Based on the ethical dilemma within my organization, the teleological theory incorporated to the choice of closing cases with negative or positive findings based on the allegation(s) specified to the investigators would make the investigator happy and administration happy. In this case, the ends justifies the means where the outcome of actually closing the cases and meeting “expectations” excuses any wrongs committed to attain it. The wrong that is being done in this scenario would be that law enforcement would close a blind eye to any other fraudulent activities that may be nexus to the case but not the fraudulent crime committed. However, the happiness of the individual depends on the individual investigator or individual public administrator’s ethics and values. In terms of public administration’s goals a whole, the happiness of meeting expectations would certainly not meeting the expectations of the law enforcement code of ethics.
In the second ethical dilemma choice, investigators examine new allegations(s) that may surface having nexus to the same case based on observations and evidence. In this ethical dilemma, investigators could possible recover more assets for the agency; which is also part of the investigators’ job function and “expectation”. The public, board of supervisors and administration
…show more content…
I would be responsible for sending cases to the district attorney’s office for criminal prosecution. The long term effects of both dilemmas would be beneficial to aid other public individuals that need the aid. However, the first dilemma would not secure as much recovery assets and sometimes we let criminals get away, but not by choice. The goal for the teleological is that the investigators have to investigate whether the individual committed fraud or not and, if the individual did, investigators recover