PHIL302 Why Rape Victim’s Names should not be Released
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Why Rape Victim’s Names should not be Released
Sexual assault is one of the most atrocious crimes in the society due to its impacts on the victims. Stigma is a common issue in most rape victims since members of the society change their perception on the victim, especially when misconceptions about the victim’s health are concerned. Sexual assault victims also suffer other psychological difficulties including post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Depending on how authorities treat the rape case, some rape victims survive the ordeal and succeed in life while others succumb to suffering and in some cases commit suicide. The problem in this case is: does releasing rape victim’s name benefit the case or the victim? The issue or releasing the names of rape victims has elicited different emotions and thoughts from philosophical, moral and psychological points of view over the last few decades.
The problem arises from the analysis of how releasing the name of a rape victim could affect their life and the nature of an ongoing rape case. Sexual assault cases are sensitive in nature and therefore, authorities handle them carefully to ensure they determine truth and protect the privacy of the rape victims. Authorities must examine evidence openly and without prejudice to ensure that the victims get justice and determine whether the rape suspects were involved (Thacker, 2017). There are incidences that lead to the release of rape victim’s names including during the search for additional evidence. However, the argument lies in the fact that despite the reason for releasing a rape victim’s name, it is unethical and might end up ruining the victim’s psychological health.
When sexual assault occurs, it is a moment or period where the survivors are confused, frightened, and generally full of emotions. Nobody indeed deserves to be sexually assaulted because the act is often deliberate and hence a violent crime. Also, the survivor is not responsible for the assailant assault, and each sexual survivor needs various needs and attention and should be treated accordingly. And being confidential about their assault is one of the major needs they deserve. Victims of sexual assault develop post-traumatic stress disorders and other health complications. While justice for them is the right thing to do, legal undertakings should consider a patient’s personal ethics as well as ethics related to medical practice. Various should be considered while handling such cases, for the security and benefit of the victim.
Position: According to Thacker (2017), there are various circumstances that could lead to the release of rape victim’s name, especially during investigation. This argument follows the moral perspective and the negative impacts that could occur if the victim’s names get released during investigations. I may disagree with Thacker’s argument that there are some cases could make concealment of rape victims unavoidable based on the moral issues that could affect the victim. The position is that releasing names of sexual assault survivors is morally wrong, prohibited by the law, and does not add any value to the case or even solve a minor problem of the assault.
Argument: The argument for this case is based on the following assumptions:
- If officers and investigators find out that searching for evidence in a certain direction may cause ethical issues that might affect the victim, then concealing the victim’s name provides the higher utility; in this case authorities and involved parties should avoid releasing the victim’s names.
- Overall, releasing the victim’s names provides less utility than releasing them.
- Therefore, releasing the names of rape victims is morally wrong.
The expanded argument being discussed is written as follows:
- If releasing names of sexual assault survivors produces less overall utility than not releasing them, then releasing names of sexual assault survivors is morally wrong.
- Releasing names of sexual assault survivors produces less overall utility than not releasing them.
- Therefore, releasing names of sexual assault survivors is morally wrong, prohibited, and does not add any fundamental value or improvement to the case.
Validity and Justification:
The argument against releasing the names of sexual assault victims is valid since it is presented in accordance to the modus pens form or implication elimination. In this argument, rape is defined as a type of sexual assault that involved intercourse without the consent of one party (Thacker, 2017). Psychological suffering refers to the mental issues such as stress and post-traumatic stress disorder that might affect a victim long after the ordeal or when their names are released to the public. The terms high and low utility are also used in this case to refer to the theory of utilitarianism which weights most pleasure versus least pain to determine the course of action when there are different alternatives.
Besides, to better understand the argument, some terms and phrases need to be defined and explained, as shown below, to provide advanced meaning and more information beyond a dictionary explanation but by providing meanings based on the content of the study. For this argument, sexual assault, a survivor of sexual assault, releasing survivor’s name, wrong morals, and overall utility is defined. Sexual assault refers to sexual behavior or contact without prior knowledge of the victim, and they can include rape, unwanted sexual touching, forced oral sex, and rape. On the other hand survivor of sexual assault is the victim of the act, who has come out of it injured or emotionally tortured, having pains but still alive. Releasing the survivor’s name is where the victim’s name is spread through the people, friends, and even in the media places. Wrong morals are morality termed as deviant in a community, while reduced utility refers to no or less effect produced to the condition.
Justification of Premise 1:
In most countries, Sexual assault cases are treated seriously to link the Sexual assault suspects to the crime in the shortest periods. Investigations are comprehensive and may take several weeks or months depending on the nature of the rape case and availability of evidence. During rape cases, authorities may be forced to expose the names of the rape victims as they search for evidence and therefore which may lead to psychological suffering and stigmatization (Porter, 2018). In accordance with the utilitarianism theory, reducing suffering is maintaining morality on the investigators side and ensuring their actions do not negatively affect the victims. If we assume that concealing the names of rape victims during investigations offers the highest utility, it would be moral to allow the concealment of names since it protects the mental health of the victims and safeguards them from stigmatization in the society.
If releasing names of sexual assault survivors produces less overall utility than releasing them, then releasing names of sexual assault survivors is morally wrong. This period of the year of digital technology, a skyrocketing gathering of data, and increased sharing of data has the situation very complex for the victims to reduce sharing of individual information. Sensitive information can still be exposed, despite the available state laws and advocacy prioritizing survivor privacy, leaving the victims either in danger, not willing to open up their abuse and to receive aid (National Network to End Domestic Violence, 2015), or just doing daily activity due to fear. It is morally wrong and even illegal to expose personal privacy. The law is very clear under the fundamental rights of a person’s privacy. Every person, the victims included, have access to these basic rights hence should never be exposed. According to United Nations (United Nations, 1948) Article 12, “No person shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his home, family, privacy or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Every person has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.” Therefore, it is not to expose a piece of information that will be a downfall or that will negatively influence an individual’s medical condition and health safety.
Justification of Premise 2:
Releasing the names of Sexual assault victims offers the overall less utility since there are alternative means of getting evidence such as the use of forensics that are moral since they protect the victim from humiliation and psychological issues. During Sexual assault cases there are internal and external forces that act against the police and investigators to get justice for the victims (Sleath & Bull, 2017). The forces might prompt authorities to release the names of the victims without considering the suffering that the victims might suffer. Therefore, authorities should not be allowed to release the names of Sexual assault victims since it is immoral and might change people’s perception of the victims.
Releasing names of sexual assault survivors produces less overall utility than not releasing them. Occasionally, in a social setup, people are fond of exposing much information about victims of sexual assaults, how the act was done, where, and the place. More untrue information will be arising hence demeaning the victim and reducing one’s self-esteem. But all these exposures of the names are not useful because their aggregate result is worse than its reverse. There is no case solved by exposing the names, not even improving the victim’s health condition. In his work, Perera (2015) indicates the practices that should be done for such victims include but are not limited to the protection of information about sexual assault because the information released to people or media is not part of the health care need for such victims.
Objection to Premise 1
Although premise one supports the concealment of Sexual assault victim’s names since it offers high utility, investigators might be forced, by the law to release the names of the victims in their search for conclusive evidence. Releasing the names is therefore considered as an option since it increases the chances of linking the victims to Sexual assault crimes. From the societal perspective, releasing rape victim’s names seems a moral idea since it speeds up the justice course which is the top priority for most people.
Based on justification premise 1, with the increasing skill and technology of computers, information can easily flow to various parts of the world where the information is greatly needed. And this is not attached whatsoever to morals. The world has rapidly changed, making it difficult to maintain such confidential information (Vista College, 2018). When the victims who are not exposed are treated, there are high chances of transmitting such infection to other friends.
Objection to Premise 2
There are critical flaws in the premise although releasing names offers less utility compared to the idea or concealing them. Although concealing the names of the victims offers them happiness by saving them from public humiliation and psychological suffering, it does not guarantee that they will eventually get justice (Capers, 2017). Concealing the names might even lead to more suffering since it might hinder investigations and lead to acquittal of the guilty party.
In addition, putting objection in justification two, it is also reasonable to share such names to save lives. It is also crucial to note that some of these sexual assaults, such as rape, may have overall effects such as unwanted pregnancies, diseases such as HIV and Aids, sexually transmitted infections. These are diseases that are very dangerous and easily transmitted from one individual to another. When the victims who are not exposed are treated, there are high chances of transmitting such infection to other friends.
Rebuttal/Answer to the Objection to Premise 1
The search or justice for rape victims might take too long or end up disappointing the rape victims due to lack of evidence. It would be painful for the police or the investigators to release the name of a rape victim them end up getting little or no evidence to tie the suspect to the crime. Releasing the names of sexual assault victims does not offer greater utility and therefore, authorities should avoid exposing the names of rape victims since it is immoral and might not lead to positive outcomes at the conclusion of the sexual assault case.
Further, Sex assault education can be conducted, and the victims get immediate first aid towards protecting their health in relation to sexually transmitted diseases. Hence, it still remains morally unfit to share the names of the victims of sex assaults because proper medication is available to take care of any unforeseen risk that can harm friends, relatives, and any associate
Rebuttal/Answer to the Objection to Premise 2
Releasing the names of sexual assault survivors produces less overall benefits to the victims than not releasing them. Immorality is a major issue in law enforcement and therefore, law enforcement officers are expected to determine the best courses of action when releasing the names of sexual assault victims (Berkseth et al., 2017). Less overall utility does not always guarantee happiness to the victims and therefore, investigators should have alternative ways of getting evidence without endangering the well-being of the victims.
Also, in modern technology, information can easily be transmitted from one media to another. On the other hand, confidential data of data can be leaked and illegally sent to unwanted people. Even though this is possible, there are still capabilities and means to maintain and observe the privacy rules. These media can be restricted to store confidential information and to promote a high level of privacy hence preventing the illegal sharing of information. Through this, the gapes which were still left are sealed, and the victims of sexual assault will have their knowledge and names kept private, thus enhance health safety and seeking help from the relevant professionals
Conclusion
Sexual assault victims require protection against psychological conditions and stigmatization in the society and avoiding releasing their names is part of protection. Also, releasing the name of sexual assault victims offers less utility than not releasing them and therefore, authorities should avoid releasing the names to maintain their morality and protect the victims from humiliation and psychological issues due to the sensitivity of sexual assault cases. Releasing the names may also fail to yield any fruits in the justice course and therefore, it is important for law enforcement officers to critically assess their options during investigations.
Sensitive information about sexual assault to a survivor when exposed can leave the survivors either in danger, unwilling to disclose their abuse and get help, or unable to perform simple tasks or activities due to low self-esteem, shyness, and destruction of public image and individual perception of ones. Hence releasing names of sexual assault survivors is morally wrong, illegal, and does not add any value to the case, neither does it solve the problem of assault. The position that releasing names of sexual assault survivors is morally wrong, prohibited by the law, and does not add any value to the case or even solve a minor problem of the assault is fully supported and confirmed to be valid and morally legal hence information privacy in sex assaulted survivor is fundamental.
References (as of 3/4/21)
Berkseth, L., Meany, K., & Zisa, M. (2017). Rape and Sexual Assualt. Geo. J. Gender & L., 18, 743.
Capers, B. (2017). Rape, truth, and hearsay. Harv. Women’s LJ, 40, 183.
Counseling and Health. (2021). College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University. Retrieved from Sexual Assault Survivor’s Guide : https//www.csbsju.edu/chp/sexual assault-survivor-guide
National Network to End Domestic Violence . (2015). Why Privacy and Confidentiality Matters for Victims of Domestic & Sexual Violence — Technology Safety. Technology Safety, p. Np.
Perera, J. (2015). Practices and attitudes of specialists in Forensic Medicine in the management of general health care needs of victims of sexual violence. Medico-Legal Journal of Sri Lanka, 1.
Porter, C. (2018). Determinative Factors for Sexual Assault Victim Participation in Prosecution (Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University).
Sleath, E., & Bull, R. (2017). Police perceptions of rape victims and the impact on case decision making: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, 102-112.
Thacker, L. K. (2017). Rape culture, victim blaming, and the role of media in the criminal justice system. Kentucky Journal of Undergraduate Scholarship, 1(1), 8.
United Nation. (1948). Universal Declaration to Human Right . United Nation Declaration on Human Right (p. 6). Paris : United Nation national General Assembly .
Vista College . (2018). Trending in information Technology . current trends in information technology, 4.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!