York Bloomingdale Insane Asylum Analysis
Introduction
When faced with a difficult situation of morals, choice, and possible destruction of a person’s protection and survival, individuals find themselves in a formidable situation. This is a common occurrence for people who become known as a whistleblower. There is a problem in the United States with protection of individuals for whistleblowing in the workplace, and not enough is being done for these individuals. Whistleblowing is increasing and has become more common, more frequent, and sometimes dangerous. Individuals could potentially face the inability of obtaining another job because they are stigmatized as a whistleblower. This paper will focus on two questions: How does the society’s view support whether someone will blow the …show more content…
This is different from traditional whistleblowing because this person sought out a problem within an institution that they were not part of. Whistleblowing comes in all forms and situations. This example shows from the public level that there was an ethical problem within an insane asylum that needed to be addressed to the public.
Military institutions also have the potential for whistleblowing to occur. To give an example of a military related whistleblowing, in 1971 GAP (n.d) mentions, Daniel Ellsberg who was a former US military analyst and government contractor disclosed what is now called the Pentagon Papers. The Pentagon Papers detailed the Presidential Administrations’ lying about information to Congress relating to the Vietnam War, which later forced Nixon to resign presidency due to its attempt to cover this information up. Whistleblowing can be damaging in that the information released could make the leader of a country resign from office. It is important to see both sides of the spectrum. One side shows that there is a problem that needs to be addressed, while the other side shows the potential for damage inflicted by these …show more content…
This opens a new range of views, ideas, and problems that people may not otherwise understand. When discussing whistleblower research, Adam Waytz, James Dugan, and Liane Young, (2013) conducted a study on the relationship between fairness and loyalty to a whistleblowers decision making, willingness, and the psychological view of whistleblowers. The purpose of this study was to find out the tradeoff between fairness and loyalty in an individual’s willingness to report. Waytz et. Al (2013, p.1031) found that in divided groups, participants in the fairness condition group engaged in more whistleblowing behavior than the individuals who were placed in the loyalty condition group. This study can contribute to the possible reasons why people decide to blow the whistle. This study shows the problems that whistleblowers have in decision making in regards to deciding between loyalty or fairness. It is important that individuals understand that deciding to blow the whistle is not something as simple as saying yes I will, or no I won’t, but rather it is often a decision between fairness and loyalty. When referencing this to historic problems of whistleblowing, it provides some context as to what can lead someone to blowing the whistle and the potential personality of that
When faced with a difficult situation of morals, choice, and possible destruction of a person’s protection and survival, individuals find themselves in a formidable situation. This is a common occurrence for people who become known as a whistleblower. There is a problem in the United States with protection of individuals for whistleblowing in the workplace, and not enough is being done for these individuals. Whistleblowing is increasing and has become more common, more frequent, and sometimes dangerous. Individuals could potentially face the inability of obtaining another job because they are stigmatized as a whistleblower. This paper will focus on two questions: How does the society’s view support whether someone will blow the …show more content…
This is different from traditional whistleblowing because this person sought out a problem within an institution that they were not part of. Whistleblowing comes in all forms and situations. This example shows from the public level that there was an ethical problem within an insane asylum that needed to be addressed to the public.
Military institutions also have the potential for whistleblowing to occur. To give an example of a military related whistleblowing, in 1971 GAP (n.d) mentions, Daniel Ellsberg who was a former US military analyst and government contractor disclosed what is now called the Pentagon Papers. The Pentagon Papers detailed the Presidential Administrations’ lying about information to Congress relating to the Vietnam War, which later forced Nixon to resign presidency due to its attempt to cover this information up. Whistleblowing can be damaging in that the information released could make the leader of a country resign from office. It is important to see both sides of the spectrum. One side shows that there is a problem that needs to be addressed, while the other side shows the potential for damage inflicted by these …show more content…
This opens a new range of views, ideas, and problems that people may not otherwise understand. When discussing whistleblower research, Adam Waytz, James Dugan, and Liane Young, (2013) conducted a study on the relationship between fairness and loyalty to a whistleblowers decision making, willingness, and the psychological view of whistleblowers. The purpose of this study was to find out the tradeoff between fairness and loyalty in an individual’s willingness to report. Waytz et. Al (2013, p.1031) found that in divided groups, participants in the fairness condition group engaged in more whistleblowing behavior than the individuals who were placed in the loyalty condition group. This study can contribute to the possible reasons why people decide to blow the whistle. This study shows the problems that whistleblowers have in decision making in regards to deciding between loyalty or fairness. It is important that individuals understand that deciding to blow the whistle is not something as simple as saying yes I will, or no I won’t, but rather it is often a decision between fairness and loyalty. When referencing this to historic problems of whistleblowing, it provides some context as to what can lead someone to blowing the whistle and the potential personality of that