Ethical Question: Detaining Non Citizen Children

This document explores the morality of detaining non citizen children for processing and the ethical implications involved. It discusses the virtues of compassion and hospitality, the morality of the act, and applies Kant's categorical imperative to analyze the ethical question. The document also includes references to relevant literature on Kantian ethics.

1
Order 962348
Name:
Course
Professor’s name
University name
City, State
Date of submission

2
a)Act Central to ethical question
The act central to ethical question is detaining unlawful non citizen children in mandatory
detention for processing.
b) 2 virtues to the morality of the act central to your specific ethical question.
1. Compassion: One of the ethical virtues is compassion. There is no compassion when detaining
non citizen children. It would be understandable to detain adults but it is morally wrong to detain
children.
2.Hospitality : Being hospitable is another virtue central to this question. Hospitality is being
able to accommodate people in a cool way.
c) Discuss the morality to the act of your ethical question
Ethical debates about detaining non citizen children for processing have emerged and there are
disagreements over whether the immigration department and political communities have a right
to enforce their border (Bowie, 2017). It is right for the immigration department to enforce its
laws by processing all the non citizens who get in the country. However, what is wrong is
detaining non citizen children which is seen by many as morally unacceptable.
First, this policy contravenes the United Nations human rights laws which states that refugees
are supposed to be accorded with all the necessary support to alleviate their human suffering
(Herman, 2016). Secondly, by subjecting children to trauma by detaining them is an
impermissible means of enforcing what may otherwise be seen as a legitimate goal of
documenting all non citizens. This shows the lack of compassion to the children.

3
categorical imperative of Kant’s theory
According to categorical imperative created by Kant we are supposed to do to others what we
would want others to do to us. All people are supposed to act according to this Maxim as if it
were a universal law.
a)
Immanuel Kant argument is that the supreme principle of morality is a standard of rationality.
Therefore all immoral actions in this case detaining non citizen children for processing is an
irrational action which is consequently immoral (Pendlebury, 2017) . This action violate the
categorical imperative. The specific rule is that the children should be detained to allow for
registration and documentation process. This is reasonable but fails to show that there are
children that are being detained which is irrational and immoral.
b) The general rule is that detention of the non-citizen children is a means to the end which is
justifying the documentation process. Detention can be used when necessary to allow
documentation and registration of the non citizen children.
c) is there any self contradiction of the general rule?
The general rule is inherently self-contradictory because it allows detention of the children to
enable documentation. According to Kant Theory and categorical imperative we are supposed to
act to others as we expect them to act towards us. We must always be rational despite any
inclinations or natural desires that we may have to the contrary (Ficarrotta,2016) . The reason as

4
to why the general rule is contradictory is because it allows for the detention of children which is
morally wrong according to Kant’s theory.
d) Are absolute morals violated by the general rule?
The general rule does not violate Kant’s absolute morals. Although morality in itself is relative
and subjective. According to Kant’s theories the rightfulness and wrongfulness of actions are not
dependent on their consequences but rather on if the fulfil their duty (Fryer, 2016). Thus, the
detention of children is viewed as an action to enable processing of the children.
e) Is fundamental purpose contradictory to the general rule?
The general rule is conflicting to its fundamental purpose because according to Kant’s theory
morality should be what is guiding us (Baron, 2018). The purpose should to enable the children
have freedom without interfering with their liberty and rights.
f) according to Kant’s ethical system is the act of detention ethical?
According to Kant the wrongness or rightness of an action depends on whether they fulfil their
duty and not dependent on their consequences. So detaining children is ethical according to
Kant’s ethical system as it is a means enabling processing to be done.
Conclusion
Detaining the children for processing is morally wrong. But utilitarian as a theory focuses on an
outcome and so in this case the outcome is ensuring that processing. Thus detention will produce
the greatest benefit for majority of the citizens.

5
Baron, M.W., 2018. Kantian ethics almost without apology. Cornell University Press.
Bowie, N.E., 2017. Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Ficarrotta, J.C., 2016. Kantian thinking about military ethics. Routledge.
Fryer, M., 2016. A role for ethics theory in speculative business ethics teaching. Journal of
business ethics, 138(1), pp.79-90.
Herman, B., 2016. Morality as rationality: a study of Kant's ethics. Routledge.
Pendlebury, G., 2017. Action and ethics in Aristotle and Hegel: escaping the malign influence of
Kant. Routledge.