Police Ethics: Field Training, Moral Courage, and Internal Affairs
This paper explores two interconnected ethical dilemmas in law enforcement. The first concerns the role of field training officers in shaping the moral conduct of rookie officers, arguing that unethical behavior modeled by veterans places new officers in a structurally difficult position and that institutional programs — not individual willpower alone — are necessary to address problems such as racial profiling and solidarity-driven misconduct. The second dilemma examines how Internal Affairs should respond to officer misconduct even when no formal complaint has been filed, emphasizing that monitoring, accountability, and administrative investigation must proceed independently of criminal prosecution outcomes. Together, the two scenarios illustrate that ethical policing requires systemic, institutional solutions rather than reliance on individual moral courage.
- The Role of Field Training Officers in Setting Ethical Standards: Veterans shape rookie ethics through lived example
- Moral Weakness and Moral Courage Among Rookie Officers: New officers struggle to challenge unethical senior conduct
- Institutional Solutions to Racism and Misconduct: Systemic programs needed beyond individual moral courage
- Internal Affairs and the Duty to Investigate: Misconduct must be investigated independent of prosecution
- Monitoring, Accountability, and Rebuilding Public Trust: Ongoing monitoring rebuilds community-police relationships
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds abstract ethical arguments in concrete, real-world examples — the NYPD stop-and-frisk reform and the Portland federal grant — giving institutional weight to its claims.
- Balances personal moral scenarios (the hypothetical racist remark) with systemic analysis, avoiding the trap of reducing institutional problems to individual failings.
- Cites authoritative sources, including a U.S. Department of Justice standards document, to support procedural arguments about Internal Affairs investigations.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of the institutional argument: rather than simply asserting that officers should act ethically, it shows why individual moral courage is insufficient and uses policy evidence to argue for structural reform. This approach — acknowledging individual difficulty while redirecting responsibility to the institution — is characteristic of applied ethics writing in criminal justice contexts.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized as two discrete dilemma responses. The first addresses field training and the socialization of new officers into ethical or unethical conduct, moving from the problem (solidarity norms) through real examples (NYPD, Portland) to a systemic conclusion. The second dilemma responds to a scenario involving officer misconduct and video evidence, arguing that Internal Affairs must act regardless of prosecutorial outcomes, and closes with the importance of monitoring for public trust.
The Role of Field Training Officers in Setting Ethical Standards
Field training officers do not merely instruct rookie officers in the technical protocols pertinent to a job description: they also set the moral tone for the organization. When an officer acts unethically in front of a rookie, it places the rookie in an uncomfortable situation. He or she can go along with the commanding officer — and thus act unethically — or remain true to personal convictions while appearing to defy the dictates of the police force at an early, critical stage in a career. As Jones and Carlson (2004) note, "the solidarity norm of police and corrections officer subculture constitutes fertile ground for officer wrongdoing" given the "us vs. them" dynamic of police subculture (p. 99).
New York City was recently criticized for having over-zealous new officers staffing its stop-and-frisk program. To curb and temper their enthusiasm — which led to allegations of racial profiling and cavalier treatment of citizens' rights — the NYPD created a new program "broadening the experience of new officers by putting them in precincts, radio cars and most importantly, creating a better ratio of seasoned veterans to rookies, will help continue their training beyond the academy" (Horan, 2014). This initiative is testimony to the NYPD's belief in the need for existing officers to set the moral tone for the organization.
Moral Weakness and Moral Courage Among Rookie Officers
If an officer said something like "I'm not racing to that location — there's nobody there but blacks — let someone else pick up the call" while another officer was still a rookie, it would be very difficult for that rookie to stand up to the officer in question, given that new officers have no established personal credibility (Jones & Carlson, 2004, p. 100). Only if a new officer had a more experienced mentor whom he or she could rely upon to provide support could that officer have the confidence to challenge such assertions.
Internal Affairs and the Duty to Investigate
Even if no complaint has been filed, misconduct must clearly be brought to light. Although no complaint was filed regarding a specific incident, this will not necessarily be the case in the future. Officers who feel as if they can act with impunity will no doubt repeat their mistakes until they are caught. The conduct in question is particularly brazen given that the officers knew there was a chance their behavior might be caught on film (Jones & Carlson, 2004, p. 154).
This situation places the Internal Affairs investigator in a difficult position, and abuses of authority cannot be solved by the vigilance of individual investigators alone. Nevertheless, action is demanded given the dangers posed not only to suspects but also to the reputation of the police department. Merely because a case is not being prosecuted does not mean the matter is resolved. Even "the declination by a prosecutor to proceed criminally or a dismissal of charges or a not guilty judgment or verdict should not lead to a termination of an administrative investigation given the nature of prosecutorial discretion and the differing standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) and admissibility of evidence in criminal matters in contrast to civil liability or administrative proceedings (preponderance of the evidence)" (Standards and Guidelines for Internal Affairs, 2014, U.S. Department of Justice, p. 23).
References
Bernstein, M. (2014). Portland police would train officers on institutional racism, under federal grant. Oregon Live. Retrieved from http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/06/portland_police_would_train_of.html
Bobb, M., & Pearsall, A. (2010). The changing mission of police monitoring. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from
Horan, K. (2014). Bratton says mentoring rookie cops will help community relationships. WNYC. Retrieved from http://www.wnyc.org/story/bratton-says-mentoring-rookie-cops-will-help-community-relationships/
Jones, J. R., & Carlson, D. P. (2004). Reputable conduct: Ethical issues in policing and corrections (2nd ed.). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Standards and guidelines for internal affairs. (2014). U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.