Paterno Ethics Essay

329 Words2 Pages
The Penn State fiasco defiantly brings up some important moral questions. Is acting only in the manner someone is legally obligated to enough? Was Joe Paterno, morally obliged to inform the incident to the police, when he must have realized that the University has decided not take action? The only “action” University took against Mr. Sandusky was to tell him, not to bring boys to the campus. But he still had access to the facilities. Wasn’t Mr. Paterno concerned for the safety of other kids on the campus? Why did Mr. Paterno, choose to stay quiet? Was it because he wanted to “protect the reputation” of Penn State? In my opinion, Joe Paterno was wrong. Mr. Paterno should have reported the incident further to the police when the University officials failed to take action. It remains unanswered as to why Mr. Paterno remained quiet. If it was to protect the reputation of Penn State, then he was wrong. Given the stature of Mr. Paterno, he would have enhanced it by going out in public. Students and parents looked up to “JoePa”, the grandfatherly figure of Penn State football. Anyone who knows of abuse of a child is immediately burdened with the moral responsibility not only to report it, but to work actively to end it. Ethical obligations are different than legal or role-based obligations. When we see people who are being threatened, and we have the power to intervene, we are morally obligated to do so. A consequentialist would argue that by reporting the incident to the police, Mr. Paterno would have put a stop to Mr. Sandusky activities and would have saved other children from being molested. The Penn State incident occurred in 2002 and Mr. Sandusky was indicted finally in 2011. Post 2002, it was reported that Mr. Sandusky continued his sexual assault. Mr. Paterno is considered morally wrong because of the consequences of his not taking action in reporting

More about Paterno Ethics Essay

Open Document