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/
