Splitting into small groups for the case study was a refreshing twist to the standard predictable presentations. I’m not sure if the group came up with the idea or if Professor Campbell assigned the idea to the group. Many of the cases were ethical dilemmas because there were multiple right answers to the issues. Our group was given the case study of the serial killer Ted Bundy. Bundy would slash the tires of women’s’ cars in supermarket parking lots. He then would approach the women offering to help, but would abduct them instead.
We had to make the decision of whether or not to inform the public of these actions. Informing the public could cause the killer to change his approach, but if the public wasn’t informed more women could fall victimized. We decided that if we were to inform the public of his tactics he would probably change his approach. As a result, we decided to inform the public of his description, but not give his whole approach. We suspected that the police would have an easier time catching him if they knew his plan, and as a result save more women from being murdered. Our group agreed we had to choose between two bad decisions in order to ultimately catch the criminal. But when people’s lives are in danger such as in this case, it may take deep analyzing to find the best solution.
No comments:
Post a Comment