only be one inference or understanding of what really happened and how it was created. This is called a finding. This is where the facts [hopefully objective in nature] come in to rationalize the event or behaviors and explains the truth in objective and clear sense rather than emotional or irrational in manner.

It is important here to understand that while values themselves are objective in all ways, their specific implementation differs from person to person and from culture to culture thus what may be normal in one setting may be abnormal in another setting. Hence each case is different and must be examined for facts, not feelings or believes one is telling the truth.
Community policing is effective when the police officers are culturally diverse and trained in recognizing these values as norms thus avoiding stereotyping when responding to a call or incident whenever possible. Police policies may differ from region to region, district to district and is applied by the officer's knowledge of such direction. It does not imply racial profiling per se but can come under scrutiny if there are acts or words said that warrant a closer look at this incident to acquire a truth statement or finding.

In order to win an argument that racial profiling existed during the event, the officer or the subject [or witnesses] must effectively prove or disprove “objective moral facts” in this type of case and provide a compelling reason to believe they exist within the statements provided making their statement more powerful and truthful in the end than the other person’ strong believe that was based on their own or individual subjective matter and personal values rather than facts.

In other words, racial profiling hurts law enforcement as it disconnects the community with those who are there to help them. Unfortunately, the perception of truth may be distorted by the subjectivity involved on either side when the persons involved are viewed to be racist as this kicks in the defensive mechanisms we depend on for survival and self-defense. It is hard to convince another person you are not being a racist when they have already made up their minds that what you [cop] are doing is based on their believe you are profiling them on race hence the confrontation,relationship is heightened to a new and volatile level.

 

Hybrid Governance in Prisons and other public services

Hybrid governance with Prisons

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

The age of hybrid governance is already upon us. Arizona today has made a clear decision to allow private prison contractors to occupy vital middle ground between our public-owned prison system and numerous and various private-sector organizations. The ideology is capitalistic and powerful as is has already established firm roots in the daily practice of running our prisons today.

 

What hasn’t been talked about is the parasitic nature of this relationship and how it is designed to absorb more government functions as time goes by. No longer an emerging market, private prison contractors have established the practice and future of public governance based on lessons learned from the past and have merged sizable government stakes, subsidies and management decision making that reflect a practice of preferential treatment in more than many ways.

 

There is no doubt that this merger has compromised those leading elements of the public sector’s regulatory environment as they evolve existing regulations to meet the new hybrid status between government and private industries.

 

This changes the traditional roles of the past and created an infusion of ideologies beyond the traditional division between labor and market demands. In fact, this merger is almost invisible and when active to the fullest extend, will remain blurred creating confusion to the taxpayers as to what actual role the government plays versus the role of private business in our state.

 

There is no secret between the cooperative levels of this state’s governor and elected officials towards private prison groups as there has been significant wealth distributed between the two parties.

 

Today, Arizona is witnessing a massive agenda of proliferation in the number of new contracts and business dealings with new parastatal entities around the state as well as outside the state. It impacts the entire criminal justice system including the administrative and judicial elements of law with little or no scrutiny of how business is conducted under this new hybrid process.

 

Public authorities have been compromised to be managed privately and secretively based on private enterprise standards not subject to open meeting laws or other regulatory requirements.

 

Power diffusion is the key in this methodology as more decisions are conducted in the shadows of corporate strength and weaker public infusions to the table. Operating in such a closed market with little scrutiny will change the integrity of government and allow growth or development of mediocrity in performance and corruption for many who are willing to ride this train as a parasite leeches off the body.

 

Thus on the pretense of improving state run agencies and reducing inefficiencies, the privatization of public service will be handed over to those corporations that can meet the productive needs of this market.

 

Power diffusion continues even in the shadow of strength. Recent decades have witnessed a gradual revival of parastatals that foreshadowed their present surge. They gained access to international capital markets and have leveraged investment to expand operations.

 

By floating shares on exchanges, contracting with auditing firms, establishing independent boards of directors, restricting subsidies from the government, and improving recruiting standards and managerial incentives, parastatals have been able to make themselves competitive with the private sector justifying their creation and existence by those that praise the concept.  

 

Today there are very few, if any, areas of governance that have not been placed in the custody of parastatals entities that undertake commercial activities on the government’s behalf. They range from public transportation, medical care, economic and logistical support of state utilities down to the smallest micro purpose of government services such as the maintenance of parks, recreation and other support agencies.

 

There are reasons for this transition.  First and foremost, state governments are broke. They lack funding and in fact are unable to manage current needs as they exist. Frustration has led to exploring alternatives and aside from the traditional practices of raising taxes or other fees they have considerable needs to improve the infrastructure and manpower requirement to meet the full demands placed on them by law and other regulatory mandates.

 

In short, parastatals are the entities everyone wants to do business with because in places where politics is an opaque void or a byzantine labyrinth, they “get things done.” Collectively, these types of parastatals have been crucial for rising powers to capture the commanding heights of personal wealth and finance.

 

Their recruitment of top investment-banking and private-equity talent and riskier investments are a major departure from decades of more conservative asset management by central banks allowing hybrid governance to coexist in many places.

 

It’s a sign of the times and Arizona is smack in the middle of such financial relationships, endorsements and futuristic expectations of spreading this hybrid governance concept to other states in due time.

 

Source:

http://www.mckinsey.com/features/government_designed_for_new_times/the_rise_of_hybrid_governance

Stealing Your DNA - Correctional Officers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSaeH7C20_k&feature=plcp

Corruption from Within the ADOC

The Rise & Fall of Corrections inside Arizona

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

The primary cause of the failing adult prison system in Arizona will not be the internal weaknesses or even a break away from the agency’s mission or goals and objectives. Rather, it will be the deliberate deterioration of the masses under control [correctional officers and other public employees] that will cause it to plummet into catastrophic conditions while failing all public safety expectations.

Although it is with most certainty this will be clouded by biased arguments by those in power insisting in 20^th Century sensibilities and rationalizing it was the weakness of the systems that caused the failures and not human as it is proposed in these writings, the fact remains it was deliberate sabotage from the inside that caused the failure by design.

Corrections ability to meet public safety and mission statements are being negatively influenced for the worse and not the better plans or policies by those hired by the chief executive officer in charge. It is with high expectations this CEO works for the chief executive officer for the state and is paid according to his ability to wreak havoc and convert public [state] interest into private [CCA, GEO, MTC, etc] interests throughout the state.

The agency’s ability to withstand numerous failures without severe repercussions from those in power makes it easier to manipulate and destroy the agency from within and over time fragment all areas and services to the point of inefficiency and total chaos making it easier for the CEO to justify the means used to quell the disorder and use pre-determined final fiscal and economical resolutions already on the bargaining table.

Thus the ability to survive systemic malfunctions e.g. escapes, attempted escapes, disturbances, racial or hate crimes, deaths, suicides, assaults, delayed medical treatment, insufficient mental health services, excessive litigation and lawsuits etc. allows them to organize positive influence among those working in concert [chain of command] with the CEO and create a false confidence within the agency and generate instability to maintain strong unfair discipline, impact and lower staff morale, and deny capable leadership ultimately fragmenting the spirit and strength of the troops [correctional officers] working on two front lines of this confrontation [combat] with politics and prisoners.

In fact, it would be the unofficial co-sponsored adverse acts of these prisoners that would contribute to the overall success in decimating the agency’s effectiveness and gain trust from the powers to be in office, to convert public trust and ownership into contractual obligations to take over a failing and faltering ship to the private prison business for salvation and redemption of all concerned and involved in this matter.

Consequently it is logical to deduct that the acts of these prisoners who have been mistreated with “deliberate indifference” based on design will create mass undesirable and most violent and repulsive acts that were allowed to be well planned and organized by those considered being “reasonable partners of these designated covert allies.”

This is done in a quest for total loss of control and repugnant accountability of internal strife and eventual systems failures throughout the state warranting a new lease on life with long-term contractual obligations with friendly allies [private prison contractors] in the end and replacing state employees with private security guards and prison grounds kept and managed by private security contractors and associated vendors.

This is the final quest for such a plan in Arizona prisons. A more detailed paper will be written on this topic and all strategies, motives, actions and outcome expectations will be recorded as a matter of record in some time in the future as we put together this grand scheme to defraud Arizona and its public employees of their inherited future to be successful in public safety and maintain their full time employment status as public servants with according wages, benefits and opportunities.

We will identify those in a position to collaborate with the CEO in this strategic plan to turn public prisons into privately controlled prisons as well as all the services associated with such a venture making investors, stockholders and stock takers richer and stronger in political terms. 

October 26, 2012

 

 

Why Care??? Because ............... read this

Why Care for Prisoner’s Healthcare?

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

A recent incident reported by an investigative reporter, who received a tip from a prisoner’s family member about the wrongful use of a needle syringe inside a state prison, made the local mainstream news. The reporter revealed poor medical practices as far as “sharp controls” and demonstrated the critical need for needle control within our prisons to prevent exposures to infectious diseases.

 

This exposure to an infectious disease has been downplayed by the Arizona Corrections Department and only warranted a $ 10,000 dollar fine for not following sound medical standards related to syringe and needle control as well as the use of such instruments. It is exactly this type of lack of concern for the prisoner’s health that impacts our community’s health and public safety daily.

The spread of infectious diseases among prisons impacts not just the prisoner but also the prison staff and the general public. The care for HIV, AIDS, Hepatitis and other infectious diseases within our prisons continues to suffer as our medical providers contracted with the state fail to meet their moral and legal responsibilities to treat prisoners in a timely, effective manner.

 

The general public must know or should know that whatever happens or whoever lives or works behind prison walls and razor wire impacts our communities when the workers go home and when the prisoners are released.  We owe it to the community, our families and our neighbors to protect them from infections by insisting the medical provider for our prison system adheres to and practices sound infectious disease education, prevention and intervention methods.

The infection of a person not incarcerated and the infection of a person incarcerated should be the same and treated with the same priorities. There is a significant difference between the two persons that make it a critical concern to all and that is a person in prison does not have the access or ready means to seek self-protection and other preventive steps as those in the free world.

The bottom line here is we must demand our government takes the appropriate steps to protect prisoners and prison officers alike for it is logical and reasonable to bring this matter to a logical conclusion that by protecting them, we protect society.

 

October 21, 2012

Report Card on Arizona Prisons

Arizona Prisons, Too Little, Too Late

A Report Card

 

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

 

Introduction – This report card is used for the purpose of evaluating and documenting information collected in local media streams with the sole purpose of providing guidance and support to those advocating better, safer and less costly prisons inside Arizona. Arizona spends more than $ 1 billion dollars on prison management in the past fiscal years and continues to ask for additional funding to keep their agency afloat.

 

Background – The opinions expressed in this report are those of its author and takes into consideration that most data received or collected is anecdotal in nature and may be personal or subjective based on inferences or cultural insights.

 

Overview – This overview is based on rational conclusions acquired and gained a period of time working inside southwest prisons and throughout the approximately thirty years in law enforcement having the experience of working the Arizona prisons for five years and working another twenty years in the New Mexico prisons offering a valid southwest cultural viewpoint on how prisons are management in this part of the country.

 

Report Card – In January, 2009, a new agency director was appointed by then governor Janice K. Brewer. His appointment was interim and pending permanent appointment and approval by the Legislature. Between the years 2004 and 2009, the Arizona prison system was under the directorship of Dora Schriro, a progressive liberal minded individual who focused on inmate programming and education priorities.

 

Mr. Schriro started a new trend in Arizona by promoting self-help programs, therapeutic environment conditions for the mentally ill and expanded the inmate employment program to the point where there was between 79 % to 84 % of the inmate gainfully employed or going to school.

 

This report card will document the progress made since her departure in January 2009, and the arrival of a new director, Charles L. Ryan, a former Arizona corrections official who had returned from tenure with the federal government and assigned in an official capacity at the Abu Ghraib Iraqi prison to train and develop prison programs for that country.

 

 

Summary of Findings – The prevalence of mismanagement complaints about public prisons inside Arizona has made the headlines now for more than three years. These events are well documented and warrant research and analysis by those responsible for public safety and the preservation of civil rights inside Arizona.

 

The reader should focus on the number of staff assaults that have occurred, the number of “natural deaths” reported, the number of suicides committed within the last two years and the flawed delivery of medical and mental health services that are neglected and delayed raising an awareness issue of known cases of communicable diseases, chronic illnesses and other sanitation and health conditions that may impact the communities when prisoners are released,

 

Government’s Response – There have been no significant, positive developments to report since the arrival of Charles L. Ryan as director. Although it appears he might have implemented a number of strategically goals and objectives within his five year plan, they have not made any noteworthy impact through these initiatives and leave much of these problems status quo for the time being.

 

It is clear that government has failed to provide the resources, leadership and vision necessary to address in a comprehensive and progressive manner those issues raised by their own investigative reports, and those by the media or advocacy groups vocal about changing the manner prisons are being operated.

 

There appears to be a lack of coordination and harmonization between this agency and those assigned required services according to the rule of law and internal policies and procedures. As a result, the standards of care related to custodial and healthcare available to prisoners varies between failing and barely meeting minimum requirements per law, standards and contractual obligations.

 

Conclusion – Prison systems have a moral, but also a legal responsibility to act without further delay to address these urgent issues reported and known to be deficient in nature or operation. Today, the government continues to fail to meet its responsibilities for public safety, staff safety and prisoner related safety issues.

There are few positive developments that have occurred since 2009 but the government is clearly not doing all they can do in the matters presented in this report card. It comes down to the quality of leadership within this agency that will make the difference between meeting its moral and legal obligations to the public and do much more to improve the current conditions as they stand.

 

Staff Issues – Cumulative Grade – F

 

Since January, 2009, the number of staff:

 

• resignations have increased
• disciplinary actions have increased
• grievances have increased
• assaults have increased

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• manpower resources have decreased
• availability on shift have decreased
• training quality has decreased
• protective measures for staff decreased
• morale has decreased

 

Security Issues – Cumulative Grade – D

 

Since January 2009, the number of:

• escapes or escape attempts have increased
• inmate assaults have increased
• double bunking of prisoners in all custody levels has increased
• hostage situations have increased
• disturbances have increased
• contraband found has increased
• drug related violence has increased
• gang related violence has increased
• prisoners housed in max custody has increased

 

Prison Self- Improvement Skill issues – Cumulative Grade – F

 

Since January, 2009, prisoner:

·        educational programs have decreased

·        vocational programs have decreased

·        employment opportunities have decreased

 

Prison Medical / Dental / Mental Issue – Cumulative Grade – F

 

Since January, 2009, prison health:

 

• medical treatment delays have increased
• medical community health risks have increased
• medical communicable/infectious diseases have increased
• medical services for the geriatric elderly has increased
• medical related “natural deaths” have increased
• medical related mistakes e.g. needle control have increased
• medical use of out-of-date medication has increased

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• medical priorities have decreased
• medical education/prevention on infectious diseases has decreased
• medical education of drugs or substance abuse have decreased
• medical staffing has decreased
• medical treatment has decreased
• medical prescription drugs have decreased
• medical referrals have decreased
• medical appointments have decreased

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• dental priorities have decreased
• dental services have decreased
• dental appointments have decreased

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• mental illness population has increased
• mental illness housing in solitary confinement has increased
• mental illness related suicides have increased
• mental illness housing in general population has increased

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• mental illness services have decreased
• mental illness treatment has decreased
• mental illness prescriptions have decreased
• mental illness cultural sensitivity has decreased
• mental illness segregation has decreased