Ethics vs Law

This is a graded essay i wrote during my introduction to Law course with Oxford Scolastica Academy.

Write a short essay of 500 words debating whether being ethical always means following the law.

Ethics are a process of reflection in which people’s decisions are shaped by moral values and purpose. This gives us a sense of what is good, right and meaningful in our lives. Religions such as Christianity often impact ethics. There is more to ethics than morality and law, ethics looks at issues that the law does not address. Ethics shape the kinds of laws the society develops but I do not think the law can shape ethics. We should be striving for the law to be that way, and not have to live in a world where we have to decide if something is ethical and need not look beyond the written law.

The law is a system of rules that is governed by the authority that control human behaviors to maintain peace and order to the society. Laws are the same and are made to be followed whilst ethics tend to vary depending on city or impact of religious views. But there are some ethical principles that would be considered to be universal in nature and that a majority of cultures would agree to be wrong. Eg- do not steal, do not murder without good reason etc... Some things are legal but are not ethical, others are ethical but go against the law. Doing the right thing even if it means breaking the law is justified. To that degree being ethical does not require any sets of law. Laws can also be conformed to what is ethically right.

Taking R v Dudley and Stephens as an example, it was a matter of ethics vs law. This case is about survivors of a shipwreck who killed and ate their youngest crew member and were later prosecuted for murder. They were highly unlikely to survive, and the boy would have likely also died anyway. It was also ‘custom of the sea’ that cannibalism was allowed in such circumstances. Ethically speaking, had they not eaten the boy they would have all died, so it was a matter of life and death. Though the wrongful killing of the boy did break the law it was a just and necessary defense. But one could argue that ethically nothing and no situation justifies taking another humans life.

Another case is Apartheid in South Africa 1948-94, according to the law at the time black people were animals and were not seen as equals. People of color could only work in specific fields of work- and live-in certain areas that were black only because that was the law. Even though it was the law, and segregation was legal, it was ethically wrong because all human beings are the same.

There may be times when obeying the law would require us to act against our ethics such as in criminal law. As a lawyer you may have a defendant who you think is guilty of immoral crimes but have to defend them because of the importance that every individual has fair treatment under the law. The perpetrator is innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Morally you may feel that it is not right to defend this person because they are a bad individual and they deserve to go to jail.

In conclusion, being ethical does not always mean following the law even though sometimes ethics are law. Following the law may affect the morality of certain people and the law may not always be just and right. The law is there to maintain order and ethics engages our feelings and thinking.