The topic of ethics in criminal justice has become more important over the last decade as concerns about coercive accountability and increased public authority have prompted ethical questions about the actions of those who exercise power over citizens. The subject of criminal justice ethics does not only involve those who work with the general population. Correctional officers in prisons and jails often face ethical dilemmas on a daily basis. One of the most common ethical issue that arises in correctional facilities is the invitation to commit sexual misconduct. How these officers deal with such situations profoundly affects the safety and performance of due diligence.
The corrections profession is more difficult to exist today. It is usually a day of dealing with some of the most difficult, violent and recalcitrant criminals behind closed doors. Due to staff shortages in some areas, correctional officers can be found working inside housing pods with 100 maximum security inmates under direct supervision. This is a very serious situation to be presented to someone who has received only a short training and lacks experience.
Sexual harassment in a correctional facility can be defined as any behavior or act of a sexual nature directed at an inmate by an employee, volunteer, visitor or manager. This includes acts or attempts to commit such acts including, but not limited to, sexual assault, sexual abuse, sexual harassment, conduct of a sexual nature or implication, obscenity and unreasonable invasion of privacy. Sexual harassment also includes, but is not limited to, conversations or correspondence that suggests a romantic or sexual relationship between an inmate and any of the above-mentioned parties.
During the 1990s, US correctional jurisdictions recognized the problem of staff-inmate sexual misconduct and that this was a problem to be addressed. In April 1999, the federal government, 41 states in California, Texas, and the District of Columbia passed criminal laws. /a> certain violations of sexual misconduct in prisons. Obviously, this problem has set the country apart as a very serious problem.
The consequences of sexual misconduct by staff in prisons are many. First of all, it violates the law, which is somewhat ironically involved in the parties involved. It also jeopardizes the security of the facility and creates stress and trauma for everyone involved. Subsequently, the support of correctional officers severely undermined the public. Every case of sexual impropriety that the public investigates in the news undermines any amount of faith that citizens have in the correctional system. In addition to public support, it also applies to public statutory amendments, therefore legislative support for funding and reduction. reform It also excludes management and staff from liability and creates a very hostile-work-environment. It creates a sense of distrust, when the staff must trust each other in the dangers posed and guarded.
Over the past 5 years, several national reports have addressed, explored, and investigated the issue of sexual misconduct among staff. Although the majority of these reports stem from the alleged abuse of women, the sexual accusation of staff is by no means limited to “women’s issues”. Staff/inmate relationships are gender-biased across all sectors – staff and female inmates; male and female attached; male staff and male inmates; both female and staff and male inmates. More importantly, the staff of sex offenders severely impacts the agency’s ability to achieve its mission, regardless of the gender of those involved.
Most correctional institutions have been affected in some way by the sexual immorality bacillus. Involved or unaware staff of sexual misconduct can have serious consequences not only for the agency, but also for the staff and the inmate. These serious consequences can be seen in various sexual offense cases brought before the courts. A federal judge awarded damages in excess of $5.3 million to the former D.C. prison. they were sentenced to prison. The prison guards were accused of forcing other officers to perform a striptease show. DC The Department of Corrections filed an appeal of the decision.
In another case, three women in Federal-bureau-of-investigation”>Federal Bureau Prisco [BOP ] facility in Dublin, California, in August and September 1995. The women were beaten, sexually assaulted, forcibly prostituted by staff who gave access to the plaintiff’s cells, and held in a segregated wing of the prison For swearing, at least one of the inmate officers suffered severe retaliation. Three weeks after he resigned, he opened his cell, without explanation. /a>, and three men entered, he beat her, and threatened to repeat her complaints, the sum of $500,000 being awarded to the plaintiffs.
All properly trained correctional staff know that inmates can be abusive, whether male or female. Staff should always instruct others to protect themselves from all attempts within their authority. The field of corrections is a challenging and challenging career, but ethical standards must be upheld despite the difficult situations in which correctional staff may find themselves.
Report:
- Sources 1.) Ethical Dilemma in Corrections, by Albertus P. De Amicis. American Jails. November/December 2005. 2.) National Institute of Corrections – Training Guide for Investigators Staff Sexual Disobedience . www.nicic.org
