Conclusion

The United States military has an abundance of rules and regulations. However, professional ethics are more than simply following a prescribed set of rules. Ethical dilemmas will occur during the missions and personal activities of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. Time and location may not allow the service member the luxury of discussing a situation with a designated ethics officer. The men and women in the United States Armed Forces need to know what ethical behavior is and how to make decisions that will honor their professional code of ethics. They need a codified standard of ethics similar to the APA Ethics Code.  

The core values of each branch are very similar. The values express principles of honor, respect, duty, and service. The similarity ends there. Robinson (2007) has surveyed the “ethics training programs in various national militaries” (p. 23). He describes the programs as having “no uniformity of approach” and “a lack of coherence within them” (Robinson, p. 23). Robinson compares a soldier’s “role morality” to a civilian’s “ordinary morality” (p. 24). He asks if a soldier can be deficient in “ordinary morality” yet still be considered a good soldier. I believe both forms of morality are necessary.  

Robinson proposes ethics training that will teach “critical thinking about complex problems” so the soldier will be able to do the right thing (2007, p. 29). He describes the ideal ethics training as practical and relevant to the service member. Robinson concludes that current ethics training programs are often enacted in response to a public scandal. His solution is to integrate ethics training into military training before a scandal and make ethics training “a part of regular military life” (Robinson, p. 34). Robinson also encourages the military to “establish a common set of values” for coalition warfare (p. 35).  

Lieutenant Colonel Imiola (2013) contends that the Army does not have a “unified professional ethic” (p.2). He reports that the current ethics program defines what the term ethics means, but the program does not clearly define the Army’s professional ethics.  Imiola believes that defining an Army ethics code will improve the professional status of the vocation, improve the moral development and performance of Army soldiers, and improve the trust relationship between the nation and the Army.  

Major Glonek (2013) describes the lack of trust that is damaging the foundation of the military profession. He cites severe moral failings of service members as the cause of this erosion of trust. Glonek mentioned the fact that “any unethical act committed by American soldiers is likely to be shared with the rest of the world in a matter of hours” (p. 44). These violations reflect on the profession and the nation. Glonek also reports that the level of trust is declining between soldiers and their leaders -- and junior officers and their superiors. He posits that these significant declines in trust relationships greatly affect service morale. 

The Department of Defense (DoD), the Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School, the Department of Homeland Security, and the respective branches of military have aided in the development of ethics codes and training programs for each branch. The assembled materials and manuals are extensive. The Judge Advocate General’s 10th Ethics Counselor’s Course Deskbook is an ethical handbook that contains 597 pages. The DoD’s Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure includes 163 pages. Those are only two of many manuals that address ethical behavior in military personnel. The sheer volume of information needs to be distilled and presented to the troops in a way that will impact the ethical behavior of all service personnel.  

The International Society for Military Ethics (ISME) will play a significant role in developing a military ethics code. Their organizational goals include the analysis of military ethical issues, the clarification of ethical norms, and the improvement of ethical training (ISME, 2011). I believe that the life examples of ethical leadership will also be an important influence in this quest for an ethical military. The members of our military can learn standards of ethical behavior and act in ways that honor their professional code of ethics. 

 

References

 

Glonek, J. (2013). The trust lapse. Military Review, 93(5), 40-47. Retrieved from: http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/repository/Military-Review-English-September-October-2013-Edition.html 

 

Imiola, B. (2013). The imaginary army ethic: A call for articulating a real foundation for our profession. Military Review, 93(3), 2-5. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1353016331?accountid=38422 

 

Robinson, P. (2007) Ethics training and development in the military. Parameters, 35(1), 23-36. Retrieved from: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/Parameters/ 

 

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Army. (n.d.). Army ethic [Video]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjQZIBtzyzo 

 

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Army, The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School. (2012) 10th ethics counselor’s course deskbook. Retrieved from: http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/10th-Ethics-Counselor-Course-Deskbook.pdf 

 

U.S. Department of Defense, Office of General Counsel. (22 July 2013). Encyclopedia of ethical failure. Retrieved from: http://fulltextreports.com/2013/07/22/encyclopedia-of-ethical-failure-updated-july-2013/

The United States Coast Guard

United States Coast Guard lists three core values on their website. The values are honor, respect, and devotion to duty.  

Honor   

Integrity is our standard. We demonstrate uncompromising ethical conduct and moral behavior in all of our personal actions. We are loyal and accountable to the public trust. 

Respect 

We value our diverse work force. We treat each other with fairness, dignity, and compassion. We encourage individual opportunity and growth. We encourage creativity through empowerment. We work as a team. 

Devotion to Duty 

We are professionals, military and civilian, who seek responsibility, accept accountability, and are committed to the successful achievement of our organizational goals. We exist to serve. We serve with pride ("Core Values," 2013). 

The Coast Guard core value of honor aligns with the APA principles of Integrity and Fidelity and Responsibility.  The core value of respect includes the APA principles of Justice and Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity. The core value of Devotion to Duty is similar to the APA principle of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence.   

The Coast Guard Ethics/Standards of Conduct webpage directs readers to the Coast Guard Standards of Conduct Manual. The manual is a 98 page document which describes the ethics program. The manual provides a detailed explanation of Ethics Program Responsibilities, Ethics Advice, Standards of Ethical Conduct, and the Ethics Training. The Ethics/Standards of Conduct webpage also included the 2009 Ethics Training PowerPoint slides. I reviewed the slides. The training slides followed the content of the Standards of Conduct Manual.   

The Coast Guard Standards of Conduct Manual was thorough in defining the terms, rules, and exceptions in the Ethics Program. The text was a basic reference source to communicate the tenets of the program. However, it the document lacked the visual interest and variety which would encourage a complete reading of the manual.

 

References 

 

Fisher, C.B. (2013). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U. S. Coast Guard. (2009). Ethics training 2009 [Powerpoint]. Retrieved from: http://www.uscg.mil/lsc/docs/Ethics%20Training%20-%20PowerPoint%20Presentation-%20Rev%20Aug%202009.ppsx 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U. S. Coast Guard. (2013). United States Coast Guard core values. Retrieved from: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg3/cg3pcx/corevalues.asp

The United States Air Force

The Air Force includes a detailed description of their three core values on their public website. The core values are explained and expanded into 16 subcategories. Four of the subcategories are expanded into 9 third-level categories.  

 

Integrity:

·         Courage

·         Honesty

·         Responsibility

·         Accountability

·         Justice

·         Openness

·         Self-respect

·     Humility  

 

Service before self:

·         Rule following

·         Respect for others

·         Discipline and self-control

o   Anger

o   Appetites

o   Religious toleration

 

Excellence in all we do:

·         Product/service excellence

·         Personal excellence

·         Community excellence

o   Mutual respect

o   Benefit of Doubt

·         Resources excellence

o   Material resources excellence

o   Human resources excellence

·         Operations excellence

o   Excellence of internal operations

o   Excellence of external operations ("Our Values," 2013.)

 

The Air Force core values cover the same basic ethics areas as the five General Principles of the APA code. However, the APA Principles divide integrity, justice, and responsibility into three separate principles while the Air Force classifies justice and responsibility as components of integrity (Fisher, 2013).  

 

The Air Force’s ethical training program is not listed on the Air Education and Training Command (AETC) website. Numerous searches for an Air Force ethics training program located several articles describing a 2011 complaint regarding religious content in Air Force ethical training materials. Ricks (August, 2011) quotes the AETC as stating,    

 

“The Air Education and Training Command is conducting a comprehensive review of training materials that address morals, ethics, core values and related character development issues to ensure appropriate and balanced use of all religious and secular source material.”  

 

Ethics Guidance Resources were located on the Air Force General Counsel website. The resources were 12 brochures that covered fundraising, political activities, gifts, conflicts of interest, travel, conduct, and employment. The site advised individuals with ethical questions to contact their Staff Judge Advocate.  

 

The Air Force has identified and defined their core values. The branch has the responsibility to develop and use ethics training programs that will teach ethical behavior without bias to one religion or philosophy.

 

References 

 

Fisher, C.B. (2013). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.  

 

Ricks, M. (2011, August 14). Air Force reviewing all ethics training. Air Force Times.  Retrieved from: http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20110814/NEWS/108140321/Air-Force-reviewing-all-ethics-training

 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force. (2013). Our values. Retrieved from: http://www.airforce.com/learn-about/our-values/

 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force, Air Education and Training Command Force.  (n.d.). Inside AETC. Retrieved from: http://www.aetc.af.mil/

 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force, The Department of Air Force General Counsel. (n.d.) Ethics. Retrieved from: http://www.safgc.hq.af.mil/organizations/gca1/ethics/index.asp

 

Wilson, N. (2013). Training tomorrow’s defenders [Image]. Downloaded from: http://www.dvidshub.net/image/914095/training-tomorrows-defenders#.Uk17itLD-1s



The Department of the Navy

The Department of the Navy oversees the Navy and the Marine Corps. The Department of the Navy has located the Navy Ethics Compass website under the Legal Community of the Navy. I expected to find more information on the Department of the Navy’s ethics training program but I was only able to access the limited information on the public side of the website. The Department of the Navy (DON) Ethics website requires a Common Access Card to access this website.  

The Department of the Navy Core Values Charter (n.d.) lists three main values: Honor, Courage, and Commitment. The one-page charter lists several bullet points under each main value which describes the actions associated with each value. Several bullet points under Honor coincide with APA Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility and APA Principle C: Integrity. The four Courage bullet points align with APA Principle D: Justice. The Commitment bullet points address areas covered in APA Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence and Principle E: Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity ("Department," n.d.).  

I reviewed the 55 PowerPoint slides of the 2012 Annual Ethics Training on the Home page of the Navy Ethics Compass website. The focus of the training is on ethical behavior associated with post-government employment, fund-raising, speaking, teaching, and political activity. While these areas of ethics are applicable for senior officers, I found the training not relevant to the average sailor and marine. A common theme in the training is that ethical questions should be addressed to the Ethics Counselor. While visiting an ethics counselor may be appropriate in some circumstances, soldiers and marines should know what constitutes ethical behavior and be able to take immediate and appropriate actions in daily circumstances. The Home page also included the 2011 Annual Ethics Training, but I did not review those 65 slides.  

The Navy’s Code of Ethics (10 November 2005) states:  

DO

·         Place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws, and ethical principles above private gain.

·         Act impartially to all groups, persons, and organizations.

·         Give an honest effort in the performance of your duties.

·         Protect and conserve Federal property.

·         Disclose fraud, waste, and abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities.

·         Fulfill in good faith your obligations as citizens, and pay your Federal, State, and local taxes.

·         Comply with all laws providing equal opportunity to all persons, regardless of their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or handicap.

DO NOT

·         Use nonpublic information to benefit yourself or anyone else.

·         Solicit or accept gifts from persons or parties that do business with or seek official action from DOD (unless permitted by an exception).

·         Make unauthorized commitments or promises that bind the government.

·         Use Federal property for unauthorized purposes.

·         Take jobs or hold financial interests that conflict with your government responsibilities.

·         Take actions that give the appearance that they are illegal or unethical. 

The Navy’s Code of Ethics and The Navy Ethics Compass website do address similar standards to the APA Ethics Code. However, the Navy’s Code of Ethics is not as structured or defined as the APA Ethics Code. The Navy Ethics Compass website includes a Reporting Unethical Conduct page that complies with APA Standard 1.05 Reporting Ethical Violations ("Reporting," n.d.). There is also an OPNAV Ethics Guidance page dated August 2008 on the website but the seven documents listed on the page are topics relevant to flag officers.  

The site includes a statement from the Secretary of the Navy on ethics. An excerpt from the Secretary of the Navy Statement on Ethics released in 2007 states,

“No organization, however, especially one as large and geographically widespread as ours, maintains excellence in ethics without constant vigilance, good training and education, and a willingness to make the tough call because it’s the right thing to do.”

 

The Department of the Navy has established core values and a basic code of ethics. The values and code of ethics are important principles that need to be taught to all Naval and Marine Corps personnel in ways that will apply to their workplace interactions.  

 

References

 

Drew, J. (2011). Becoming an ethical warrior [Image]. Downloaded from:  http://www.dvidshub.net/image/380289/becoming-ethical-warrior

 

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (2012). 2012 Annual ethics training presented by the Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Ethics) [Powerpoint]. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/content/2012training/training.html

 

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (n.d.). Department of the Navy core values charter. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/content/corevaluescharter.aspx

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (2005). Navy code of ethics. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/content/codeofethics.aspx

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (2008). OPNAV ethics guidance. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/content/opnavethicsguidance.aspx

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (n.d.). Reporting unethical conduct. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/content/reporting.aspx

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (2007). Secretary of the Navy statement on ethics. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/content/secnavmsgstatement.aspx

U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Navy. (n.d.). The ethics compass. Retrieved from: http://ethics.navy.mil/Default.aspx 

The United States Army

The Army core values form the acronym Leadership: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage ("The Army Values," n.d.). These principles guide the ethical standards of the Army. Every Army trainee is taught the seven core values. Soldiers are given a basic description of what those values mean. The ADRP1 – The Army Profession (2013) lists several creeds and codes that apply to different segments of the Army population. The Army’s CAPE program builds on the Army’s core values and teaches those principles to the Army population.   

The CAPE program addresses ethics and professionalism in the Army’s civilian, enlisted, and leadership populations.  The CAPE website contains training and supplemental material resources.  The Education and Training portion of the site contains online training support packages, seven virtual simulators, case studies, and other training materials. The Library and Resources segments of the site contain policies, reports, studies, reading lists, videos, images, brochures, other related materials, and links ("Center," 2013).

I went through the virtual simulator Backbone of the Army.  Live actors portrayed all the individuals in the simulation program. The simulator introduced my character through a brief history of my personal and professional status. I was a married promotable sergeant with an assignment at a new stateside duty station. My character interacted with his military and civilian roles. I was presented with multiple real-life situations. After the presentation of the dilemma, a decision screen would interrupt the video to present four options. Choosing an option would restart the video and play through the choice and subsequent consequences of that choice ("Backbone," 2013).

My character faced several ethical challenges during the half-hour session which covered several weeks of his virtual life. The first decision involved rumors about a fellow sergeant who was wearing a Ranger tab without the appropriate orders. My response to this situation was guided by Ethical Standards 3.04 Avoiding Harm and 1.04 Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations. I chose to discuss the situation with the sergeant and reminded him of the regulations about wearing the tab without the accompanying orders.  

I also faced a choice between family obligations and a social interaction with other platoon leaders. Ethical Standards 3.04 Avoiding Harm and 3.09 Cooperation with Other Professionals guided my decision in this choice. A third dilemma involved the discovery of confidential papers behind a shredder that were logged as destroyed. Ethical Standard 1.05 guided my response to this discovery although I was unaware of the Army policies regarding this type of situation. I was guided by Ethical Standards 1.07 Improper Complaints and 7.06 Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance when I addressed the rumors and the misplaced confidential documents with a soldier under my authority. Additional choices involved issues of privacy and confidentiality and human relations. My virtual life concluded with my character’s promotion ceremony ("Backbone," 2013).

At the conclusion of the virtual simulator, a four-page review document detailed my dilemmas and my decisions. Under each dilemma, there were comments, questions, and additional information regarding my choices. I thought the simulator was outstanding and an excellent way to teach the ethical standards. The ethical dilemmas were appropriate, the options were applicable, and the discussion and information during the simulation review addressed many additional questions and situations ("Backbone," 2013).

The Army’s CAPE program utilizes many innovative forms of training and provides extensive military ethics references. However, I was disappointed that I was not able to locate a single core document that contains the ethics material. Perhaps the diverse vocations represented in the Army preclude the ability the creation of a single concise standard of principles and standards similar to the APA Ethics Code.  

References

 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army. (2013). ADRP 1 - The Army profession. Retrieved from: http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/DR_pubs/dr_a/pdf/adrp1.pdf 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army. (2013). Backbone of the Army [Virtual Simulator]. Retrieved from: http://cape.army.mil/Virtual%20Simulators/backbone.php

 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army. (2013). Center for the Army Profession and Ethic. Retrieved from: http://cape.army.mil

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army. (2013). Moral combat [Poster]. Downloaded from: http://cape.army.mil/posters.php 

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army. (n.d.). The Army values. Retrieved from: http://www.army.mil/values/

 

Introduction

United States military personnel face numerous situations which involve ethical decisions. Combat duties can require quick, life-or-death choices that can have widespread implications. Other military duties involve troop welfare and the control of extensive financial and material resources. Service unit members and leaders require clear ethical guidelines to guide their choices and influence their behavior.

The military is not a single entity and there is no central military source supplying the ethics codes and training for US Military members. There are five main branches of the Armed Forces which contain active and reserve units ("Military Service Branches," 2013). The Army, Navy, and Marine Corps trace their history back to 1775 ("Army," 2004; "Navy," n.d.; "History & heritage," 2013). The Coast Guard evolved from five different services dating back to 1789 and the Air Force began as a division in the Army in 1907 ("U. S. Coast Guard," 2012; "History – missions," 2013).

The five military service branches are under different government agencies. The Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force are under the authority of the Department of Defense (DoD) ("Organization," 2012). The Department of Defense General Counsel maintains a Standards of Conduct Office (SOCO) and is the DoD Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO) which “oversees the ethics and standards of conduct programs throughout DoD” ("SOCO online," 2013).

The DoD established a Joint Ethics Regulation (JER) in 1993 which identifies the ethical standards and behavior for military and civilian employees. The regulation is continually amended and updated as changes are approved ("DoD 55007-R," 2011). In addition, each service branch has implemented service-specific programs to identify their branch-specific standards and train their personnel in those standards.

 The Coast Guard is generally under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security but the Coast Guard is transferred to the Navy and the Department of Defense during times of war.  The Department of Homeland Security abides by the policies listed in the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch ("Standards," 2011). The Coast Guard has a 98 page Standards of Conduct Manual which outlines the Coast Guard ethics program ("Standards," 2002).

As I previously stated, there is no joint military organization that supplies the ethical values and training for the five branches of the military.  The International Society for Military Ethics (ISME) began in 1979 as “an organization of military professionals, academics and others formed to discuss ethical issues relevant to the military” (ISME, 2011). The organization was originally incorporated as the Joint Services Conference on Professional Ethics (JSCOPE). The JSCOPE Board voted in 2005 to change the organization’s name to ISME and incorporated as a non-profit organization dedicated to “professional military ethics” (ISME, 2011).  

ISME's goals are to:

·         1. Provide a forum for the discussion and exchange of ideas relating to professional military ethics.

·         2. Foster the rigorous and systematic analysis of military issues of ethical significance.

·         3. Clarify the ethical norms and related behavioral expectations which should guide and constrain the conduct of military professionals.

·         4. Enhance the quality of military ethics instruction.

·         5. Afford service commanders informed, timely analyses of the ethical impact of military service practices.  (ISME, 2011).

This blog will look at the current ethics codes, programs and training for each military branch and seek to identify the common core values and training practices in each branch of service.

References

ISME. (2011). The International Society for Military Ethics (ISME) (Formerly the Joint Services Conference on Professional Ethics--JSCOPE) history, structure and purpose. Retrieved from: http://isme.tamu.edu/General/hist.html

U.S. Department of Defense. (2012). Organization of the Department of Defense (DoD). Retrieved from: http://odam.defense.gov/omp/Functions/Organizational_Portfolios/Organization_and_Functions_Guidebook.html

U.S. Department of Defense, Standards of Conduct Office. (2011). DoD 55007-R, The joint ethics regulation, including changes 1-7. http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/defense_ethics/ethics_regulation/

U.S. Department of Defense, Standards of Conduct Office. (2013). SOCO online. Retrieved from: http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/defense_ethics/

U.S. Department of Defense, Today’s Military. (2013). Military service branches. Retrieved from: http://www.todaysmilitary.com/service-branches

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force. (2013). History - missions part one: From the Signal Corps to the Air Corps. Retrieved from: http://www.airforce.com/learn-about/history/part1/

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army. (2004). Army birthdays. Retrieved from: http://www.history.army.mil/faq/branches.htm

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps. (2013) History & heritage timeline. Retrieved from: http://www.marines.com/history-heritage/timeline

U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Navy, Naval History and Heritage Command. (n.d.) Navy birthday information -13 October 1775. Retrieved from: http://www.history.navy.mil/birthday.htm

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U. S. Coast Guard. (2002). Standards of conduct manual, COMDTINST M5370.8. Retrieved from: http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/5000-5999/CIM_5370_8B.pdf

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U. S. Coast Guard. (2012). U. S. Coast Guard: A historical overview. Retrieved from: http://www.uscg.mil/history/articles/h_uscghistory.asp

U.S. Office of Government Ethics. ( 2011). Standards of ethical conduct for employees of the Executive Branch. Retrieved from: http://www.oge.gov/Laws-and-Regulations/Employee-Standards-of-Conduct/Employee-Standards-of-Conduct/