Suchergebnisse

Presents a framework for analyzing the policy impact of whistleblowing; utilizes two case studies from the 1980s; US. Hugh Kaufman and the Environmental Protection Agency; Hal Freeman and the San Francisco Office for Civil Rights.

In a recent paper given at a Symposium on terrorism, Thomas Hill, Jr., discussed "Making Exceptions Without Abandoning the Principle: Or How a Kantian Might Think about Terrorism." His argument, however, after acknowledging that "terrorists of course often claim to have morally worthy ends and also means that are morally justified in the context," and further stating that "some such claims deserve a serious hearing,"1 goes on to deal with the related question of…what one may justifiably do in response to morally indefensible terrorism.2

WHISTLEBLOWING, OR GOING PUBLIC, IS AN ISSUE WHICH HAS RECEIVED A GREAT DEAL OF MEDIA ATTENTION AND SCHOLARLY CONSIDERATION. THE AUTHOR OF THIS ARTICLE DIVIDES WHISTLEBLOWING INTO INDIVIDUAL, ORGANIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEVELS OF ANALYSIS. EACH LEVEL HAS ITS OWN UNIQUE CONSIDERATIONS WHICH MUST BE UNDERSTOOD SEPARATELY BEFORE THEY CAN BE UNDERSTOOD COMPREHENSIVELY. MOREOVER, THE AUTHOR ASSERTS THAT THE STUDY OF WHISTLEBLOWING FOSTERS AWARENESS OF ETHICS, PROVIDES THE SKILLS NEEDED TO EFFECTIVELY COPE WITH DISSENT, AND IMPARTS LEGAL KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE DISCIPLINE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION TO STUDENTS.

Whistleblowing, or going public, is an issue which has received a great deal of media attention and scholarly consideration. Public administrators of the future will surely have to confront it. The author of this article divides whistleblowing into individual, organization, and environmental levels of analysis. Each level has its own unique considerations which must be understood separately before they can be understood comprehensively. Moreover, the author asserts that the study of whistleblowing fosters awareness of ethics, provides the skills needed to effectively cope with dissent, and imparts legal knowledge about the discipline of public administration to students.

Divides whistleblowing into individual, organization, and environmental levels of analysis, each with its own unique considerations. Asserts that the study fosters awareness of ethics, provides the skills needed to cope with dissent, and imparts legal knowledge about the discipline of public administration. (Abstract amended)

The US Congress has taken a positive attitude toward whistleblowers as providing an effective check on executive branch misconduct. Expressions of support in the 1960s & 1970s were not matched by substantive legislative assistance. The Civil Service Reform Act provided the basis for that assistance in the form of the Offices for Special Council. However, this office shows limited support for whistleblowers, as reflected in the low number of cases it handled in contrast with the number handled by the inspectors general. This situation is attributed to a lack of resources & commitment within the executive branch & a restrictive legislative framework. 1 Table. Modified AA