This dilemma can be evaluated utilizing two frameworks: existentialism and Kant’s ethics. The theory of existentialism under a deontological framework and is based on the belief that only the person can determine what is right and wrong based on their free will to make decisions (Stanwick & Stanwick, 2014). The sheriff is this sense has developed his own sense of virtue and in his defense to the ethics complaint investigated by the state repeatedly said he did nothing wrong. Regarding his trip to New Orleans, he defended his actions by stating he was told by Bolante that the sheriff who preceded him had used his vehicle for personal business, so he therefore believed he was then justified to use the vehicle likewise. The sheriff further …show more content…
Kant’s theory is that a person will make the right decision for the right reason (Arnold, Beauchamp Bowie, 2013). This analysis is based solely on the facts at face value as presented in the two cases. Bolante’s actions are Kantian in nature as one could believe that any person in the same circumstance would have come forward to expose ethical violations to the authorities. But the question here is what actually the circumstance is. We would all like to think that any person would want to do the morally and ethically right thing. Because the sheriff reimbursed the expenses, did the sheriff right a wrong, therefore was the motivation for filing the complaint politically driven? Hoffman (personal communication, October 27, 2015) contends the sheriff is not a popular sheriff with the majority of the employees. Bolante had been hired by Manfre in 2000 during his first term as sheriff. In 2004, Manfre lost the election and for a period of eight years, Bolante was given large pay raises and the use of a company vehicle. She had also been working at a family business and was given the freedom to make her own schedule. When Manfre was reelected in 2012, all of the fringe benefits were taken away. I don’t know that Bolante would have even looked at the violations had the conditions of her employment not changed, and doubtfully would have reported the violations to a third party had she not been forced to