Reforming Magistrate District Courts in PA

This project is design to focus on ways of reforming Magistrate District Courts in Pennsylvania to make them more efficient, and to operate in accordance with the Rule of Law[1].  One of the principles of the rule of law is the independence of the judiciary.   We will attempt to complete this daunting task by applying the Eightfold path to more effective problem solving (Bardach, Eugene- A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis).  Very little research has been done in this subject area, but it is conspicuous that, there are fingerprints of inefficiency of these courts due to the limited powers vested in them, and the method of electing officials to adjudicate proceedings of the court.  Below is an analysis of our research to reform these courts:

The Pennsylvania Judicial System is a hierarchical pyramid system with the Supreme Court at the top which comprised of 7 Judges.  This is followed by the Superior and the Commonwealth Courts with 15, and 9 Judges respectively.  The third layer is composed of the Common Pleas Courts which are dispersed in 60 judicial districts with 439 Judges.  In the final layer, there are the Magisterial  District Courts with 546 Judges, Philadelphia Municipal Court with has 25 Judges, Philadelphia Traffic Court is comprise of 7 Judges, and Pittsburg Municipal Courts with has 13 Judges.  The graph below shows the hierarchical pyramid structure of the Pennsylvania Judicial Branch

Now that we have stated the preambble of the composition of the Pennsylvania Judicial System, we like to reetirate that the main focus of this project is on the Majesterial District Courts.  The outcome of the research can be made universal to all other branches of the Minor Courts since they carry the same charateristics as the majestrate court.

Define the Problem:  

The main problem of the Magistrate District Courts is the method of filling vacancies of Judges in the courts.  As already mentioned above, the independence of the judiciary is paramount for the rule of law to prevail.  But since Judges are elected in their position to adjudicate in their various precinct, this makes it difficult for them to operate independently without falling out of favor from campaign contributors, law firms, and the electorate.  Like candidates running for State and Federal offices in elections, candidates running for Magistrate judge seats must raise funds to finance their campaign.  Those that contribute funds to such campaigns are the very individuals such as, litigants and lawyers who ultimately appear before the courts on which the candidates are seeking to serve.

In fact, judicial elections in Pennsylvania have not generated nearly as much media sensation, citizens or participation as elections for state and federal offices, such as governor, senator, or representative.  Also, numerous electorates in Franklin County we interviewed expressed that they have not had much information available to them in making decisions between aspirants and candidates.  On this same issue, students at Wilson College in Chambersburg disagree the notion that, the perceived lack of information in large part resulted from codes of conduct prohibiting judicial candidates from announcing their views on dispute issues likely to come before their chambers.

Another problem with Magistrate District Courts is that, the their Judges are not required to have tried any cases or even actually practiced law at all, let alone for any minimum number of years.  This is a problem because present day Magistrate courts are face with constitutional crisis issues such as “individual mandate” clause of the Health Care Reform Bill.  These types of constitutional issues need to be adjudicated by legally minded professional and not just any individual that win election for the court’s seat.  The court does not need an individual that have to look the definition of a word in a dictionary to reach a decision.  This makes the court less formal and dangerous.  Although for the proponent of the court, it’s less costly and faster.

The PA District Magistrate Courts resembles “old toothless dog” that can bark, but never possess the instrument to bite.  The Court’s limitations on the cases they decide has adverse impacts on its efficiency so much that it has become a safe haven for criminal.  The court can only decide cases that involve issues of civil matters of up to $12,000, and title 18, criminal codes, and title 30 for game sports such as fishing and hunting (Vivian J. Cohick- Newville District Judge- Cumberland County-03/01/2012 class lectures). 

However, the court lacks its own jail and police force to implement their sentence.  If an individual is scoundrel by a deceptive person the Borough or State police will not get involve arresting the culprit.  They refer the matter to the district magistrate court because the money scoundrel is not more than $12.000.  The victim will have to file with the magistrate court to summon the individual to court.  The cost for filing is $100, and $10.00 if the complainant choose to send the summon notice by registered mail, and $35.00 for a constable to deliver it in person.

Assemble Some Evidence:

  In order to determine the credibility of the problems identified above, we visited the Agency of Open Records of Franklin County to provide us with data of citation of the Magistrate District Court of Greencastle PA.  Our focus is to review the citations issued during an election year when the incumbent Judge is running for re- election.  We then assemble the data in four quarters.  January – March is our first quarter, April – June is the second quarter, July- September is the third quarter, and October – December 2008 is the fourth quarter.  This information is provided to us in compliance of the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) under Pa. C.S.A. section 1503. (http://www.co.franklin.pa.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/Front%20Page/Magisterial%20District%20Reestablishment%20Report.pdf-access- 04/18/2012).                 

2008 DATA AOPC DATA ON DISTRICT COURT 39-03-05- GREENCASTLE                             

The data collected from the AOPC for the Greencastle Magistrate District Court 39-03-05 as illustrated by the graph above revealed that the court, and both the Borough and State Police work as a team in collecting revenue for the municipalities.  In the first quarter of an election year, 57% of traffic citations were issued.  This is probably because the incumbent judge is waiting to see who his or her challenger is.  In the second quarter, there is a slight increase of 15% in citation, which is from 57% to 72%.  This is an interesting up right skewed, and the only explanation we can come up with is that either the incumbent has a weak challenger with no name recognition, or the municipality has put pressure on the law enforcement officers to help raise revenue to cover the cost of their operation due to budget constraints. 

The third quarter also show a downward spiral to the left by 20%,  and the only logical explanation at first is because the election is getting closer and the campaign signs are now on the road sides and in people’s front yards.  However, the Editor of Eco Pilot News Paper in Greencastle Joyce F Nowell believes that Dwayne Cunningham the current district judge made his promulgation to join the race, and was endorse by the Greencastle Chamber of Commerce and many law firms in the District.  As the race intensified for the opening seat, the traffic citations from law enforcement officers dropped from 72% to 25% in the third year.

Finally, the fourth quarter which is the quarter when elections are held, the down ward slop of citations continued to 12%, and interestingly, all of the citations issues during the fourth quarter are from motorists from out of state.  Therefore, this data clearly reveals how the method of filling vacancies to the office of magistrate judges by elections will tampered with the independent of the judiciary which is one of the fundamental principles of the rule of law, and the bed rock of the American Constitution.

Furthermore, we have also cited earlier that, like candidates running for State and Federal offices in elections, candidates running for Magistrate judge must raise funds to finance their campaign.  This has created biasness, and made the Magistrate Judges corrupt as they try to please possible donors that are state prison contractors, and juvenile detention contractors.  It has become an open secret that Magistrate District Judges are on prison contractors’ pay rolls to aid in sending defendants to county jails by setting up high bail fee.  The boroughs lack prison cells, and only have a small room as holding, and setting up high bail fee will facilitate the possibility of sending more people to the county jail while awaiting trial.

A case in point is the “kids for cash” scandal in Luzerne County in which two judges took bribes from the owners of juvenile detention centers in exchange for sentencing minors to terms in those facilities.  Some of the victims or survivals reported that they were coheres to sign waivers for not getting state legal aid.  They will therefore appear before the Magistrate like a sheep led for slaughter, and they will look with imploring eyes as they are sentence and taking away to those corrupt facilities.  One of the boy committed suicide after his release due to the dismal state of the facility, and spending his entire childhood life behind walls.

Another problem on processing civil law suit that involves funds not exceeding $12.000 is the lack of enforcement mechanism other than property seizure, and throwing out tenant’s property, changing the locks of apartment to denied access.  A respondent we interviewed shares her personal experience from this process with us.   She had a transmission problem on her vehicle and a scrupulous self- employed mechanic/ handy man promised to get her a used car transmission for $600.00.  The mechanic took the money and absconded, and she decided to call the state and borough office to report the matter.  Both the borough and state police referred her to the district court because the money scoundrel was not enough to press criminal charges.  The district court found the mechanic guilty in absentia because he didn’t showed up for the hearing.

 The next step is to file for an order of execution which is $285 for the judgment to be certified by the judge to issue promulgation for the sale of the property owned by the mechanic to recover the lady’s money.  In this case, after spending all that money, the defendant who was staying in a weekly rate motel disappeared.  He has no job for his wages to be garnish, and whenever she spots him around town and call the police, they will advise her to contact the district court again.  Therefore, the system is ineffective and is not different from the criminal who took away the woman’s money.  She became angry and decided to follow the second option through the prothonotary.  The prothonotary requires a $150.00 filing fee, and $35.00 constable fee to initiate protocol for selling the mechanic’s property, in this case there is none.

Construct the Alternatives: 

There are certain alternatives that can be implemented to restore public confidence of Pennsylvania Magistrate District Courts.  Firstly, the filling of vacancies of judges has to be done by appointment through the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for a two year term and limited to two terms.  The appointee must be a retired trial attorney who has to be going through rigorous screening by borough councilors open to the public.  This will allow the public to understand what spectrum the prospective law belongs.  For example if he proponent of natural law of legal positivist.

This is important because trial attorneys have gone through law school with many years of legal experience with strong legal ethics.  This will enhance the independence of the judiciary, because the Supreme only performs the ceremonial duty of nominating the prospective judge.  The court will function properly even during election year, and cannot be manipulated by corrupt co- operations, prison and juvenile contractors.

The State of Mary Land which shear common border with Pennsylvania appoints their Magistrate through the U.S. District Court for District of Maryland for a 2 four year term (http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/39fed/04usmag/html/usmag.html-accessed 04/21/2012).

Another alternative to be taken into consideration is building prison facilities for the magistrate courts to facilitate the apprehension of repeated embezzlement offenders such as the individuals that will target people with the intension squandering money less than $12,000.  It’s also necessary for the court to hire its own constable to serve summons and arrest culprits.  The contract for food services at the magistrate must also be executed by the same contractor that serves food at the school districts.

Select the Criteria: 

After setting up the above stated criteria, it’s time to get this in the agenda setting of both State houses of the Congress.  We will approach Senator Lisa Baker, R- Lehman Township who sponsored the “kids for cash” bill until it became a law on April 10, 2012 to put out reforms on the agenda.  This will be the first step towards a policy formulation towards reforming the district courts.  Then we can organize a concerned citizen forum and appoint formidable women who have been adversely impacted by the “Kids for cash” to championed the reforms in the form of interest and lobby groups.  We would appoint Sandy Fonzo, whose son was locked up for a minor offence and subsequently killed himself to head the pressure group.  This is important because she already have name recognition in her relentless effort to influence the passage the “kids for cash” bill into law. 

Project the Outcomes:

After successfully getting the reform proposal on the agenda of the Pennsylvania Congress, discussions will prevail to determine the best course of action.  This is usually a conflictive and competitive political process for both the Republicans and Democrats in the Congress.  Fortunately for these proposals, there will be less opposition from both parties due to the fresh memories of the “kids for cash” programs and the total prohibition for the magistrate district courts to discuss cases involving juveniles.  This will also gain the support of the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) who are advocating for free and fair trials.  These reforms will also gain the support of associations such as Pennsylvania Local Lawyer Referral Services, Pennsylvania Association for Justice and Pennsylvania Association of Bond Lawyers.  These associations have advocated in the past to increase the powers of the magistrate district courts, and the appointment for legal educated minded judges that can execute judgments impartially.

Confront the Trade-offs

Nevertheless, we do not expect a clean sweep of the reforms without compromise from the State Senators to the extreme right who would like to preserve the court’s status quo.  However, they will be reminded of the reality that we live in a dynamic world and the United States was founded on the basis fundamentals of the rule of law.  The system of putting square pegs in a round hole in the first level of the judiciary branch is disastrous and can be costly for the state in compensations for judicial liabilities and Constitutional crisis.  The only acceptable tradeoffs would be to allow judges that are serving their current terms to complete those terms.

What we think would be a possible trade - offs is the appointment of Judges which can be assign to the Governor as a ceremonial function, instead of the Supreme Court.  This compromise will prompt the governor to support the reforms which will be a green light for a policy implementation in reforming the archaic magistrate courts.  This move will also make the critics of none politicizing the district court to throw fists because the magistrate courts are designed to be free of politics.  However, the very fact that they were created with the intent of having elected judges defeats the purpose of its unanimity for having any political affiliation. Another trade – off is the return juvenile to magistrate District Courts, and the appointment of permanent legal aids to represent citizens for all crimes in all cases at the magisterial level.

Decide:

At this juncture, we have to decide how our reform proposals can be promulgated to the citizens.  We have to decide what media to use in familiarize the citizens of the intended policy reforms.  Is it going to be a print, radio or electronic media?  Before we embark on broadcasting our propaganda to foster support, we need to survey to determine the media that can be effective to our campaign.  We will sample, Greencastle, Chambersburg, Bedford and Somerset Counties.  These surveys are done by face- to – face and we will target our respondents as they leave grocery stores and fast food restaurants.  Our target stores are the dollar store, McDonalds and Apple bees.  The following questions will be included in the survey, Media preference, exercise of franchises in local elections and citations for traffic violation. 

The charts below reveals that, 27% of the people 73 people we interviewed in rural Pennsylvania read their local newspapers for current events, 6% listened to CNN, 15% use the internet and 25% listen to their local FM radio station for news and music.  On exercising their franchise during local elections, 27% Franklin County respondents have voted during local government elections, 4% in Somerset and 6% in Bedford.  Finally, 13% of Franklin County has appeared before the magistrate district courts in their area, 4% in Somerset County, and 6% in Bedford County.After reviewing this data, it’s evedient that we may have to use the Local News papers of every municipality, and FM Radio stations to persuade residents to call their state representatives to vote in support of the reform policy.  It’s also evedient that Franklin County residents has more life experiences with the magistrate district court, and can relate easily to problems of magistrate courts.  Somerset and Bedford counties are more rual than Franklin, and must rural municipalities do not have their own police force.  They rely solely on State Police for protection, and therefore are less likely to get traffic citation since they only drive in rural routes and the State Police are on main interstate 70 and the turnpikes.

Tell Your Story:

In the final process of applying the Eightfold path to more effective problem solving of Bardach Eugene in reforming the magistrate district courts in Pennsylvania, we will try to determine the media that we can use as our mouth piece to help spread the message.  We will use all of the Local FM Radio Stations that operate under Section C of non – profit organization, including National Public Radio (NPR) to attract both liberals that are educated, and working men who may not have voted in the past but have appeared before the court.

The editors of all Local Newspapers will be invited to attend every town hall or rallies organized by proponents of the reforms to gain free press coverage.  Our findings will be utilized to ascertain the need for reforms, by citing the problems and the positive outcomes in the first quarter after they start implementing the policies.

We can also request phone numbers from local party offices and ask volunteers to place calls to all voters in Pennsylvania and ask them to call their State representatives to vote in favor of reforms.  This is the time we can present all the vises of the policy reforms, and also asked individuals to sign a memorandum in favor of the reforms, and then we will send these copies to both the Pennsylvania Secretary of State and the governor’s office.

In a nut shell, this strategies will effectively produce a formidable policy on the agenda of Pennsylvania Congress, and give a new and efficient face to the magistrate courts that will possess an iron arm to deal with local problems in their precinct as they arise to the satisfaction of all involve to reduce appeals from the decisions they arrived at.

Gershon Bai-Lama Bangura

All rights@ reserved.

---

[1] Refers to a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards.

Ethical Analysis of the Main Characters of the Watergate Scandal, Massacre or be Massacred.

I’m going to attempt analyzing ethical concerns of the key players involved in the Watergate Scandal.  Firstly, I will define the ethical theories that I will be using to validate my findings.  I will explore the role of key players using the following theories: deontological, teleological and virtue ethics.  The first two are considered action – based theories of morality because they focus entirely upon the actions which a person performs.  When actions are judged morally right based upon their consequences, we have a teleological or consequentiality ethical theory.  When actions are judged morally right based upon how well they conform to set of duties, we have a deontological ethics.  With the virtue based- ethical theory, it doesn’t judge action as right or wrong but rather the character of the person doing the actions. The person in turn, makes moral decisions based upon which actions would make one a good person.  Here are the main characters of this epic national Watergate conundrum:

Archibald Cox- Special Prosecutor: 

A Special Prosecutor is a Barrister from outside government selected by the Attorney General to probe and possibly prosecute a federal government official for wrong doing while in office.  The theory behind appointing such an individual is that there is a built in conflict of interest at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and officials who may have political or government connections with the department.  Thus, such a position is very significant to ensure the universal application of the Rule of Law to all citizens. 

 Archibald Cox’s position to persistently request that the president release the secret recordings to divulge weather the president is innocent or guilty raised the ethical question, if it is morally right to do so.  Another ethical question that faced Cox as we would all agreed in this class is whether it was appropriate to indict a sitting president?  The president was accused to provide cover up for member of his re-election campaign in the burglary of the Democratic Headquarters. 

Deontologists argues that to make a moral choice, we simply have to understand what our moral duties are and what correct rules exist which regulates those duties.  When we follow our duty, we are behaving morally, verse versa.  Cox chooses to be Chauvinistic and defend the constitutional which stated that, the president is only a primus inter pare.  He shows his true north with this statement after he was fired.  “Whether ours shall continue to be a government of laws and not of men is now for Congress and ultimately the American people {to decide}” (Berber, 1985).

 Elliot Richardson- Attorney General/ William Ruckelshaus – Richardson’s Successor:

Another ethical issue arose when Nixon order Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox to be fired.  Attorney General Elliot Richardson and his Deputy William Ruckelshaus were both fired because they refused to fire Cox.  Robert Bork, another character whose role will be discussed shortly in the next stage ultimately carried out Nixon’s order.  The ethical and moral question that derives from the reasoning of these two officials is whether it was ethical or moral for them to turn down the Executive request to sack Cox?

I do not want to seem cynical of the Executive, but I would like to embrace the teleological theory for the prudency of these two statesmen.  Teleological theory argues that in order to make correct moral choices, we have to have some notion of the effects from our choices.  That is, when we make choices which have positive effects, then we are acting morally, verse versa.  In the case of Richardson and Ruckelshaus acted rationally.  The positive consequences of their action are, they set precedence for fundamental supremacy of the U.S. Constitution.  The U.S. Constitution is the model of world democracy, because it promotes fundamental human rights.  This case shows that it works and the effectiveness of the legal process became apparent as the investigation and prosecution continued.

Some of the ways the system worked included:

• The First Amendment allowed stories in the Washington Post to break Watergate open and also led to stories about other abuses of power; the stories were based largely on information from an unnamed source called “Deep Throat” (Warren, 1982).

• The Senate hearings headed by Sen. Sam Irvin and the house impeachment proceedings showed the importance of the Congressional oversight responsibility.

• The independent judiciary was able to initiate an investigation, which a non- independent judiciary likely could not have done; and The Saturday Night Massacre resulted in the largest spontaneous outpouring of outrage from the public that the White House had ever experienced.  The precedent set by them was followed by Congress during Clinton, Lewinsky saga (Scholastic Inc., 2001).

These positive outcomes are due to the fearless characters of these two men for the happiness of citizens of the United States, and those around the world to protect the Constitution, since democracy is been emulated everywhere, as opposed for the happiness of the White House.

Robert Bok- Solicitor General: 

Furthermore, after the forceful resignation of Richardson and Ruckelshaus, Robert Bork then Solicitor General fired Cox and attempted to blandish news outlets in favor of his loyalty to the President, because he felt he has the moral responsibility to do so.  In his defense, he stated that the difference between him and Richardson was that, he has never made any commitment under oath to the House of Congress for his deeds (Garofalo and Geuras, 2011).  The ethical question for his action is, did he act morally and ethically in carrying out the president’s order?  His argument sounds elusive, moot and hokum to the issue at hand, and created many legal, moral and ethical quandaries for the Nixon White House.  One may want to believe that his actions are influence by quid quo pro, or just blind loyalty to the president.  He purely exhibited incompetence and absolute arrogance about the law.  He exhibited an attitude of hubris which was not in confluence with the virtue theory. 

The virtue ethics places much less emphasis on which rules people should follow, and instead focus on helping people develop good character traits, such as kindness and generosity.  These character traits will in turn, allow a person to make the correct decisions later on his life.  Virtue theorists also emphasize the need for individuals to learn how to break bad habits of character, like greed and anger.  The biography of Bok shows his power of persuasion, his wife used to be a Catholic Sister, and he charmed her to give that up.  She later became an activist and subsequently his wife (Berber, 1985).  There are fingerprints of these characteristics of his early lifestyle in trying to squelch criticisms against his position which led to further cleavage between the Nixon administration, the citizens and Congress.  These vices would have been virtuous if he only realized that he has a moral authority to the people of the United States, instead of the President.

However, Bok acted in accordance with the six pillars of character in protecting his boss, the president.  He was trustworthy, very honest to the president, the news media and the American people as to why he was protecting the president, despite the pervasive corruption in his administration.  He was also reliable; he keeps his promise to the president to fire his opponents and circumvent all attempts by Congress to stop him.  His loyalty to the presidency is unquestionable despite his menial omniscience of presidential powers which makes his law degree looks frivolous to me.  I admired his intrinsic true north in attempting to save the presidency of Nixon.

Richard Nixon- President/ Primus Inter Pares:

President Nixon was suspected of massive cover up to obviate his administration’s involvement in the Watergate scandal.  The president refused to hand over secret recordings of telephone conversations from the White House to Special Prosecutor, Archibald Cox by claiming Presidential Confidentiality.  First let me review the oath taken by any U.S. president on first entering office as prescribed in Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution.  “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, Preserve, Protect, and Defend the Constitution of the United States” (Barber, 1975 ).  This is the Constitutional and Moral responsibility of the president; all other responsibilities are just “behavior in roles.”

It was unconstitutional for Nixon to claim presidential confidentiality for the recordings, because they were not recorded in his private home.  The White House is a Federal Building occupied by public officials assumed infallible to carry out altruistic agendas for the American people.  The crimes being investigated are crimes that are pivotal in preserving the Constitution, of which the president has taken oath to protect and defend.  The “Presidential Confidentiality” claim also violates the six pillars of characters, especially integrity portion of it, and espoused the four enemies to integrity to save his presidency.  Namely, self- interest (things we want), self- deception (a refusal to see a situation clearly), Self- Protection (things we don’t want), and self-righteousness (an end justifies the means attitude), (Berman and West, p, 12), these enemies of integrity confluence the embattled administration which was desperately fighting to avoid both political and judicial linchpin.

However, his timely resignation to save the country from a protracted legal battle during war time morally portrayed him as a responsible man, but White House critics would say, his resignation instead of being honest to the American people was due to his narcissism and hokum deceitful inner circle advisers.  This is evident in his prudence speech “I am not a crook.” He was responding to reporters after a press conference at Disney World about the Watergate money trail in Washington.  His response goes as “And do, that is where the money came from.  Let I just say this to the television audience: I made mistakes, but in all of my years of public life, I have never profited, never profited from public service- I have earned every cent.  And in all my years of public life, I have never obstructed justice.  And I think, too, that I could say that in my years of public life that I welcome this kind of examination, because people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook.  Well, I am not a crook.  I have earned everything I have got”, (http://youtu.be/sh163n1lJ4M, obtained September 9, 2011).

My recommendation to current and future leaders is to follow the five principles of ethical leadership, respect others, builds community, servers others, manifests honesty and impartial justice for all (Berman and West, p, 49).

Bibliographies

Adapted from the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court, Scholastic Inc, accessed on September 5, 2011.

Barber, James David.   The Presidential Character, 3d ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1985.

Barber, Sotirios A.  The Constitution and the Delegation of Congressional Power:  Chicago:  University of Chicago Press, 1975.

Berman, Evan M and West, Jonathan.   The Ethics Edge 2^nd Edition (ICMA Press, Washington DC. 2006).

Garofalo, Charles and Geuras, Dean, Practical ethics in Public Administration 3^rd Edition (Management Concepts: Vienna, Virginia, 2011).

http://youtu.be/sh163n1lJ4M, accessed September 9, 2011.

Warren, Kenneth F. Administrative Law in the American Political System.  St. Paul:  West, 1982.

By Gershon Bai-Lama Bangura

All rights reserved

ETHICAL ANALYSIS OF "JOHN Q" MOVIE

The movie “John Q” is filled with ethical and moral dilemmas throughout its course.  It gives us a clear notion of the duties of public servants, and private administrators with regards to ethical decision they face in the daily execution of duties in communities they represent.  In this analysis, I will explore the ethical and moral values of the main characters in the movie in performing their various official capacities.  I will also elaborate on health insurance coverage by defining and reviewing the difference and similarities of PPO and HMO.  Below is an ethical analysis of the characters in the movie “John Q.”:

First of all let me explain what the movie is about before touching on the moral and ethical dilemmas of the characters.  The director of this movie Nick Cassavetes reveals a social issue in the health care industry.  He explains the ordeals of John Archibald, whose son has a serious cardiac condition that requires urgent surgery.  John did not have an appropriate health insurance policy to cover the cost of the operation; the hospital chooses not to take the Good Samaritan route, and refuse to proceed with the operation.

Therefore, John Q is confronted with a moral dilemma to accept fate and prepare for his son’s funeral as the Hope Memorial Hospital administrator, Rebecca Payne have suggested, or raise funds for the cardiac operation, which is a daunting task considering the time and emergency nature of the situation his son is in.  John decided to take the hospital staff and other patients at the emergency room hostage.  In the Geuras, Dean, and Charles Garoralo text for this course have discussed the four sub groups of absolutism which will be discussed in this analysis.  It talks about philosophers like Aristotle, Kant, and Mills who have developed their ethical opinions and philosophies.  By reviewing events throughout the movie, we can compare them as to how they would be viewed under these different philosophies to determine if they were morally right, or wrong in relation to Public Administration.

One would wonder why a hospital will refuse to offer free operation to save the life of a twelve year old boy.  Well the answer is simple, unlike public administrations, Hope Memorial Hospital (HMH) is a private entity, and private cooperation’s were established to make a profit.  This what academicians described as the “real world” or functional world?  A world of budget, deadlines to meet, accountability, and compliance (Garofalo and Gueras p, 1.)  Rebecca Payne acted in a utilitarian way; by thinking that assisting John Q’s son for free treatment will not do society any good due to millions of HIV patients facing the same problem.  John Q’s son is only a modicum of the health care problem faced by many.  Utilitarian believes that the outcome of any action has to be for the happiness of many.  Rebecca Payne may be a pariah to her community for refusing to offer free treatment to John’s son, but her action may be justified by a utilitarian.

While John is espousing the emergency room (ER) with his hostages, he was also faced with an ethical dilemma; he has a pregnant woman who needs treatment at another facility and another lady who can’t speak English in the ER.  When Lieutenant Frank ask him to release some of the hostages during the negotiation, John’s dilemma tears him between leaving the women in the ER where they will die and giving in to the police by releasing the women.  One outcome emphasizes his desire to find a heart for his son while the other saves the lives of hostages and expose his weakness.  In the end, he shows his reverence for humanity and releases the hostages that need serious help to save them.

This act of John Q will resonate well to a jury that has passion with the “virtue theory” of Aristotle which focuses on good intents of an action.  By releasing the most vulnerable patients during the hostage negotiation for their own good, divulge a good side of John.  John Q may have portray a poor character traits for using the gun to commandeer the hospital staff, but for the very fact that he was brandishing an empty gun on his victims, and his consistency in freeing hostages as promise, is a clear indication of being a man of integrity.  Since virtual theory is concern with the significance of the whole person, (Garofalo and Gueras p, 59.)  John’s actions, his ran some demand and the treatment of his hostages shows his frivolous intensions of hurting no one, rather than an attempt to save his son’s life after everything else saves.  His case brings awareness to his community who can relate to its plight, of part time employment, and lack of health insurance.  This fact makes his actions very virtuous and utilitarian despite his action initially gear towards his son’s well being, it’s magnitude after being publicized has a theme of struggle to achieve happiness beyond his community.  His slogan,” sick! Help! Is welcome by sympathizers, and that is a remuneration for his virtues. 

Furthermore, the movie also brings to mind the question of loyalty which is one of the six pillars of characters.  How much can one be loyal to his employer or organization?  One has a moral duty to protect his organization, but when a person’s moral standards are being threaten, they usually resigns, or stay and become “whistle blowers.”[1]  The whistle blowers often fall under intuitionism, a pragmatic theory which indicates that our intuition can determine if an action or act is good or evil.  There are certain individuals in the ER whose morals conflict with those of the ‘Hope Memorial Hospital’.  For instance one of the nurses gives John Q several options for funding of his son’s operation including an altruistic statement of “just don’t take no for an answer.” A statement which John Q reminded her of when she asks him what he thinks he is doing.  John answer that, “I am doing what you advise me, not to take no for an answer.”  During the course of the hostage taking in the ER, both John and the hospital staff were discussing insurance coverage for Health Maintenance Organization (HMO.)[2]  “HMO” Merriam- Webster’s Medical Dictionary.  Merriam- Webster, Inc. 21 Aug.2011.               < Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/brouse/HMO>.

One of the ER male nurses reveals that HMO physicians receives annual Christmas bonus for not checking their patients for costly illness to avoid paying hospitals for costly procedures.  This is reveal after John asks why his son’s physicians didn’t find out about his illness earlier during their visits.  The heart surgeon amongst the hostage is reluctant in accepting this claim which I think is the exercise of his loyalty to the hospital. The candor this male nurse in further attacking the surgeon by revealing that in their hospital, they tend to get around the law by stabilizing the patients, and then send them home to die if they do not have a good health insurance carrier to cover the cost of the treatment.

The male nurse’s claims sounds infallible, but the question is what is the ethics in whistle blowing?  In their analyses of whistle blowing, both Bowie (1982) and Bok (1980) indicate that an employee has a significant obligation of loyalty to the organization they belong.  Bok, for example, comment that the “whistleblower hopes to stop the game; but since he is neither referee nor coach, and since he blows the whistle on his own team, his act is seen as a violation of loyalty.”  For both, however, the duty of loyalty is not absolute; it is a prima facie duty that can be overridden in certain circumstances. 

However, Duska (1997) reject this theory in which whistle blowing is categorize as an act of sell out, one needs justification or can be pursued only under special circumstances.  Duska says “ it is as if the act of a good Samaritan is being condemn as an act of interference, as if the prevention of a suicide needs to be justified” (p.355).  The flaw, for Duska, is found in the notion that individuals should be loyal to a company. Simply put, a company is not a person and not, therefore, deserving of loyalty. While a company typically consists of people, it is not a group of people with a purpose that transcends self-interest. Loyalty, according to Duska, exists in the context of human relationships and entails a readiness to engage in sacrificial behavior. “A company is...an instrument with a specific purpose, the making of profit. To treat an instrument as an end in itself...does give the instrument a moral status it does not deserve” (p. 338).  Thus whistle blowing is a prominent instrument in virtue theory, intuitionism and teleology.

Another ethical aspect that comes to light in the movie is dishonesty.  The human resource (HR) department change John Q’s insurance from PPO (Preferred Provider Organization)[3]  “PPO” Merriam- Webster’s Medical Dictionary.  Merriam- Webster, Inc. 21 Aug.2011.< Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/brouse/PPO>  to HMO without explaining the implication of the change to his health benefits.  Not until the day he visits the HR to discuss his health benefits that he is aware of the kind of coverage his has.  Health insurance and other employee benefits are very esoteric, and should be thoroughly explained to employees before making changes in their plan.

Another aspect of dishonesty is portrayed by Rebecca Payne, Hope Hospital Senior Supervisor in lying to John Q’s wife that her son’s name has been added to the donor list.  This unethical lie would have cost John Q his life as he is made to believe that his son’s name has been added to the organ recipient list.  As he is talking on the phone with his wife, a conspiracy to murder him during the act is unsuccessful, as the sniper misses his target (John Q).  As John Q lie inanimate after the shot is fired faking to be decease to play his move.  He rise up and overpower his assassin to fulfill his moral obligations to his wife and son whom he promised to do something, and to find his son a new heart.

This action of John Q, to deceive the sniper, and the entire police force in his locale on live television also resonates with the six pillars of character (W& B p.13, 14) of reliability and responsibility.  John Q is reliable due to his determination to keep the promises he made to both his wife and son.  West and Evan write that “when we make promises or other commitments which creates a legitimate basis for another person to rely on us to perform the task (p.13).  They further write that people with ethics should avoid bad faith excuses.  This clause reveals the dishonesty of the hospital administration, and the HR department of John Q’s employer, who uses cover up to conceal their motives of murder, and paying less health coverage for their employees respectively without explaining benefits and cost to their employees for them to make an informed decision.

The reliability character pillar also warns individuals to avoid unwise commitments, and also to avoid unclear commitments.  These two clauses put John Q in a moral dilemma for promising his loved ones to get things done by taking the law into his own hands as a vigilante to fulfill his promise at all cost to save his son’s life.  As he put it “I will not bury my son, my son will bury me.”   This brings another pillar of character to mind, ‘responsibility’.  As the economist’s says, human wants are many, but the need to satisfy them are limited (Adam Smith- wealth of a nation) which brings to scarcity and choice.  John has chosen to threaten the hospital to save his son which is considering as a moral responsibility for every parent.  He is aware of the consequences of his action, as West and Berman indicates “beyond having the responsibility to be trustworthy, respectful, fair and caring, ethical people show responsibility by being accountable, pursuing excellence, and exercising self restraints” (W & B p, 14).  All this traits can be trace in John Q’s actions and decision making throughout the movie, on to the end when he decided to sacrifice his heart for his son when he has explore all means, but his son’s condition keeps deteriorating by the hour.

Despite this colorful picture I have painted on John Q’s to morally, and ethical justify his actions, I will be unjust to discredit Rebecca Payne for lying to John Q’s wife.  In fact, she is not the one that suggested initially lying to John Q’s wife about their son’s name being added to the organ recipient list, it is Sergeant Moody’s idea.  Regardless, a deontologist would argue in her favor due to the principle nature of the situation.  A deontological ethical theory celebrates an action not base on its outcome, but on a remarkable feature of the act itself (G& G p.53).  Most popular of these views are followers of Emanuel Kant (1959), the father of Kantianism.  They believe in consistency and in this case, they will support Hope Memorial Hospital’s stand of continue its policy of “cash case” for all patient without health coverage.  Any action contrary to the hospital’s billing tradition with creates contradiction, and lying to John’s wife is ethical.  This is because, deontologist believes any true statement meant to deceive others would not be a lie (G& G p,53).

Another example of lying can be justified by deontologist and Utilitarians alike is doing undercover work by police officers.  They often dress in plain clothes and change their identity to get information from the public.  Such action can be consider as unethical by some, but since such disguise is for the general good to create a happy society, the utilitarian would support such an act, and so is the deontologist.  For the very fact that Rebecca Payne lie to end the hostage ordeals in her organization to save the hostages, her organization, and cooperation with authorities, makes her decision ethical.

In the final analysis, we will examine the role of the Police Officials and the media in the movie, and the impact of their involvement ethically.  Unlike private organization that operates for profit, public officials such as police officers operate to provide public safety to maximize happiness for people to roam freely in their communities without fear for their lives or properties.  They are empowered with the moral and ethical powers to carry out their duties without fear and favor.  On the other hand, the new outlets that are considered by political scientists as the fourth arm of the government encourage transparency and accountability and exposes corrupt practices in the community.

By: Gershon Bai-Lama Bangura

copyright2011- all rights reserved

Bibliographies

Bok, S.: 1980, “Whistleblowing and Professional Responsibility,” New York University Education Quarterly, 11, 2-7.
Bowie, N.: 1982, Business Ethics. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
Duska, R.: 1997, “Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty,” in Ethic Theory and Business , T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie, Eds. (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle Rive, NJ).

Geuras, Dean, and Charles Garofalo, Practical ethics in Public Administration 3^rd Edition (Management Concepts: Vienna, Virginia, 2011).

“HMO” Merriam- Webster’s Medical Dictionary.  Merriam- Webster, Inc. 21 Aug.2011.  < Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/brouse/HMO>.

“PPO” Merriam- Webster’s Medical Dictionary.  Merriam- Webster, Inc. 21 Aug.2011.  < Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/brouse/PPO>.

West, Jonathan and Evan M. Berman, The Ethics Edge 2^nd Edition (ICMA Press, Washington D.C. 2006).

---

[1] a person who informs on another or makes public disclosure of corruption or wrongdoing.

[2]  an organization that provides comprehensive health care to voluntarily enrolled individuals and families in a particular geographic area by member physicians with limited referral to outside specialists and that is financed by fixed periodic payments determined in advance called also health maintenance organization compare

[3] A preferred provider organization (PPO) enters into contractual agreements with health care providers and creates a "provider network." But unlike HMOs, PPO health insurance will cover some – but not all – of the cost of care administered by out-of-network providers.  If you select a PPO, you will have low co-payments as long as you see in-network physicians. Another advantage of PPO insurance is that unlike an HMO, you do not need a primary care physician's permission to see a specialist (as long as the specialist is in network).

Na Me & You // Sierra Leone Music // 2011 HD

MY EGYPTIAN BROTHER HAS BECOME THOMAS PAYNE OVERNIGHT

My dear African Brother,

When I first met you at the Washington Center for Academic and Internships Seminars two years ago, I knew you are a Patriotic Egyptian who can rise to the occasion.  When you call me the “Thomas Payne” of Africa for supporting the Tunisian cause, I was not offended; I thank you for the complements although you went further calling me names in Arabic which I couldn’t comprehend.  When ever I felt betrayed by a close confidant, I write down my thoughts in consolation to heal.  My encounter with you on that day gave birth to the January 17 article in my blog titled “Tunisians have spoken” which ask that citizens of other oppressed regimes to RISE UP.  When you called after the article was published and asked for reconciliation, I accepted. 

During our reconciliation Lunch on January 21at the Indian restaurant in Adams Morgan, we discussed about renown revolutions including the execution of Louis XVI in France on January 21, 1793, American Revolution, Russian Revolution, the first Military Intervention in Africa and subsequent others that followed due to the contagious effects, Civil Wars in Africa, Pro- Democracy Movement in China, Gandhi resistance against the British, Civil Right Movement of Dr. King, Women Right Movement and the Tunisian demonstrators that chase the coward Ben Ali out of Tunis, I knew you will become the “Thomas Payne” of Egypt. 

Remember, the main strategy against Forces of Brutality is non violence strategy of Gandhi and Dr. King.  The desert for non violent strategy is the tactic used during Women Rights Movement in the United States called “Refusal to go home.”  Keep on pilling the pressure and encourage all participants to use Skype, and other social media networks to expose the violence against demonstrators around the world.  Don’t ever under estimate the world’s opinion when it comes to human rights abuses.  Please be aware of Islamic fundamentalists because they are worse than the dictator you are trying to push out.  He had managed to consulate his hold to power for so long due to the strategic role Egypt is playing in the Middle East debacle.  I am certain this role can be more effective in a Democratic government that is transparent, and accountable to its citizens.

Africa has a generational problem, until the self proclaimed kings in disguised vacate office, their will be no respect for human rights and democracy.  We are there with you in sprit, and with unrelenting pressure, the dictators will be chase one after the other.  Two- Thousand and Eleven will be a year that will go down in history as the era when the African people finally grew up, and recognize the duties and rights they have in their states.  West Africans! What are you waiting for, the North is bracing up to remove the aching pre- molar tooth from the mouth by demonstrating perseverance against the pain it’s causing.  How long can you endure the mid- night pain caused by this aching pre- molar?

For French speaking West Africans that read this blog momentarily, the African Center for Transparency and Accountability (ACTA) is asking you to translate this letter into French and dispatch it around the rural and urban area coffee and cookery shops.  Rise Up!  Stand Up! Against your dictators, it’s not a crime to ask a leader that has ruled more than a decade to step down.  It has to be a unanimous effort by all citizens of a state to discourage charges of treason against organizers.  These destitute of common sense will soon realize that, they cannot manipulate their citizens any more.  They have to follow the example of term limit for leaders in Sierra Leone and Ghana.  Do you want to read history, or take part in writing one and change the course of a horrible history?

 It’s not always easy, but very soon the forces of brutality will soon realize that, their actions will never go unpunished.  They are citizens, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, uncles, nephews, aunts, grand fathers, and grandmothers before becoming a government agent.  They will one day come home and found that one of their family members has been murdered by their comrades in arms.  That will hit them very hard in their sleeping pillows, and will decide to join you in the revolution to uproot the pre- molar that is causing the pain.  Take the example of the pilot of Ben Ali in Tunisia, he refused an order to transport the family of Ben Ali to Saudi Arabia, and became an instant hero. You can also become a hero of your people by refusing to go to work for an authoritarian regime by joining the demonstrators in the streets of everywhere a dictatorship regime reins.

Good evening Libya, good morning Ivory Coast, Good afternoon Burkina Faso, how are you The Gambia?  Viva Tunisia, Viva Egypt, it is getting very contagious brothers, what are you waiting for.  If the Berlin Walls came crumbling overnight, the apartheid regime melted in broad day light, you can do it.  The world is watching and listening, you have more sympathizers than you think.

Finally, back to you my brother, it was courageous for you to travel home for this very noble cause.  You have indeed become “The Thomas Payne” of Egypt overnight.  Stay safe and don’t quit.  You guys have come too far to retreat.  Keep the woods burning and mount the pressure every day.

Long live Africa! Long Live Democracy!  Aluta Continua

Gershon Bai-Lama Bangura

African Center for Transparency & Accountability (ACTA)

Copyright2011

All rights reserve