Different kinds of reasoning 1. Reasoning from rules non-consequentialist / deontological – Using set of rules that could spring from variety of sources Religious Legal Group norms Ex. sharing private info is wrong even tho it might not be illegal – 2. Reasoning from consequences reasoning –teleological Consider the harm caused Weighing of competing harms pros v cons/ benefit vs harm – 3. Ontological reasoning Reasoning from virtue/ character/ values Decision-making is motivated by desire to be a good person by how we define our ideals of conduct n character at trial may conflict – loyalty vs honesty vs respect for privacy Role Morality ethical rules / norms of the role occupied ex. unethical for lawyer to disclose secret cuz of the duty of confidentiality legal ethic involves: rules virtues consequences issue- requirement of role morality may conflict with personal morality exception even duty of confidentiality has exceptions – smith v jones - recog a future harm exception to lawyer-client confidentiality Rule of Professional conduct 3.3-3 – R v butt Accused convicted of sexual interference against 12 yr old boy Defence counsel learned accused was HIV+ Disclosed to n court commended defence counsel Sources of Regulation Case law and legislation most significant doctrinal source of guidance – Rules of professional conduct Law society disciplinary decisions Provides insight into meanings of provisions of the code of conduct Principle / norms Tanovich Learning to Act like a Lawyer – Existing problem University code is not enough: Gap btw university code of conduct vs law society code of conduct Prob No positive obligation not requirement to do sth – Cultural competence need to have skills rep client from diverse background – Current Focus only on things that are related to campus – Should have more stringent code Reason When entering law school essentially entering law school – Since almost everybody gets called to the bar – Need to create culture of professionalism More and more students are serving communities thru pro bono Separate code for law students to give effect to the professional element of the law – program Reasons against stringent code
Different kinds of reasoning 1. Reasoning from rules – non-consequentialist / deontological Using set of rules that could spring from variety of sources Religious Legal Group norms Ex. sharing private info is wrong – even tho it might not be illegal 2. Reasoning from consequences –teleological reasoning Consider the harm caused Weighing of competing harms – pros v cons/ benefit vs harm 3. Ontological reasoning Reasoning from virtue/ character/ values Decision-making is motivated by desire to be a good person by how we define our ideals of conduct n character at may conflict – loyalty vs honesty vs respect for privacy Role Morality ethical rules / norms of the role occupied ex. unethical for lawyer to disclose secret cuz of the duty of confidentiality legal ethic involves: rules virtues consequences issue- requirement of role morality may conflict with personal morality exception – even duty of confidentiality has exceptions smith v jones - recog a future harm exception to lawyer-client confidentiality Rule of Professional conduct – 3.3-3 R v butt Accused convicted of sexual interference against 12 yr old boy Defence counsel learned accused was HIV+ Disclosed to n court commended defence counsel Sources of Regulation Case law and legislation – most significant doctrinal source of guidance Rules of professional conduct Law society disciplinary decisions Provides insight into meanings of provisions of the code of conduct Principle / norms Tanovich – Learning to Act like a Lawyer Existing problem University code is not enough: Gap btw university code of conduct vs law society code of conduct Prob No positive obligation – not requirement to do sth Cultural competence – need to have skills rep client from diverse background Current Focus – only on things that are related to campus Should have more stringent code Reason When entering law school – essentially entering law school Since almost everybody gets called to the bar – Need to create culture of professionalism More and more students are serving communities thru pro bono Separate code for law students – to give effect to the professional element of the law program Reasons against stringent code trial
Benedet_Law_468_-_Ethics_&_Professionalism_Winter_2013_Jennifer_Tseng.docx