Pennsylvania State Final Project

1. Analysis of the actor’s actions through the lens of legal compliance v. ethical compliance.

Both Paterno and McQueary practiced ethical obligations to some extent, i.e. the human obligation to protect children from abuse. Anyway, it was done beyond legal obligations because it is an area, which is not properly regulated by the legal institutions. Sometimes, the laws are written not properly enough, thus preventing people from reacting correctly to a specific situation as it was in case of McQueary. McQueary was not implicated in any wrongdoing, since he took an initiative to tell his boss, Paterno, about the incident. However, he was blamed for not taking a step further to report the incident to police to seek justice regarding the boys’ case.

Paterno met his legal obligations, but not his ethical ones. Although Jack Marshall, the chief executive officer of Pro Ethics column, argued that Paterno did not act ethically. According to his statement, Paterno did not report the matter to law enforcement authority even after seeing the little efforts done on the matter. However, Paterno failed to perform his legal obligations as a leader in that he was informed about what occurred to the boys but obstructed proper investigations and failed to take immediate legal measures to seek justice for the boys and protect them from future sexual abuse. Instead, he shielded the program from being publicized negatively. McQueary, though, did his legal obligations but failed ethically by describing the conduct in the shower room between the young boys and Sandusky as some kind of pranking instead of describing the real picture of what he saw. In other words, he did not share the happenings in details but just gave a rough report.

The university and the special investigative counsel followed legal requirements by taking action to investigate the matter. The university availed all the information required for the officers to perform the investigation, including raw computer data. The forensics was done on the basis of documents without interfering with the evidence provided. People who agreed to be interviewed followed the law as the law requires people with evidence to provide them in order for justice to prevail. However, those who declined to be interviewed, such as Sandusky, Curley, Schultz and others, did not follow the law, since they were obstructing the achievement of justice.

2. Analysis and critiquing the manner in which utilitarianism may have been used.

Utilitarianism is the philosophy that bases the moral worth of an action upon the number of people it gives happiness or pleasure to and also involves proper cause of action. Utilitarianism was merely used and largely neglected by Spanier and Paterno leading to maximizing of sufferings and reducing the benefits to young boys and girls as observed in Pennsylvania State scandal.

Paterno was criticized as a leader due to the fact that he was informed about the happenings and made further inquiry on the case impossible. He totally failed to take proper actions on the cause and to inform the authority about the happenings immediately. Instead, he considered the weekend to be more important than the child abuse reported to him.

Spanier and Paterno did not take any effort to identify the child victim or notify his family, as well as failed to determine if the child was injured, which was not a proper moral action. Spanier informed the relevant authority, who later decided to handle the unfolded crisis alone, about the issue. According to FBI investigator Louis Freeh, Spanier did not reveal the issue to the relevant authority. Spanier also did not empathize with the victims because he did not take steps to know the victims’ whereabouts or health conditions. Instead, he allowed him to continue using the resources of institution without supervision or restrictions. Paterno was criticized for allowing Sandusky continue using the facilities of the institution even after being informed about his actions.

3. Analysis and critiquing the manner in which universalism may have been used.

Universalism is religious beliefs, theological and philosophical. Universalism concept has revealed itself in the Pennsylvania State scandal at different stands as its features are evident in actions of Paterno and McQueary. McQueary proved his ethical belief and instinct and made an effort to report the matter he saw in the shower room between Sandusky molesting the young boys to his superior Paterno. Nevertheless, his boss behaved to some extent inhumane and did not take immediate steps against Sandusky. Instead, he spent time to follow the right procedure, which was completely in contrast with what McQueary thought. It made him testify that Paterno, Curley and Schultz knew what he had seen. The event was deeply emotional and personal for McQueary, thus he felt that act of child abuse was not religious, thus he needed to help. However, McQueary is criticized for sharing the information roughly and not detailed as he had observed in the shower room. Moreover, he did not handle the quote unquoted the perfect way has it varied from the one he testified in the court and Paterno.

Paterno was not universal as he did not empathize with the boys, since he did not take necessary steps to ensure that the issue was handled legally. He also failed to notify the police about the matter because he did not pay proper attention to the case. Instead of informing the authority about the happenings immediately, he considered the weekend to be more important than the child abuse reported to him.    

4. Was justice served? If so, describe what type of justice.

Even though the key figures tried to obstruct justice, it was finally served. In October 2012, Jerry Sandusky was found guilty and was imprisoned for a term of 30 to 60 years for abusing young boys sexually after enticing them with the program’s offers of accessing facilities of the program, free tickets to the football games, among others. In addition, football players 1998-2011/current football players, NCAA served unprecedented sanction and fines on Pennsylvania State, affecting the normal operations of the program.  

The body which governs sports in college also imposed an unprecedented fine of $60 million, made Pennsylvania State not to vie for the position for at least 4 years, reduced the number of scholarship below the usual number for 4 years and placed football on five years probation.

5. Analysis of Ethical leaders v. Effective leaders.

Ethical leaders are leaders who follow corresponding ethical norms. They ensure that they do what is good in the society and fight for the achievement of ethics. McQueary practiced good ethics when he reported the matter to Paterno. He knew that since Paterno was his leader, proper action had to be taken against Sandusky. However, Parento did not act effectively by taking steps to ensure that the children received justice. Instead, he let the children suffer, while Sandusky enjoyed the program’s facilities. Sandusky was not an effective leader and acted unethically by using his position to molest young boys. He was corrupt since he used the program’s services to perform humiliating things to innocent boys. The law enforcers, investigators, courts and the university acted ethically by ensuring that evidences are availed and the children receive justice. They were also effective leaders since they did not allow anybody to interfere with the process of collecting evidences and providing witnesses. Witnesses acted ethically by providing the truth of what had occurred, as well.