Question 1: Identify the stakeholders and how they were affected by Heene's actions?
The stakeholders in the “Balloon Ball Hoax” are the boy, Falcon Heene; the parents, Richard and Mayumi Heene, brothers, Bradford and Ryo Heene; Larimer County sheriff; Jim Alderman; Denver International Airport travelers and employees; National Guard unit; local police; search and rescue teams; media and news services; Colorado taxpayers; and the public.
The public through the media watched and worried about the fate of the boy in the balloon. Colorado taxpayers footed the bill for the 50,000 USD cost of personnel time, equipment and other incidentals to track the balloon, search the rescue mission, and investigation of the hoax. Denver International Airport closed to avoid collision with the balloon. Travelers were delayed and flights rerouted and rescheduled. Airport employees had to remain calm and courteous as travelers became frustrated with delays, missed flight times and rescheduling.
Local police, the National Guard unit, and search and rescue teams spent hours and used expensive equipment to track and hunt for the balloon and boy while Falcon was safe the whole time. Sheriff Jim Alderman had to conduct investigation under intense media scrutiny. At first, the media was incredulous that the parents were being questioned and investigated. Then Mr. Alderman was ridiculed for not detecting the hoax sooner.
Falcon Heene was used by his parents to pull out the hoax that he was on a hot air balloon that had escaped it tether. Falcon was expected to lie and help his parent with the hoax. His brothers, Bradford and Ryo, were also expected to lie and help the parents. Media attention was forcused on all of the sons as the story played out. Falcon explained on CNN Larry King Live in responses to a question from Wolf Blitzer that he was hiding and not responding to his name being called for show. The media attention on the young boy did cause his to vomit on television twice in one day
The parents , Richard and Mayumi Heene, used the hoax to create and garner attention so that they could get their own reality television show. Their actions were a result of egoism. The need for media attention was the utmost reason the hoax, and the hoax was carried out without regard for any one else or cost to the taxpayers. Richard Heene had called the media and Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) twice while the balloon was aloft.
The media and news services followed the story in detail. Journalism ethics and skepticism were forgotten in the thrill of chasing the story and being the first to report updates.
As a result of the hoax, Sheriff Jim Alderman considered charges against the Heene for conspiracy, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, making a false report to authorities, and attempting to influence a public servant. Some of these charges are felonies and carry a maximum sentences of six years in prison.
Richard Heen pled guilty to the felony charge of attempting to influence a public servant and received four years probation, was prohibited from receiving and financial benefit from the case during the period of the probation; and received 90 days of jail time with 60 days being work release time. Richard pled to more serve felony charge so that his wife could be charged with misdemeanor, a lesser charge. She, thereby, could avoid deportation back to Japan. Mayumi pled guilty to false reporting to authorities. She was sentenced to 20 days in jail, which she can serve on weekends after her husband’s release
Sheriff Aderman was seeking full restitution of approximately 50,000 USD for the cost of investing the hoax. The FAA planned to seek a fine of 11,000

Question 2: What stage of moral reasoning is exhibited by Richard Heene's actions? Do you believe the punishment fit the crime? Why or why not?
Richard Heene was reasoning at stage 2 in the pleading guilty to a felony charge, Richard was reasoning at stage 3 (fairness to others) and showing loyalty to his wife.
Question 3 :Explain how the cognitive-developmental approach influences one's ability to make ethical judgments?
Cognitive development approach assumes that individuals construct a system of moral reasoning. Moral development proceeds through successive stages, each stage involves more complex judgment processes. Movement from one stage to another stage is dependent on the increasing capacity of the individual to synthesize complicated cognitive reasoning when confronted with more complex social situations. This approach suggests that people continue to change their decision priorities over time and with additional education and experience. In the context of business, an individual moral development can be influenced by corporate culture and ethics training.
Question 4 : How do you assess at what stage of moral development in Kohlberg's model you reason at in making decisions? Are you satisfied with that stage? Do you believe there are factors or forces preventing you from reasoning at a higher level? If so, what are they?
There are several approaches to the study of moral development, which are categorized in a variety of ways. Briefly, the social learning theory approach claims that humans develop morality by learning the rules of acceptable behavior from their external environment (an essentially behaviorist approach). Psychoanalytic theory proposes instead that morality develops through humans' conflict between their instinctual drives and the demands of society. Cognitive development theories view morality as an outgrowth of cognition, or reasoning, whereas personality theories are holistic in their approach, taking into account all the factors that contribute to human development.
The hardest part of moving up Kohlberg scale might be impartially. Nearly all ethical systems make difficult demands of treating other as if we loved them.