Child Abusement: An Ethical Analysis
As a government employee interacting with students, one must report any signs or statements of mental and/or physical abuse on a student. Each educator is trained on how to make reports in order to protect the child from any further punishment. Ignoring and/or lying about a student’s abusement often results in severe professional punishments such as getting a letter in their files or getting released from the district. That decision is also up for an ethical analyzation. The spanish teacher is now thrown into this dilemma on whether to lie about the child’s explanation of his father hitting him with a belt. If she were to use the Justice lens, she would fulfil her lawful duties as a mandated reporter, and she would tell the english teacher
what the child had said. She would base her decisions on the lawful position that she has as an educator within the US. This decision does not take into the account of the student or father’s well being. The spanish teacher is following the rule of conduct associated with being a mandated reporter.
When it comes to making a decision that would reflect on the possible lifestyle changes of the student and father, the spanish teacher must think of the culture of the home and what might happen if the translation was completely accurate. The complementary difference might be used because the teacher comes from a Latino household. She understands the differences in homelife, and in this scenario, how spanking is a common practice in these households. Spanking does not symbolize child abuse, and the teacher mentions that the father is trying his best to accommodate his son and the school’s efforts in trying to help his child. Now the complementary difference lens is explained by Wells as celebrating differences, but in this case, the difference is not celebrated, rather it is being taken into account. If the desired outcome is to protect the student from his other home and the father from being removed from the US, then the teacher can tell a complete lie, or explain the situation to her peer in a way that does not incite the teacher in reporting the case.
what the child had said. She would base her decisions on the lawful position that she has as an educator within the US. This decision does not take into the account of the student or father’s well being. The spanish teacher is following the rule of conduct associated with being a mandated reporter.
When it comes to making a decision that would reflect on the possible lifestyle changes of the student and father, the spanish teacher must think of the culture of the home and what might happen if the translation was completely accurate. The complementary difference might be used because the teacher comes from a Latino household. She understands the differences in homelife, and in this scenario, how spanking is a common practice in these households. Spanking does not symbolize child abuse, and the teacher mentions that the father is trying his best to accommodate his son and the school’s efforts in trying to help his child. Now the complementary difference lens is explained by Wells as celebrating differences, but in this case, the difference is not celebrated, rather it is being taken into account. If the desired outcome is to protect the student from his other home and the father from being removed from the US, then the teacher can tell a complete lie, or explain the situation to her peer in a way that does not incite the teacher in reporting the case.