Introduction
In March 2019, Captain Brett Crozier had to make a morally challenging choice. This problem is typical for the military command, which makes elaborating the protocol of ethical actions in similar cases critical. The question is whether the commander had to breach the line of command to get a quicker response or should he trust his chain of command to prioritize the safety of his crew. The investigation discusses the components of forming moral judgments based on how Captain Crozier coped with the challenges. His communication method is analyzed from the perspectives of effectiveness and ethics.
The Ethical Dilemma
The COVID-19 pandemic was a significant concern that interrupted the work of all spheres globally. The military sphere was not the exception, and this factor influenced Captain Crozier’s choice. According to the official information that Captain Crozier received, the COVID-19 infection was mortal; it had an airborne type of transmission and spread quickly through air droplets during close contact (Toti, 2020). Consequently, Captain Crozier faced a moral dilemma concerning preserving the soldiers’ lives. The question was whether he should follow the official protocol to safeguard the lives of his staff or whether he should wait and believe that his prior communications through the chain of command would lead to the desired result.
Awareness of an Ethical Problem
There were already approximately 100 sailors who were infected with the virus.
The Captain claimed in his letter that he could not provide those staff members with separate rooms for the required quarantine to prevent the subsequent virus spread (Toti, 2020). Additionally, there were no opportunities for other staff members on the ship to preserve the social distance critical for the virus spread prevention (Toti, 2020). Despite testing, infected individuals showed negative results during the incubation phase due to how the virus appeared (Toti, 2020). Therefore, the number of infected people on the ship increased constantly, and there was no reasonable opportunity to prevent this.
Judgment Against Ethical Criteria
The Captain had to decide if it was more moral to inform a more extensive group about the issue or to communicate the message to the officer in command on the ship, which is consistent with the Navy protocol.
Prioritizing the Ethical Decision Above all Other Possible Consequences
Captain Crozier is a competent naval officer aware of the penalties for violating the Navy rules and has probably had to enforce such sanctions on his subordinates.
He prioritized the lives of his staff members over his career opportunities. Captain thought there was a significant possibility that numerous members of his team contracting the disease would die, which was not comparable to the risks of losing his job and ruining his reputation. The quote from the letter illustrates this position: âWe are not at war. Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset: our Sailorsâ (Starr et al., 2020, par. 5). It states that Captain understood all possible consequences of his decision and prioritized people’s lives over his job.
Turning Ethical Principles into Action
After assessing his alternatives, Captain Crozier decided to send the message through email and include a thorough description of the ship’s problems and a request for assistance. He used an insecure email route and informed those commanders outside his direct supervision.
The Successes and Failures of the Captain’s Communication
Raising awareness of the circumstances on board the ship was the aim of Captain Crozier’s communication plan, which was successful. The Captain used persuasion as a communication strategy. His goal was to influence the mindset of his receivers, who were the Navy leadership, and motivate them to respond more quickly. In his message, he utilized language that would cause panic to express the dire circumstances facing the ship (Starr et al., 2020). The articles describing the ship’s situation also describe this event similarly to emphasize the critical case and the need to react rapidly.
Nevertheless, the message had other objectives besides only increasing awareness. The key aim was to shift the ship’s command to evacuate the crew for quarantine safely. The Captain’s communication strategy might have failed to achieve the expected results. He disregarded protocol, which resulted in the letter’s release (Pickrell, 2021). The Navy’s senior leadership changed their focus to cope with his conduct and the media reaction supporting Captain. Soon, the commanders stopped criticizing the Captain and released him from all accusations (Pickrell, 2021). The peculiar detail in this situation is that captain Crozier had an impeccable reputation among the crew, and the critical position of the Navy leaders harmed their reputation instead.
Ethical Decision-Making in the Private Sector
It is possible that the ethical decision-making in the private sector would be similar to the one Captain Crozier made. He prioritized the lives of his staff, which is critical in all spheres of work. For instance, similar behavior is standard in healthcare, where the patient’s life and well-being are the most valuable thing. At the same time, the decisions in the private sector might be more straightforward than those of Captain Crozier (Peregrine, 2020). The navy sphere is connected with a comparatively high level of bureaucracy, which makes the system not flexible in emergencies.
Conclusion
Making ethical decisions is always challenging, and Captain Crozier had to solve a moral problem in a critical situation. He prioritized the lives of the staff over his career opportunities and was ready to face the adverse consequences of his decision. Communication allowed him to explain his opinion and situation to others, which was a critical issue in restoring his reputation. Even though the message may have yet to produce the expected results, based on his knowledge and experience at the time, captain Crozier had the clear intention to act ethically (Peregrine, 2020). From examples of comparable actions and outcomes in the private sector, Captain Crozier would have experienced the same outcome in all spheres, and the ethical decision would be the same.
References
Peregrine, M. (2020). Corporate leadership lessons from the navyâs U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt report. Forbes. Web.
Pickrell, R. (2021). Warship captains told the skipper of a COVID-stricken aircraft carrier he was ‘doing what is right’ just before the Navy fired him, emails show. Insider. Web.
Starr, B., Perez, E., & Browne, R. Acting Navy secretary apologizes for calling ousted aircraft carrier captain âstupidâ in address to shipâs crew. CNN. Web.
Toti, W. (2020). 13 lessons from the Crozier controversy. Defense One. Web.