Essay About U.S. Swimmer Ryan Lochte And Ryan Lochte

Rationalization in Unethical Behavior
Rationalizations in Unethical BehaviorJoseph S. Nicola Tarleton State University                Why do people make unethical choices? Perhaps one of the great questions for the deep thinkers of our time and one for which there may never be a definitive answer. Nevertheless, the question begs for an answer that explains such decisions and the people who make them.  Former Federal Prosecutor Serina Vash says, “When I first began prosecuting corruption, I expected to walk into rooms and find the vilest people.  I was shocked to find ordinarily good people I could well have had coffee with that morning.  And they were still good people who had made terrible choices” (Carucci, 2016).  The “why” becomes the challenge in every situation of unethical conduct.  Did the accused lack knowledge of what was considered ethical behavior? Did they lack a positive leadership example?  Was the environment where the unethical behavior occurred lacking a culture constructed of an ethical fabric? Was it so competitive that they felt compelled to cut corners to meet unreasonable goals? Was it unsafe to speak up? That is, were they at risk of losing their job?  In some cases, people accused of unethical behavior have alleged these concepts may have contributed to their choices, but, as we all know, in the end we all have choices.  While it is important and perhaps more valuable to discuss positive examples of ethical decision-making as a means of strengthening an ethical culture, there is value, as well, in showing how otherwise good people made terrible choices.  Several cases come to mind: U.S. swimmer Ryan Lochte at the Rio Olympics in 2016, former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowdens national security breach, and, finally, Baylor Universitys sexual assault scandal involving football coach Art Briles.  From these examples, we will see how each accused party attempted to justify their unethical behavior and the consequences of their actions.         While out on the town with fellow Olympic swimmers in Rio de Janeiro during the 2016 Olympics, 12-time Olympic medalist—the second most decorated male swimmer in Olympic history—Ryan Lochte (Sutherland, 2016) found himself in a confrontation with Brazilian police regarding his conduct at a gas station.  In the early morning hours of August 14, 2016, Lochte and teammates said they were forced out of their taxi at gunpoint and robbed of their money and personal possessions after armed men stopped their taxi. Lochte later said in an interview that he was drunk and that he “over-exaggerated” the story (Quinn, 2016).  His story began to fall apart when he changed the facts and more details came to light that indicated Lochtes taxi had not been stopped by armed men (Quinn, 2016).  In fact, he and his swimmer friends had stopped to use a gas station restroom, which Lochte was accused of vandalizing. Lochte then changed his story to say that the money taken from him was, instead, offered as payment for the damages to the restroom (Romero, 2016).  Brazilian authorities charged Lochte with making a false claim of robbery and could have faced 18 months in prison (Savarese, 2016).  Lochte later remarked about the “robbery” that he didnt know if he would consider it as a robbery, extortion, or “us just paying up for the poster being ripped” (Quinn, 2016).  As a result, USA Swimming suspended Lochte from competition for 10 months, which cost him millions of dollars in sponsor money (Marquina, 2016).  In the end, Lochte attempted to rationalize his behavior with euphemistic labeling, by asserting that he may have “over-exaggerated” his claims (Quinn, 2016). He seemed to distort the consequences, as well, when he said that he didnt know if he would consider the event as a robbery, extortion, or “us just paying up for the poster being ripped” (Quinn, 2016).