Making moral choices may be difficult, especially when individuals have few viable options. The essays “Constraints” and “Per Diem” discuss the importance of moral standards and constraints in making choices. In “Constraints,” Darryn Frost’s defensive acts bring up issues with fairness and the value of human life. In the meantime, the protagonist and Grace in “Per Diem” have to make judgments concerning their remuneration in light of the Navy’s strict pay laws and limited resources. We get insight into the impact of moral concerns and limits on decision-making through these interpretations.
Q1
Respect for individuals, fairness, and goodwill are only a few moral concepts that the “Constraints” reading asserts must be considered while making ethical decisions. Since Darryn Frost acted in self-defense and protected others during the London Bridge assault, he was ethically authorized to wield the narwhal tusk to threaten Usman Khan (Jersey, 2019). Because he was endangering people’s lives and breaching their right to be left alone, Usman Khan had no right to assault them on the bridge. This is against the concept of respect for persons, which states that people should not be used as tools for an aim. Furthermore, once Darryn Frost pointed the narwhal tusk at Usman Khan, Khan was not morally permitted to threaten Frost because Frost had a right to defend himself and others from harm.
Q2
While on a Naval assignment, the protagonist and their coworker, Grace, face a quandary overpayment for their services in the “Per Diem” reading. However, the Navy is only ready to pay them per diem for 4.5 days even though they have worked more than 64 hours this week in Japan. This reading shows how limitations may affect decision-making in both individuals and businesses. In this situation, the protagonist is limited in their options by the Navy’s pay standards and regulations. The protagonist understands that they will labor until the project is finished, but they will only be paid for a set number of days according to Navy rules. Military pay restrictions test the protagonist’s sense of fairness and justice (Skerker, 2021). Like the Navy’s offer of 4.5 days’ pay, Grace’s decision to ask for five days’ pay is informed by her limitations. Grace and her husband must pay for the portion of their daughter’s treatment not covered by Tricare. Grace’s limited resources force her to prioritize getting paid more for her work in Japan, regardless of the consequences.
A
The purposeful misrepresentation of facts to acquire higher financial recompense is at the heart of a claim for five full days of per diem, while regulations only suggest three full days. One may argue that this action lacks honesty and integrity, two of the most important ethical principles that should inform our actions and choices (Jersey, 2019). However, some may contend that the Navy’s compensation laws and regulations are unjust and insufficient and that requesting a higher per diem rate will help level the playing field. According to this line of thinking, the Navy’s rules are immoral; hence, people have a right to seek methods to break them.
B
Using the universalization test, it is evident that the system cannot survive if every government worker plans to misreport their trip expenditures. If everyone knew that everyone else planned to overstate their expenditures, the government would have to restrict required travel or raise taxes to make up the difference (Skerker, 2021). The government would have to change its laws or establish a mechanism that guarantees fair and appropriate remuneration for all employees if everyone was honest about their intentions to claim more money than they are entitled to under regulations. Given the system’s flaws and the need for modification, it would not be a violation of anyone’s rights to demand payment for five consecutive days of per diem.
C
As stated by the “mere means” test, one should not treat someone as a means to an end. If someone claims to have received per diem for five full days, the question becomes whether or not they are exploiting the comptroller and American taxpayers as a means to an end. Reporting five full days of absence without providing the comptroller with all essential information regarding the travel plan might be seen as utilizing her as a simple means. The comptroller will be able to determine the correct number of days to report if they are forthcoming with information concerning their extended work hours and travel time. However, if a person uses the comptroller to conceal information or alter the truth to increase their financial reward, they are engaging in corrupt behavior (Skerker, 2019). It is possible that the person is only interested in making more money for himself and that U.S. taxpayers are only a means to an end. If everyone submitted claims for more time than they put in, the per diem payouts would be a waste of public money. Consequently, the person should think about how their activities will affect others and not see taxpayers as a means to an end.
D
Considering constraints alone, falsifying the expense report is prohibited. The government regulations specify that only three full days of per diem can be claimed for the given travel schedule. Falsifying the report to claim five full days violates these regulations, which can be considered breaking the law. As government employees, the individuals involved are responsible for abiding by these regulations and reporting their expenses truthfully. Thus, based on constraints alone, it is morally impermissible to falsify the expense report.
Conclusion
The readings “Constraints” and “Per Diem” show how important it is to make ethical decisions and how limitations might limit our options. The readings may portray contrasting scenarios but emphasize the need to uphold ethical standards like fairness and decency. As seen in both readings, decisions are influenced by personal resources and governmental laws. Ultimately, the readings remind us of the difficulty of forming moral judgments and the importance of considering all relevant elements.
References
Jersey, G. (2019, December 21). London Bridge attack: Darryn Frost on using a narwhal tusk to stop knifeman. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50870309#:~:text=Mr%20Frost%20handed%20the%20tusk
Skerker, Dr. M. (2021). Constraints: The First Step in the Moral Deliberation Road Map For the Naval Community College.
Skerker, M. (2019). per Diem.
write