The Ethical School

Summer 2012

By Paula Mirk

The dilemma we present here is real, told to us for your consideration. We change only names and occasionally some of the details to protect privacy of the individuals and/or organizations involved. If you have an ethical dilemma that you would like to share, please contact the editorial staff at Independent School ([email protected]).

Jeff Hanley is thrilled to be elected student-body president his senior year at an all-boys boarding school. He tells his advisor, Dan Hill, that getting elected president had always been his dream. When in office, Jeff takes the job seriously. Early in his term, he implements a number of great innovations, including organizing “town hall meetings” to provide a space and structure for students to voice complaints and ideas. After the meetings, he follows through on those issues that can be addressed, and he speaks up right away if a student’s proposal would be impossible to realize. Jeff has pledged to facilitate these meetings monthly. He’s lined up a variety of guest faculty and administration to attend the meetings to field particular questions. He has committed to attending trustees meetings to provide updates and the student point of view — and the trustees are happy to have him. 

Hill feels that Jeff is off to a great start, but after a couple of months he notices a change in Jeff’s behavior. Sometimes Jeff arrives late to his commitments, and is clearly unprepared. He has recently missed a trustees meeting, and he’s scheduled to report to the student body the next week about the content of that meeting.

When Hill checks Jeff’s grades, he sees that the same patterns are carrying over to the classroom. Jeff is missing classes and is unprepared for tests. Concerned with the uncharacteristic behavior, Hill calls Jeff’s home. His mother explains that she and Jeff’s dad are going through a painful divorce. She’s worried because Jeff seems to be taking the situation very hard, calls every night and seems very homesick. Hill promises to speak with Jeff, but when he suggests that some time off might be a good idea, Jeff is adamant about his commitments at school. Jeff reminds Hill that he’s always wanted to be class president, and that this is his big year.

Hill feels torn. On the one hand, it’s right for him to insist that Jeff take a leave of absence and spend time with his family, since he clearly misses them and feels a need to be close. Jeff’s duties as president are falling short anyway, and he isn’t getting as much as he could out of his class work. On the other hand, Jeff has made it clear that he wants to stay and be a part of the school. He has hinted that sending him home would be like firing him for doing a bad job, and Hill can see that Jeff is fragile in this regard.

This dilemma has short-term vs. long-term implications. Either immediate action could set up long-term problems. If Jeff goes home, he might feel defeated and incompetent in the long run. If he stays and continues performing poorly under stress, he could end up feeling worse about himself. There are also individual vs. community considerations. While sending Jeff home might impact the school community that must adjust to a new class president, keeping Jeff in a role he isn’t doing well also has an impact on everybody else.

The ends-based thinker, considering the greatest good for the greatest number of people, in this case might recommend sending Jeff home. The school community needs a functioning student-body president, and leaving Jeff in the position when he’s doing sub-par work, even if the job means a lot to Jeff, is hurting the school community. The rule-based thinker’s guiding principle might coincide with the ends-based position, since the standard would likely be, “If you can’t perform your duties, you can’t keep your job.” But a care-based thinker might well put himself in Jeff’s shoes and decide to let him stay on. After all, he has no control over his parents’ divorce and could not have foreseen its emotional impact when he ran for office, and this is his dream come true. It’s possible, with more support, Jeff can rise to the occasion again.

The Resolution

Hill talked things over with the administrative team at the school. They came up with a creative third way out that, looking back, turned out well for everyone. They insisted that Jeff take a week at home to completely catch up on his schoolwork, assess his ability to be an effective student-body president, and reconnect with both parents. They told him he was welcome to return to school, but should seriously talk over taking a leave of absence with his parents.

Jeff stayed home for a week and returned to school in much better shape. He carried out the rest of the school year as planned, and kept his grades up. The short break was what he needed to be reassured by his parents and to pull himself together.

Paula Mirk

Paula Mirk is the director of education at the Institute for Global Ethics, based in Rockport, Maine. All rights reserved.