Integrity

Honesty, reliability and moral action are embodied in the ethical standard of Integrity. Continual reflection assists members in exercising integrity in their professional commitments and responsibilities.

This links with the CGE (Catholic Graduate Expectation) #5 - A Collaborative Contributor who (g) Achieves excellence, originality and integrity in one’s own work and supports these qualities in the work of others. 

On this page, my thoughts on 'Morality and the Double Effect' can be found. To me, morality goes hand-in-hand with integrity. It is my job as a Catholic educator to support these qualities and understanding in our students AND to act in a moral way as an educator. 

Morality and the Double Effect

Consider the following scenario:

Imagine that you are a coach for a senior sports team (students in grade 11 or 12). You have selected your top ten most talented players out of twenty students who tried out and you are about to declare your team publicly. Before that happens, a colleague, whose opinion you respect, approaches you. She confides that Stewart, a student who was not successful in making the team, ought to be placed on the team because his emotional health is at risk if he doesn’t get on the team. Stewart has suffered the breakdown of family following the recent death of a parent. Under the circumstances, being a member on this particular sports team is the only feasible way of coping with the loss and breakdown at this time. You accept your colleague’s judgment that membership on the team is critical for Stewart’s well-being but you’re not sure it is fair to the player who would be bumped off the team to make room for Stewart. You consider that Stewart is a strong player who placed eleventh out of the twenty who tried out. If you agree to place him on the team you will have to bump out the student who placed tenth on the list. That particular student, Andre, has been trying for three years to make the junior and senior teams and now he finally did. He is in his graduating year so he will not have an opportunity to try out again.
 If you cut Andre from the team to make room for Stewart, Andre will recover from the disappointment because he has a strong support system. Due to reasons of confidentiality, you cannot reveal to Andre the real reason for cutting him if you choose to go that route. The team will also be marginally weaker with Stewart rather than Andre. What will you do? (Hint: you will need a guiding, ethical principle. One such principle could be the criteria for being on a high school sports team.

I would consider the criteria for being on a high school sports team and arrange them in a hierarchy. This would be my guiding, ethical principal.  My criteria (in order) would be: team player, work ethic, general attitude to sport (ie. Determination), ability to improve character, and physical talent. Because both Andre and Stewart would be level for team player, work ethic and general attitude to sport, moving onto to ability to improve character, I believe that despite Andre benefitting a lot to joining the team, Steward would benefit more given his circumstances.  Therefore I would keep Stewart, not Andre.

HOWEVER, I firmly believe that choices like this can easily be alleviated by simply increasing the team to 11. I can’t understand why it this particular case, the number cannot be flexible and changed.  Therefore, if I was coach, I would say both have tied for 10^th and have them both on the team.

Now test your guiding principle by applying the principle of double effect to the above scenario to determine if your action (adding Stewart or keeping Andre) was correct. If you believe the principle of double effect does not apply, explain your reasoning.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia provides four conditions for the application of the principle of double effect:

1. The act itself must be morally good or at least indifferent.  It is morally good.
2. The agent may not positively will the bad effect but may permit it. If he could attain the good effect without the bad effect he should do so. The bad effect is sometimes said to be indirectly voluntary. As the coach, I would want Andre to make the team because he is the 10^th best player, so I am not willing the bad effect of him not making it.
3. The good effect must flow from the action at least as immediately (in the order of causality, though not necessarily in the order of time) as the bad effect. In other words the good effect must be produced directly by the action, not by the bad effect. Otherwise the agent would be using a bad means to a good end, which is never allowed. Making the team, immediately Stewart would be happy.
4. The good effect must be sufficiently desirable to compensate for the allowing of the bad effect“(p. 1021). Weighing up the two boys’ personal situations, giving Stewart the last place on the team would help to cope with life in general.

I therefore believe that the action I have taken is morally correct. 

Extra idea: A great song about integrity and always trying your best that I often use with my class to keep them motivated and stay true to themselves: