The Crimes of Child Killer Angela McAnulty

Angela McAnulty sits on death row at the Coffee Creek Correctional Facility in Oregon after pleading guilty to the murder of her 15-year-old daughter Jeanette Maples, whom she literally tortured, beat, and starved to death. McAnulty also pled guilty to altering and destroying evidence in the case. Angela McAnultys Formative Years Angela McAnulty was born on October 2, 1968, in California. When she was 5 years old, her mother was murdered. She spent the remainder of her childhood living with her father and two brothers. Her father was abusive, often withholding food from the children as a form of punishment. At the age of 16, McAnulty began a relationship with a carnival worker and left home. It was during this time that she became involved with drugs. She later met Anthony Maples, with whom she had three children, two boys, Anthony Jr. and Brandon, and her daughter, Jeanette. She also had another child, a daughter named Patience, by another father. When Maples and McAnulty were incarcerated on drug charges, the children were placed in foster care. After her release from jail in 2001, McAnulty regained custody of Jeanette and Patience. In 2002, Angela met and married a long-haul truck driver named Richard McAnulty. They had a son soon after the marriage. By October 2006, the family relocated to Oregon, leaving Anthony Jr. and Brandon behind. The boys had sent letters to a judge requesting to stay in foster care rather than be returned to their abusive mother. Cries for Help Born on August 9, 1994, Jeanette Maples spent six of her first seven years in foster care prior to being returned to her mother. According to interviews with family members, Angela began abusing Jeanette soon after the two were reunited. Described as a good child, Jeanette attended public school and took her studies seriously. She was given perfect attendance awards in the seventh and eighth grade. However, in social interactions, Jeanette had a difficult time. Sent to school wearing torn, dirty tops and worn-out sweatpants, she was sometimes teased by her classmates. Despite her shyness, she managed to make a few friends, although she would only see them at school. Her mother did not allow her to invite friends to her home. In 2008, after a friend spotted several bruises on Jeanette during gym class, she admitted that her mother did not allow her to eat and that she was abused. The friend told her parents and Child Protection Services (CPS) was contacted but the agency representatives were reluctant to respond to what they called second-hand information. A teacher was contacted who spoke to Jeanette who again admitted to being abused. She said was terrified of her mother. The teacher contacted CPS and reported her concerns. CPS went to the McAnulty home but closed the case after McAnulty denied abusing her daughter and blamed the accusations on Jeanette, whom she described as a compulsive liar. McAnulty subsequently pulled Jeanette out of school, saying that she was going to home school her daughter. This left Jeanette completely isolated and greatly reduced any chances of her getting the help she so badly needed. In 2009 another call was made to the CPS, this time by an anonymous caller who later turned out to be Lee McAnulty, Jeanettes grandmother. She called CPS after seeing how grossly underweight Jeanette had become. The child also had a split lip, both conditions Angela McAnulty dismissed when it was suggested that she should take her daughter to a doctor. Over the following months, Jeanettes grandmother called CPS several times but the agency did not follow up on the calls. Her last call was made within days of Jeanettes death. The Death of Jeanette Maples On December 9, 2009, at around 8 p.m., Angela McAnulty told emergency personnel responding to a 9-1-1 call made from her home that her daughter Jeanette was not breathing. Paramedics found the small, thin-framed 15-year-old girl in the living room. Jeanettes hair was wet and she wasnt wearing a top. She had no pulse. McAnulty told the paramedics that Jeanette had fallen down and seemed fine an hour before she stopped breathing. However, a brief exam of the dying girl told a different story. Jeanette had multiple bruises on her face, cuts above her eye, and scars on her lips. She was so emaciated that she looked much younger than her age. Jeanette was transferred to the hospital where she was pronounced dead at 8:42 p.m. The Criminal Investigation At the hospital, Dr. Elizabeth Hilton examined Jeanette and found that her face was disfigured from severe bruising. There were scars and deep wounds on her head, legs and back, including an exposed femur. Her front teeth were broken and her lips were pulverized. It was determined that Jeanettes dehydrated, starved and beaten body was not a result of a simple fall. The police searched the McAnulty home and found a blood-splattered bedroom that family members admitted McAnulty tried to clean before calling 9-1-1 to come to the aid of her dying daughter. Richard McAnulty also admitted that Angela wanted to bury Jeanette rather than call 9-1-1 but he had insisted on calling for help. He made the call while Angela attempted to hide evidence of the abuse that had gone on inside the home. The two children in the McAnulty home were interviewed. Patience told police that Angela and Richard were starving Jeanette and that Angela beat Jeanette repeatedly. She later said that Richard and Angela often struck Jeanette across the mouth with shoes or their hands. Police Interview of Angela McAnulty During the first police interview, Angela McAnulty tried to convince detectives that Jeanettes injuries were caused by a fall. She said her husband was responsible for disciplining the children and that she had never hurt Angela. She changed her story only after investigators apprised her that they had spoken to other family members whod described the abuse Angela routinely inflicted on Jeanette. When questioned about Jeanettes dehydrated and starved condition, McAnulty said it was a result of ignorance, not neglect. She told detectives, The reason why shes so skinny, honest to God, is when she split her lip awhile back, I did not know exactly how to feed her. The investigators continued to challenge McAnultys version of the facts until she eventually broke and began to tell them what really happened. I did wrong, she said. I should never have spanked my daughter with a belt. I shouldnt have done that. That was horrible of me. I shouldnt have done any of that stuff that I did. I shouldnt have done hands up. I understand that. I am very sorry. I dont know how I can take it back. But when it came to what McAnulty assumed was the final blow that caused her daughters death, she refused to take the blame. I didnt do the injury on the head. I did not do that, she told detectives. I know that she probably died because of the injury on her head, through the skull when she fell down. I did not kill my daughter over a spanking. I didnt do that. McAnulty told detectives that maybe she should have taken up smoking to help relieve the stress that Jeanette caused. I guess the things she did just got to me, she went on to explain. I dont know. Honest to God, I dont know. Im sorry. I am sorry. Torture and Starvation Angela and Richard McAnulty were arrested and charged with aggravated murder by intentionally maiming and torturing Jeanette Maple. Based on the evidence found at the McAnulty home, autopsy reports, and interviews with the Angela and Richard McAnulty, their children, and other relatives, prosecutors determined that the following took place over the course of several months: McAnulty punished Jeanette regularly using different methods of abuse and torture. To hide the abuse from the other children in the home, she would bring Jeanette into her bedroom, later described by prosecutors as the torture room, turn on the vacuum cleaner to mask the sounds, force Jeanette to strip naked, and then she would repeatedly beat her with leather belts, sticks, and torture her with pliers.Tests on various objects found in the home would later show that they contained blood and pieces of Jeanettes flesh.Jeanette was deprived of food and water for days at a time. She was forced to drink water from the dogs bowl and the toilet bowl to quench her thirst.Dying tissue had been cut away, likely with a knife, from wounds that had become infected to the point of exposing bone on Jeanettes hip.Jeanette was forced to sleep on cardboard so that blood would not seep into the carpet. She was often left tied up after being beaten or forced to kneel with her arms behind her back as if handcuffed.McAnulty forced Patience to collect dog feces from the yard which McAnulty would smear over Jeanettes face and mouth.McAnulty forced Jeanette to stand facing the walls with her arms raised for hours at a time. Often she could only stand on one foot because her other foot was too injured from Angela stomping on it.Angela and Richard McAnulty hit Jeanette across the mouth with shoes and the backs of their hands, which pulverized her lips. Angela refused to get medical help for Jeanette which resulted in her lips healing from the inside out. The scar tissue that formed left her mouth deformed.McAnulty purposely beat Jeanette in areas that she had already caused severe damage, resulting in old wounds opening up and becoming infected. ​Disturbing Testimony by Jeanette Maples Half Sister ​According to testimony given by Patience, the half-sister of Jeanette Maples, Angela McAnulty began abusing Jeanette as soon as she regained custody of the child who was 7 years old at that time. Patience also spoke about an incident just days before Jeanette died, during which McAnulty showed her a wound about the size of a quarter on the back of Jeanettes head. McAnulty made the comment that if someone was  Ã¢â‚¬Å"stabbed in the back of the head with a branch, it would cause brain damage.†Ã‚  Patience went on to testify that by that time, Jeanette was acting strange and was incoherent. When asked about what she remembered during the time that Jeanette was first returned to McAnulty, Patience said that after McAnulty married Richard McAnulty in 2002, Jeanette was locked in a back bedroom so that she would â€Å"not really be part of the family.† She went on to describe how she witnessed both Angela and Richard abusing Jeanette, which including beating her with shoes and depriving her of food.​ Sentencing Angela McAnulty was sentenced to death for the torture and murder of her daughter. Richard McAnulty was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole until serving 25 years. He denied directly abusing Jeanette but admitted that he failed to protect her from her mother or to report the abuse to authorities. Anthony Maples v. Oregon Department of Human Services The State of Oregon agreed to pay $1.5 million to the estate of Jeanette Maples in a wrongful death lawsuit filed by her biological father, Anthony Maples, who was the sole heir to Jeanette Maples estate. It was determined that beginning in 2006, and ending with a call that was received the week before her death, CPS agents failed to investigate four reports of possible abuse of Jeanette Maples by her mother. Anthony Maples had no contact with his daughter for nearly 10 years prior to her murder, nor did he attend her memorial service. Under Oregon law, only a deceased persons parents, spouse, or children can be considered legal heirs. Siblings, who are not considered legal heirs, are unable to share in an estate.

Management Of International Mobility - 1352 Words

This model identifies that management of international mobility entails the need to take a holistic approach to all aspects of the assignment process. (Sparrow, Brewster and Harris, 2004) However, although the model has its advantages in terms of pre-assignment preparation, some of the stages however do bring about some complexities for IM managers as outlined for by (Sparrow, Brewster and Harris, 2004) Selection- the need for precise recruitment and selection is needed; IM managers need to pay close attention to interpersonal and cross-cultural skills in potential assignees. As this will determine how they interact with locals and the subsequent success of the assignment. (Barham Wills, 1992) In practise however, the criteria for the majority of assignment candidates tends to be based on their technical competence and job knowledge. Rather than paired with the previously mentioned skills. This puts a great importance on the practise in use of ‘soft skills’ and ‘hard skills’ mixture for a successful assignment. (Sparrow, Brewster and Harris, 2004; Morley and Flynn, 2003) A MNC has many choices regarding their staffing policies when recruiting for assignments; these come under different forms depending on the company’s preferences in terms of skills. †¢ Ethnocentric approach- Using Home country staff †¢ Polycentric approach- Using Host country staff †¢ Geocentric approach- Using staff from any parts of the world (Pelmutters, 1969) Performance measurement- (Fenwick, 2004)Show MoreRelated1. Abstract . We Have Little Knowledge About The Report,1693 Words   |  7 Pages1. ABSTRACT We have little knowledge about the report, we are discussing about the global talent management (GTM) and the role of the corporate human resource function in multinational corporations. International mobility its new forms, increased global talents hunting are the two perspectives of GTM. GTM discusses and considered primarily about the mechanisms and following the willingness to enter the emerging markets using organisational ability to maintain or managing the talents. These issuesRead MoreThe Hr Trend : Greater ( Job ) Mobility1692 Words   |  7 PagesThe HR Trend – Greater (Job) Mobility Human resources professionals who have sole HR responsibilities for their organization are faced with 10 trends affecting HRM. Thus, planning for and adapting to these changes in the workplace becomes an integral part of the HR professional’s job (10 Workplace Trends that Will Affect HR, n.d.). The video highlights ten (10) trend affecting human resources management, one such being Greater (Job) Mobility. According to the Video, â€Å"You may find that more ofRead MoreThe Hr Trend : Greater ( Job ) Mobility1233 Words   |  5 Pages1. The HR Trend – Greater (Job) Mobility Human resources professionals who have sole HR responsibilities for their organization are faced with 10 trends affecting HRM. Thus, planning for and adapting to these changes in the workplace becomes an integral part of the HR professional’s job. The video highlights ten (10) trend affecting human resources management, one such being Greater (Job) Mobility. According to the Video, â€Å"You may find that more of your employees are willing to take short termRead MoreChallenges And Implications Of Human Resource Management1393 Words   |  6 Pagesresource management is arguably one of the most important departments in every organization. Just like other departments in the organization human resource management faces its share of challenges. One of the major challenges the department has been facing in the recent past is the trend in the mobility of human resources (Caulfield, 2010). Human resource mobility refers to the movement of employees either internally or externally . Internal mobility includes upward mobility or downward mobility. TheRead MoreCase Study : Global Risk Manager1318 Words   |  6 Pagesways. Obviously, the risks that accompany deployment of employees worldwide are rethinking the part of mobility professionals. They must have strong financial acumen, learning of duty and immigration risks, employee relations experience, and an adaptable manner to adapt to the continually changing business environment, Hannibal says (Krell, 2012). The part obliges a sound way to risk management. While this methodology differs by organization and circumstance, versatility specialists recognizeRead MoreArticle Analysis: On the Contradictions of the New International Financial Architecture: Another Procrustean Bed for Emerging Markets?1404 Words   |  6 PagesSummary: what is a main concept in the case or article? The main concept of the article is to explain why the New International Financial Architecture (NIFA) was created and who is being benefited from this approach. The discussion begins with an examination of the power structures of the global political economy by focusing on the continued dominance of the USA. The article presents the contradictory relations between USA and global finance will be explored so as to shed more critical lightRead MoreThe Role of Transportation in Developing Nations811 Words   |  3 Pagesdevelopment. Cars are the main form of transport that people use. The most common vehicle fuels are ethanol and gasoline. Both vehicles fuels are pollutants and environment damage, but the alcohol is much less polluting than gasoline. According to International Energy Agency IEA Energy Technology Essentials (2007), biofuels are a sustainable energy. Brazilian ethanol production is made using sugar cane, and the crop produces high yields per hectare and the sugar is rel atively easy to extract. The UnitesRead MoreThe Diversity At The Workplace747 Words   |  3 Pagesof all ancestry, ethnicity, age, gender, race, educational background, sexual orientation, marital status, religious belief, income, geographic location and work experience. The mobility in human resource trend is emerging within the competitive market that requires more strategic role on account of human resource management. Organizations may fall in dire consequences of outplaying by other competitors in strategic employment. Nowadays, workforce is no longer a set of employees (Narasimhan, 2004)Read MoreEssay on Bmw Strategic and Operational Plans768 Words   |  4 PagesMobility is a number one focus globally as we continue to look for mobility solutions. We are currently living in times of economic uncertainty. To meet these challenges BMW must create strategic and operational plans to increase sales, develop new and profitable areas of activity and sustainability along the ent ire value chain and in all basic processes, which will create value to the company, the environment and society. Based on the SWOT analysis BMW’s strengths are as follows: a very reputableRead MoreThe High Level Of Openness And Labor Mobility1642 Words   |  7 PagesExecutive Summary The high level of openness and labor mobility are two of the essential criteria for a successful optimal currency area (OCA). EU and GCC countries are OCA in terms of openness because they have high economic openness level. Although the GCC has a low level of intra-regional trade, the fixed exchange rate regime still is the optimal due to the fact that the main export commodity is oil for GCC countries, they do not need to adjust the exchange rate between GCC countries due to their

Egoism and Altruism Free Essays

string(32) " to show benevolence to others\." 1. Metaethics The term â€Å"meta† means after or beyond, and, consequently, the notion of metaethics involves a removed, or bird’s eye view of the entire project of ethics. We may define metaethics as the study of the origin and meaning of ethical concepts. We will write a custom essay sample on Egoism and Altruism or any similar topic only for you Order Now When compared to normative ethics and applied ethics, the field of metaethics is the least precisely defined area of moral philosophy. It covers issues from moral semantics to moral epistemology[-0]. Two issues, though, are prominent: (1) metaphysical issues concerning whether morality exists independently of humans, and (2) psychological issues concerning the underlying mental basis of our moral judgments and conduct. a. Metaphysical Issues: Objectivism and Relativism Metaphysics is the study of the kinds of things that exist in the universe. Some things in the universe are made of physical stuff, such as rocks; and perhaps other things are nonphysical in nature, such as thoughts, spirits, and gods. The metaphysical component of metaethics involves discovering specifically whether moral values are eternal truths that exist in a spirit-like realm, or simply human conventions. There are two general directions that discussions of this topic take, one other-worldly and one this-worldly. Proponents of the other-worldly view typically hold that moral values are objective[-1] in the sense that they exist in a spirit-like realm beyond subjective human conventions. They also hold that they are absolute, or eternal, in that they never change, and also that they are universal insofar as they apply to all rational creatures around the world and throughout time[-2]. The most dramatic example of this view is Plato[-3], who was inspired by the field of mathematics. When we look at numbers and mathematical relations, such as 1+1=2, they seem to be timeless concepts that never change, and apply everywhere in the universe. Humans do not invent numbers, and humans cannot alter them. Plato explained the eternal character of mathematics by stating that they are abstract entities that exist in a spirit-like realm. He noted that moral values also are absolute truths and thus are also abstract, spirit-like entities. In this sense, for Plato, moral values are spiritual objects. Medieval philosophers commonly grouped all moral principles together under the heading of â€Å"eternal law† which were also frequently seen as spirit-like objects. 17th century British philosopher Samuel Clarke described them as spirit-like relationships rather than spirit-like objects. In either case, though, they exist in a sprit-like realm. A different other-worldly approach to the metaphysical status of morality is divine commands issuing from God’s will. Sometimes called voluntarism (or divine command theory[-4]), this view was inspired by the notion of an all-powerful God[-5] who is in control of everything. God simply wills things, and they become reality. He wills the physical world into existence, he wills human life into existence and, similarly, he wills all moral values into existence. Proponents of this view, such as medieval philosopher William of Ockham[-6], believe that God wills moral principles, such as â€Å"murder is wrong,† and these exist in God’s mind as commands. God informs humans of these commands by implanting us with moral intuitions or revealing these commands in scripture. The second and more this-worldly approach to the metaphysical status of morality follows in the skeptical philosophical tradition, such as that articulated by Greek philosopher Sextus Empiricus, and denies the objective status of moral values. Technically, skeptics did not reject moral values themselves, but only denied that values exist as spirit-like objects, or as divine commands in the mind of God. Moral values, they argued, are strictly human inventions, a position that has since been called moral relativism[-7]. There are two distinct forms of moral relativism. The first is individual relativism, which holds that individual people create their own moral standards. Friedrich Nietzsche, for example, argued that the superhuman creates his or her morality distinct from and in reaction to the slave-like value system of the masses. The second is cultural relativism which maintains that morality is grounded in the approval of one’s society – and not simply in the preferences of individual people. This view was advocated by Sextus, and in more recent centuries by Michel Montaigne and William Graham Sumner. In addition to espousing skepticism and relativism, this-worldly approaches to the metaphysical status of morality deny the absolute and universal nature of morality and hold instead that moral values in fact change from society to society throughout time and throughout the world. They frequently attempt to defend their position by citing examples of values that differ dramatically from one culture to another, such as attitudes about polygamy, homosexuality and human sacrifice. b. Psychological Issues in Metaethics A second area of metaethics involves the psychological basis of our moral judgments and conduct, particularly understanding what motivates us to be moral. We might explore this subject by asking the simple question, â€Å"Why be moral? † Even if I am aware of basic moral standards, such as don’t kill and don’t steal, this does not necessarily mean that I will be psychologically compelled to act on them. Some answers to the question â€Å"Why be moral? † are to avoid punishment, to gain praise[-8], to attain happiness, to be dignified, or to fit in with society. i. Egoism and Altruism One important area of moral psychology concerns the inherent selfishness of humans. 17th century British philosopher Thomas Hobbes[-9] held that many, if not all, of our actions are prompted by selfish desires. Even if an action seems selfless, such as donating to charity, there are still selfish causes for this, such as experiencing power over other people. This view is called psychological egoism[-10] and maintains that self-oriented interests ultimately motivate all human actions. Closely related to psychological egoism is a view called psychological hedonism which is the view that pleasure is the specific driving force behind all of our actions. 18th century British philosopher Joseph Butler[-11] agreed that instinctive selfishness and pleasure prompt much of our conduct. However, Butler argued that we also have an inherent psychological capacity to show benevolence to others. You read "Egoism and Altruism" in category "Essay examples" This view is called psychological altruism and maintains that at least some of our actions are motivated by instinctive benevolence. ii. Emotion and Reason A second area of moral psychology involves a dispute concerning the role of reason in motivating moral actions. If, for example, I make the statement â€Å"abortion is morally wrong,† am I making a rational assessment or only expressing my feelings? On the one side of the dispute, 18th century British philosopher David Hume[-12] argued that moral assessments involve our emotions, and not our reason. We can amass all the reasons we want, but that alone will not constitute a moral assessment. We need a distinctly emotional reaction in order to make a moral pronouncement. Reason might be of service in giving us the relevant data, but, in Hume’s words, â€Å"reason is, and ought to be, the slave of the passions. † Inspired by Hume’s anti-rationalist views, some 20th century philosophers, most notably A. J. Ayer, similarly denied that moral assessments are factual descriptions. For example, although the statement â€Å"it is good to donate to charity† may on the surface look as though it is a factual description about charity, it is not. Instead, a moral utterance like this involves two things. First, I (the speaker) I am expressing my personal feelings of approval about charitable donations and I am in essence saying â€Å"Hooray for charity! † This is called the emotive element insofar as I am expressing my emotions about some specific behavior. Second, I (the speaker) am trying to get you to donate to charity and am essentially giving the command, â€Å"Donate to charity! † This is called the prescriptive element in the sense that I am prescribing some specific behavior. From Hume’s day forward, more rationally-minded philosophers have opposed these emotive theories of ethics (see non-cognitivism in ethics[-13]) and instead argued that moral assessments are indeed acts of reason. 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant[-14] is a case in point. Although emotional factors often do influence our conduct, he argued, we should nevertheless resist that kind of sway. Instead, true moral action is motivated only by reason when it is free from emotions and desires. A recent rationalist approach, offered by Kurt Baier (1958), was proposed in direct opposition to the emotivist and prescriptivist theories of Ayer and others. Baier focuses more broadly on the reasoning and argumentation process that takes place when making moral choices. All of our moral choices are, or at least can be, backed by some reason or justification. If I claim that it is wrong to steal someone’s car, then I should be able to justify my claim with some kind of argument. For example, I could argue that stealing Smith’s car is wrong since this would upset her, violate her ownership rights, or put the thief at risk of getting caught. According to Baier, then, proper moral decision making involves giving the best reasons in support of one course of action versus another. iii. Male and Female Morality A third area of moral psychology focuses on whether there is a distinctly female approach to ethics that is grounded in the psychological differences between men and women. Discussions of this issue focus on two claims: (1) traditional morality is male-centered, and (2) there is a unique female perspective of the world which can be shaped into a value theory. According to many feminist philosophers, traditional morality is male-centered since it is modeled after practices that have been traditionally male-dominated, such as acquiring property, engaging in business contracts, and governing societies. The rigid systems of rules required for trade and government were then taken as models for the creation of equally rigid systems of moral rules, such as lists of rights and duties. Women, by contrast, have traditionally had a nurturing role by raising children and overseeing domestic life. These tasks require less rule following, and more spontaneous and creative action. Using the woman’s experience as a model for moral theory, then, the basis of morality would be spontaneously caring for others as would be appropriate in each unique circumstance. On this model, the agent becomes part of the situation and acts caringly within that context. This stands in contrast with male-modeled morality where the agent is a mechanical actor who performs his required duty, but can remain distanced from and unaffected by the situation. A care-based approach to morality, as it is sometimes called, is offered by feminist ethicists as either a replacement for or a supplement to traditional male-modeled moral systems. . Normative Ethics Normative ethics involves arriving at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. In a sense, it is a search for an ideal litmus test of proper behavior. The Golden Rule is a classic example of a normative principle: We should do to others what we would want others to do to us. Since I do not want my neighbor to steal m y car, then it is wrong for me to steal her car. Since I would want people to feed me if I was starving, then I should help feed starving people. Using this same reasoning, I can theoretically determine whether any possible action is right or wrong. So, based on the Golden Rule, it would also be wrong for me to lie to, harass, victimize, assault, or kill others. The Golden Rule is an example of a normative theory that establishes a single principle against which we judge all actions. Other normative theories focus on a set of foundational principles, or a set of good character traits. The key assumption in normative ethics is that there is only one ultimate criterion of moral conduct, whether it is a single rule or a set of principles. Three strategies will be noted here: (1) virtue theories, (2) duty theories, and (3) consequentialist theories. . Virtue Theories Many philosophers believe that morality consists of following precisely defined rules of conduct, such as â€Å"don’t kill,† or â€Å"don’t steal. † Presumably, I must learn these rules, and then make sure each of my actions live up to the rules. Virtue ethics[-15], however, places less emphasis on learning rules, and instead stresses the imp ortance of developing good habits of character, such as benevolence (see moral character[-16]). Once I’ve acquired benevolence, for example, I will then habitually act in a benevolent manner. Historically, virtue theory is one of the oldest normative traditions in Western philosophy, having its roots in ancient Greek civilization. Plato emphasized four virtues in particular, which were later called cardinal virtues: wisdom, courage, temperance and justice. Other important virtues are fortitude, generosity, self-respect, good temper, and sincerity. In addition to advocating good habits of character, virtue theorists hold that we should avoid acquiring bad character traits, or vices, such as cowardice, insensibility, injustice, and vanity. Virtue theory emphasizes moral education since virtuous character traits are developed in one’s youth. Adults, therefore, are responsible for instilling virtues in the young. Aristotle[-17] argued that virtues are good habits that we acquire, which regulate our emotions. For example, in response to my natural feelings of fear, I should develop the virtue of courage which allows me to be firm when facing danger. Analyzing 11 specific virtues, Aristotle argued that most virtues fall at a mean between more extreme character traits. With courage, for example, if I do not have enough courage, I develop the disposition of cowardice, which is a vice. If I have too much courage I develop the disposition of rashness which is also a vice. According to Aristotle, it is not an easy task to find the perfect mean between extreme character traits. In fact, we need assistance from our reason to do this. After Aristotle, medieval theologians supplemented Greek lists of virtues with three Christian ones, or theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity. Interest in virtue theory continued through the middle ages and declined in the 19th century with the rise of alternative moral theories below. In the mid 20th century virtue theory received special attention from philosophers who believed that more recent approaches ethical theories were misguided for focusing too heavily on rules and actions, rather than on virtuous character traits. Alasdaire MacIntyre (1984) defended the central role of virtues in moral theory and argued that virtues are grounded in and emerge from within social traditions. . Duty Theories Many of us feel that there are clear obligations we have as human beings, such as to care for our children, and to not commit murder. Duty theories base morality on specific, foundational principles of obligation. These theories are sometimes called deontological, from the Greek word deon, or duty, in view of the foundational nature of our duty or obligation. They are also sometimes called nonconsequentialist since these princi ples are obligatory, irrespective of the consequences that might follow from our actions. For example, it is wrong to not care for our children even if it results in some great benefit, such as financial savings. There are four central duty theories. The first is that championed by 17th century German philosopher Samuel Pufendorf, who classified dozens of duties under three headings: duties to God, duties to oneself, and duties to others. Concerning our duties towards God, he argued that there are two kinds: a theoretical duty to know the existence and nature of God, and a practical duty to both inwardly and outwardly worship God. Concerning our duties towards oneself, these are also of two sorts: duties of the soul, which involve developing one’s skills and talents, and duties of the body, which involve not harming our bodies, as we might through gluttony or drunkenness, and not killing oneself. Concerning our duties towards others, Pufendorf divides these between absolute duties, which are universally binding on people, and conditional duties, which are the result of contracts between people. Absolute duties are of three sorts: avoid wronging others, treat people as equals, and romote the good of others. Conditional duties involve various types of agreements, the principal one of which is the duty is to keep one’s promises. A second duty-based approach to ethics is rights theory. Most generally, a â€Å"right† is a justified claim against another person’s behavior – such as my right to not be harmed by you (see also human rights[-18]). Rights and duties are related in such a way that the rights of one person implies the duties of another person. For example, if I have a right to payment of $10 by Smith, then Smith has a duty to pay me $10. This is called the correlativity of rights and duties. The most influential early account of rights theory is that of 17th century British philosopher John Locke[-19], who argued that the laws of nature mandate that we should not harm anyone’s life, health, liberty or possessions. For Locke, these are our natural rights, given to us by God. Following Locke, the United States Declaration of Independence authored by Thomas Jefferson recognizes three foundational rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Jefferson and others rights theorists maintained that we deduce other more specific rights from these, including the rights of property, movement, speech, and religious expression. There are four features traditionally associated with moral rights. First, rights are natural insofar as they are not invented or created by governments. Second, they are universal insofar as they do not change from country to country. Third, they are equal in the sense that rights are the same for all people, irrespective of gender, race, or handicap. Fourth, they are inalienable which means that I ca not hand over my rights to another person, such as by selling myself into slavery. A third duty-based theory is that by Kant, which emphasizes a single principle of duty. Influenced by Pufendorf, Kant agreed that we have moral duties to oneself and others, such as developing one’s talents, and keeping our promises to others. However, Kant argued that there is a more foundational principle of duty that encompasses our particular duties. It is a single, self-evident principle of reason that he calls the â€Å"categorical imperative. A categorical imperative, he argued, is fundamentally different from hypothetical imperatives that hinge on some personal desire that we have, for example, â€Å"If you want to get a good job, then you ought to go to college. † By contrast, a categorical imperative simply mandates an action, irrespective of one’s personal desires, such as â€Å"You ought to do X. † Kant gives at least four versions of the categorical imperative, but one is especially direct: Treat people as an end, and never as a means to an end. That is, we should always treat people with dignity, nd never use them as mere instruments. For Kant, we treat people as an end whenever our actions toward someone reflect the inherent value of that person. Donating to charity, for example, is morally correct since this acknowledges the inherent value of the recipient. By contrast, we treat someone as a means to an end whenever we treat that person as a tool to achieve something else. It is wrong, for example, to steal my neighbor’s car since I would be treating her as a means to my own happiness. The categorical imperative also regulates the morality of actions that affect us individually. Suicide, for example, would be wrong since I would be treating my life as a means to the alleviation of my misery. Kant believes that the morality of all actions can be determined by appealing to this single principle of duty. A fourth and more recent duty-based theory is that by British philosopher W. D. Ross, which emphasizes prima facie duties. Like his 17th and 18th century counterparts, Ross argues that our duties are â€Å"part of the fundamental nature of the universe. † However, Ross’s list of duties is much shorter, which he believes reflects our actual moral convictions:  ·Fidelity: the duty to keep promises Reparation: the duty to compensate others when we harm them  ·Gratitude: the duty to thank those who help us  ·Justice: the duty to recognize merit  ·Beneficence: the duty to improve the conditions of others  ·Self-improvement: the duty to improve our virtue and intelligence  ·Nonmaleficence: the duty to not injure others Ross recognizes that s ituations will arise when we must choose between two conflicting duties. In a classic example, suppose I borrow my neighbor’s gun and promise to return it when he asks for it. One day, in a fit of rage, my neighbor pounds on my door and asks for the gun so that he can take vengeance on someone. On the one hand, the duty of fidelity obligates me to return the gun; on the other hand, the duty of nonmaleficence obligates me to avoid injuring others and thus not return the gun. According to Ross, I will intuitively know which of these duties is my actual duty, and which is my apparent or prima facie duty. In this case, my duty of nonmaleficence emerges as my actual duty and I should not return the gun. c. Consequentialist Theories It is common for us to determine our moral responsibility by weighing the consequences of our actions. According to consequentialism[-20], correct moral conduct is determined solely by a cost-benefit analysis of an action’s consequences: Consequentialism: An action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable. Consequentialist normative principles require that we first tally both the good and bad consequences of an action. Second, we then determine whether the total good consequences outweigh the total bad consequences. If the good consequences are greater, then the action is morally proper. If the bad consequences are greater, then the action is morally improper. Consequentialist theories are sometimes called teleological theories, from the Greek word telos, or end, since the end result of the action is the sole determining factor of its morality. Consequentialist theories became popular in the 18th century by philosophers who wanted a quick way to morally assess an action by appealing to experience, rather than by appealing to gut intuitions or long lists of questionable duties. In fact, the most attractive feature of consequentialism is that it appeals to publicly observable consequences of actions. Most versions of consequentialism are more precisely formulated than the general principle above. In particular, competing consequentialist theories specify which consequences for affected groups of people are relevant. Three subdivisions of consequentialism emerge:  ·Ethical Egoism: an action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable only to the agent performing the action.  ·Ethical Altruism: an action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone except the agent. Utilitarianism: an action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone. All three of these theories focus on the consequences of actions for different groups of people. But, like all normative theories, the above three theories are rivals of each other. They also yield different conclusions. Consider the following example. A woman was traveling through a developing country when she witnessed a car in front of her run off the road and roll over several times. She asked the hired driver to pull over to assist, but, to her surprise, the driver accelerated nervously past the scene. A few miles down the road the driver explained that in his country if someone assists an accident victim, then the police often hold the assisting person responsible for the accident itself. If the victim dies, then the assisting person could be held responsible for the death. The driver continued explaining that road accident victims are therefore usually left unattended and often die from exposure to the country’s harsh desert conditions. On the principle of ethical egoism[-21], the woman in this illustration would only be concerned with the consequences of her attempted assistance as she would be affected. Clearly, the decision to drive on would be the morally proper choice. On the principle of ethical altruism, she would be concerned only with the consequences of her action as others are affected, particularly the accident victim. Tallying only those consequences reveals that assisting the victim would be the morally correct choice, irrespective of the negative consequences that result for her. On the principle of utilitarianism, she must consider the consequences for both herself and the victim. The outcome here is less clear, and the woman would need to precisely calculate the overall benefit versus disbenefit of her action. i. Types of Utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham[-22] presented one of the earliest fully developed systems of utilitarianism. Two features of his theory are noteworty. First, Bentham proposed that we tally the consequences of each action we perform and thereby determine on a case by case basis whether an action is morally right or wrong. This aspect of Bentham’s theory is known as act-utilitiarianism. Second, Bentham also proposed that we tally the pleasure and pain which results from our actions. For Bentham, pleasure and pain are the only consequences that matter in determining whether our conduct is moral. This aspect of Bentham’s theory is known as hedonistic utilitarianism. Critics point out limitations in both of these aspects. First, according to act-utilitarianism, it would be morally wrong to waste time on leisure activities such as watching television, since our time could be spent in ways that produced a greater social benefit, such as charity work. But prohibiting leisure activities doesn’t seem reasonable. More significantly, according to act-utilitarianism, specific acts of torture or slavery would be morally permissible if the social benefit of these actions outweighed the disbenefit. A revised version of utilitarianism called rule-utilitarianism addresses these problems. According to rule-utilitarianism, a behavioral code or rule is morally right if the consequences of adopting that rule are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone. Unlike act utilitarianism, which weighs the consequences of each particular action, rule-utilitarianism offers a litmus test only for the morality of moral rules, such as â€Å"stealing is wrong. Adopting a rule against theft clearly has more favorable consequences than unfavorable consequences for everyone. The same is true for moral rules against lying or murdering. Rule-utilitarianism, then, offers a three-tiered method for judging conduct. A particular action, such as stealing my neighbor’s car, is judged wrong since it violates a moral ru le against theft. In turn, the rule against theft is morally binding because adopting this rule produces favorable consequences for everyone. John Stuart Mill’s version of utilitarianism is rule-oriented. Second, according to hedonistic utilitarianism, pleasurable consequences are the only factors that matter, morally speaking. This, though, seems too restrictive since it ignores other morally significant consequences that are not necessarily pleasing or painful. For example, acts which foster loyalty and friendship are valued, yet they are not always pleasing. In response to this problem, G. E. Moore [-23]proposed ideal utilitarianism, which involves tallying any consequence that we intuitively recognize as good or bad (and not simply as pleasurable or painful). Also, R. M. Hare proposed preference utilitarianism, which involves tallying any consequence that fulfills our preferences. ii. Ethical Egoism and Social Contract Theory We have seen (in Section 1. b. i) that Hobbes was an advocate of the methaethical theory of psychological egoism—the view that all of our actions are selfishly motivated. Upon that foundation, Hobbes developed a normative theory known as social contract theory[-24], which is a type of rule-ethical-egoism. According to Hobbes, for purely selfish reasons, the agent is better off living in a world with moral rules than one without moral rules. For without moral rules, we are subject to the whims of other people’s selfish interests. Our property, our families, and even our lives are at continual risk. Selfishness alone will therefore motivate each agent to adopt a basic set of rules which will allow for a civilized community. Not surprisingly, these rules would include prohibitions against lying, stealing and killing. However, these rules will ensure safety for each agent only if the rules are enforced. As selfish creatures, each of us would plunder our neighbors’ property once their guards were down. Each agent would then be at risk from his neighbor. Therefore, for selfish reasons alone, we devise a means of enforcing these rules: we create a policing agency which punishes us if we violate these rules. 3. Applied Ethics Applied ethics is the branch of ethics which consists of the analysis of specific, controversial moral issues such as abortion, animal rights, or euthanasia. In recent years applied ethical issues have been subdivided into convenient groups such as medical ethics, business ethics, environmental ethics[-25], and sexual ethics[-26]. Generally speaking, two features are necessary for an issue to be considered an â€Å"applied ethical issue. † First, the issue needs to be controversial in the sense that there are significant groups of people both for and against the issue at hand. The issue of drive-by shooting, for example, is not an applied ethical issue, since everyone agrees that this practice is grossly immoral. By contrast, the issue of gun control would be an applied ethical issue since there are significant groups of people both for and against gun control. The second requirement for an issue to be an applied ethical issue is that it must be a distinctly moral issue. On any given day, the media presents us with an array of sensitive issues such as affirmative action policies, gays in the military, involuntary commitment of the mentally impaired, capitalistic versus socialistic business practices, public versus private health care systems, or energy conservation. Although all of these issues are controversial and have an important impact on society, they are not all moral issues. Some are only issues of social policy. The aim of social policy is to help make a given society run efficiently by devising conventions, such as traffic laws, tax laws, and zoning codes. Moral issues, by contrast, concern more universally obligatory practices, such as our duty to avoid lying, and are not confined to individual societies. Frequently, issues of social policy and morality overlap, as with murder which is both socially prohibited and immoral. However, the two groups of issues are often distinct. For example, many people would argue that sexual promiscuity is mmoral, but may not feel that there should be social policies regulating sexual conduct, or laws punishing us for promiscuity. Similarly, some social policies forbid residents in certain neighborhoods from having yard sales. But, so long as the neighbors are not offended, there is nothing immoral in itself about a resident having a yard sale in one of these neighborhoods. Thus, to qualify as an applied ethical issue, the issue must be more than one of mer e social policy: it must be morally relevant as well. In theory, resolving particular applied ethical issues should be easy. With the issue of abortion, for example, we would simply determine its morality by consulting our normative principle of choice, such as act-utilitarianism. If a given abortion produces greater benefit than disbenefit, then, according to act-utilitarianism, it would be morally acceptable to have the abortion. Unfortunately, there are perhaps hundreds of rival normative principles from which to choose, many of which yield opposite conclusions. Thus, the stalemate in normative ethics between conflicting theories prevents us from using a single decisive procedure for determining the morality of a specific issue. The usual solution today to this stalemate is to consult several representative normative principles on a given issue and see where the weight of the evidence lies. a. Normative Principles in Applied Ethics Arriving at a short list of representative normative principles is itself a challenging task. The principles selected must not be too narrowly focused, such as a version of act-egoism that might focus only on an action’s short-term benefit. The principles must also be seen as having merit by people on both sides of an applied ethical issue. For this reason, principles that appeal to duty to God are not usually cited since this would have no impact on a nonbeliever engaged in the debate. The following principles are the ones most commonly appealed to in applied ethical discussions:  ·Personal benefit: acknowledge the extent to which an action produces beneficial consequences for the individual in question.  ·Social benefit: acknowledge the extent to which an action produces beneficial consequences for society.  ·Principle of benevolence: help those in need. Principle of paternalism: assist others in pursuing their best interests when they cannot do so themselves.  ·Principle of harm: do not harm others.  ·Principle of honesty: do not deceive others.  ·Principle of lawfulness: do not violate the law.  ·Principle of autonomy: acknowledge a person’s freedom over his/her actions or physical body.  ·Principle of justice: acknowledge a person’s right to due process, fair compensation for harm done , and fair distribution of benefits.  ·Rights: acknowledge a person’s rights to life, information, privacy, free expression, and safety. The above principles represent a spectrum of traditional normative principles and are derived from both consequentialist and duty-based approaches. The first two principles, personal benefit and social benefit, are consequentialist since they appeal to the consequences of an action as it affects the individual or society. The remaining principles are duty-based. The principles of benevolence, paternalism, harm, honesty, and lawfulness are based on duties we have toward others. The principles of autonomy, justice, and the various rights are based on moral rights. An example will help illustrate the function of these principles in an applied ethical discussion. In 1982, a couple from Bloomington, Indiana gave birth to a baby with severe mental and physical disabilities. Among other complications, the infant, known as Baby Doe, had its stomach disconnected from its throat and was thus unable to receive nourishment. Although this stomach deformity was correctable through surgery, the couple did not want to raise a severely disabled child and therefore chose to deny surgery, food, and water for the infant. Local courts supported the parents’ decision, and six days later Baby Doe died. Should corrective surgery have been performed for Baby Doe? Arguments in favor of corrective surgery derive from the infant’s right to life and the principle of paternalism which stipulates that we should pursue the best interests of others when they are incapable of doing so themselves. Arguments against corrective surgery derive from the personal and social disbenefit which would result from such surgery. If Baby Doe survived, its quality of life would have been poor and in any case it probably would have died at an early age. Also, from the parent’s perspective, Baby Doe’s survival would have been a significant emotional and financial burden. When examining both sides of the issue, the parents and the courts concluded that the arguments against surgery were stronger than the arguments for surgery. First, foregoing surgery appeared to be in the best interests of the infant, given the poor quality of life it would endure. Second, the status of Baby Doe’s right to life was not clear given the severity of the infant’s mental impairment. For, to possess moral rights, it takes more than merely having a human body: certain cognitive functions must also be present. The issue here involves what is often referred to as moral personhood, and is central to many applied ethical discussions. b. Issues in Applied Ethics As noted, there are many controversial issues discussed by ethicists today, some of which will be briefly mentioned here. Biomedical ethics focuses on a range of issues which arise in clinical settings. Health care workers are in an unusual position of continually dealing with life and death situations. It is not surprising, then, that medical ethics issues are more extreme and diverse than other areas of applied ethics. Prenatal issues arise about the morality of surrogate mothering, genetic manipulation of fetuses, the status of unused frozen embryos, and abortion. Other issues arise about patient rights and physician’s responsibilities, such as the confidentiality of the patient’s records and the physician’s responsibility to tell the truth to dying patients. The AIDS crisis has raised the specific issues of the mandatory screening of all patients for AIDS, and whether physicians can refuse to treat AIDS patients. Additional issues concern medical experimentation on humans, the morality of involuntary commitment, and the rights of the mentally disabled. Finally, end of life issues arise about the morality of suicide, the justifiability of suicide intervention, physician assisted suicide, and euthanasia. The field of business ethics examines moral controversies relating to the social responsibilities of capitalist business practices, the moral status of corporate entities, deceptive advertising, insider trading, basic employee rights, job discrimination, affirmative action, drug testing, and whistle blowing. Issues in environmental ethics often overlaps with business and medical issues. These include the rights of animals, the morality of animal experimentation, preserving endangered species, pollution control, management of environmental resources, whether eco-systems are entitled to direct moral consideration, and our obligation to future generations. Controversial issues of sexual morality include monogamy versus polygamy, sexual relations without love, homosexual relations, and extramarital affairs. Finally, there are issues of social morality which examine capital punishment, nuclear war, gun control, the recreational use of drugs, welfare rights, and racism. 4. References and Further Reading Anscombe,Elizabeth â€Å"Modern Moral Philosophy,† Philosophy, 1958, Vol. 33, reprinted in her Ethics, Religion and Politics (Oxford: Blackwell, 1981).  ·Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, in Barnes, Jonathan, ed. , The Complete Works of Aristotle (Princeton, N. J. : Princeton University Press, 1984).  ·Ayer, A. J. , Language, Truth and Logic (New York: Dover Publi cations, 1946).  ·Baier, Kurt, The Moral Point of View: A Rational Basis of Ethics (Cornell University Press, 1958).  ·Bentham, Jeremy, Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), in The Works of Jeremy Bentham, edited by John Bowring (London: 1838-1843). Hare, R. M. , Moral Thinking, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981).  ·Hare, R. M. , The Language of Morals (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952).  ·Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, ed. , E. Curley, (Chicago, IL: Hackett Publishing Company, 1994).  ·Hume, David, A Treatise of Human Nature (1739-1740), eds. David Fate Norton, Mary J. Norton (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).  ·Kant, Immanuel, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, tr, James W. Ellington (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1985).  ·Locke, John, Two Treatises, ed. Peter Laslett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963).  ·MacIntyre, Alasdair, After Virtue, second edition, (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1984).  ·Mackie, John L. , Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, (New York: Penguin Books, 1977).  ·Mill, John Stuart, â€Å"Utilitarianism,† in Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, ed. , J. M. Robson (London: Routledge and Toronto, Ont. : University of Toronto Press, 1991).  ·Moore, G. E. , Principia Ethica, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903).  ·Noddings, Nel, â€Å"Ethics from the Stand Point Of Women,† in Deborah L. Rhode, ed. , Theoretical Perspectives on Sexual Difference (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990).  ·Ockham, William of, Fourth Book of the Sentences, tr. Lucan Freppert, The Basis of Morality According to William Ockham (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1988).  ·Plato, Republic, 6:510-511, in Cooper, John M. , ed. , Plato: Complete Works (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1997).  ·Samuel Pufendorf, De Jure Naturae et Gentium (1762), tr. Of the Law of Nature and Nations  ·Samuel Pufendorf, De officio hominis et civis juxta legem naturalem (1673), tr. The Whole Duty of Man according to the Law of Nature (London, 1691).  ·Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism, trs. J. Annas and J. Barnes, Outlines of Scepticism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).  ·Stevenson, Charles L. , The Ethics of Language, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944).  ·Sumner, William Graham, Folkways (Boston: Guinn, 1906). Author Information James Fieser Email: jfieser@utm . edu[-27] University of Tennessee at Martin Last updated: May 10, 2009 | Originally published: June 29, 2003 [-0] – .. /mor-epis [-1] – .. /objectiv [-2] – .. /time [-3] – .. plato [-4] – .. /divine-c [-5] – .. /god-west [-6] – .. /ockham [-7] – .. /relativi [-8] – .. /praise [-9] – .. /hobmoral [-10] – .. /psychego/ [-11] – .. /butler [-12] – .. /humemora [-13] – .. /non-cogn [-14] – .. /kantmeta [-15] – .. /virtue [-16] – .. /moral-ch [-17] – .. /aris-eth [-18] – .. /hum-rts [-19] – .. /locke [-20] – .. /conseque [-21] – .. /egoism [-22] – .. /bentham [-23] – .. /moore [-24] – .. /soc-cont [-25] – .. /envi-eth [-26] – .. /sexualit [-27] – mailto:jfieser@utm. edu How to cite Egoism and Altruism, Essay examples

Corporate Governance Themes and Variations

Question: Discuss about the Corporate Governance for Themes and Variations. Answer: Introduction A ground breaking booklet of guidelines regarding the operation of organizations and the governance structures in South Africa is the King Report on Corporate Governance (King, 2016). The King committee on cooperate governance issues this report. Till now, four of these reports have been issued, i.e., King I in 1994, King II in 2002, King III in 2009 and King IV in 2016 (Maleszewski, 2017). The following parts compare and contrast between the latest two reports. And based on this, the opinion has been drawn to suggest the improvements which can be made to improve the code of corporate governance, highlighting the key areas which need improvement. Similarities and Differences between King III and King IV Bases Similarities Differences Apply and explain Both followed the approach of apply or explain There is a shift from the approach taken under King III to the one contained in King IV. So, as per the King IV approach, the organizations would have to not only apply these principles, but also explain the measures and its results. Number of Principles The number of principles contained in King III, have been reduced from 75 to 17 in King IV. Remuneration Both these contained the provisions regarding the remuneration policies of the organizations. King IV goes further and addresses this controversial issue in a more concise way, as it ensures that the remuneration of the executive management remains responsible and fair. Independence of directors Even though both the approaches contained this provision, but the manner of the same has been changed. In King III, the approach was to provide a set of criteria for judging the independence of the non-executive directors. In King IV, a list of indicators has been introduced for the same. Enclosed Disclosure Both these contained the requirement of enhanced disclosure. The disclosure requirements introduced through King IV are quite broader in comparison to those of King III. King IV specifies the disclosure in relation to the audit committee, each committee of the governing body, etc. Social and ethics committee There was a common provision social and ethics committee in both the approaches (Myburgh and Costa, 2017). King IV went on a further step and encouraged the formation of a specific committee for this (Myburgh and Costa, 2017). Improvements to Code for Corporate Governance through King IV King III provided with a strong foundation for the corporate governance of the world-class level. Even though King IV does not entirely depart from the principles and ethos underlying in King III, it does represent a development in both content, as well as, approach to the King Code in a manner of framing the corporate governance. Hence, the organizations that were following King III would not face many issues in following King IV (Institute of Directors, 2016). King IV raised the bar upon the implementation and shifted the focus on disclosures and outcomes. This new code was a positive step forward due to its outcomes-based and principles-based and it also considers the realities and challenges which are faced by the business at the present time. King IV bettered the shortfalls of King III and a key example of this is the notion of apply and explain. Under King III the organizations were called to apply or explain but under King IV, the organizations are required to explain the manner in which they have applied the principles. This ensures that the corporate governance is not seen as mindless compliance but something which bears the results when approached in a careful manner, and when the due consideration is given to the situation being faced by the organization (Institute of Directors, 2016). The approach has changed from rules based to outcome and principle based. And the corporate governance is now concerned with ethical behavior, mindset, attitude and leadership. So, the focus is targeted and is on transparency due to the properly considered disclosure requirements. In line with the international developments, the remuneration now receives greater importance. There is also a new emphasis over the responsibilities, as well as, the roles of the stakeholders. King IV also recognizes the information in isolation of technology as an asset of corporate governance as it is a part of the stock of intellectual capital of the company, and it also confirms the requirement of the governance structure so as to enhance and protect this very asset (Deloitte, 2017). The underpinning philosophies of King IV include integrated thinking and sustainable development. Even though these concepts were there in King III, but with King IV, an emphasis has been laid down on their interconnectedness. The objective of King IV is to promote corporate governance as a vital part of running the companies and in delivering the governance outcomes for instance, legitimacy, effective control, good performance and ethical culture. The principles of corporate governance given under King IV had made it fit for implementation and accessible across the different organization types and a range of sectors (Coppenhagen and Naidoo, 2017). King IV has reinforced corporate governance as an interrelated and holistic set of arrangements which have to be implemented and understood in an integrated manner, and has also encouraged meaningful and transparent reporting to the stakeholders. Due to King IV, the current corporate governance has changed not only with its process and structure, but also with the conduct and ethical consciousness. It also links the responsible corporate citizenship to the responsibility of the governing body, do as to make sure that the tax policy of the organization is both transparent and responsible and also takes in account the repercussions to the reputation (EY, 2016). Areas of Improvement Even though King IV has brought forward a bold and revolutionary set of code for corporate governance, yet is has failed to address certain key areas relating to this issue. There was a missed opportunity by the King IV code regarding directing the boards in South Africa to focus specifically over the issues of governance which would help the directors in a practical manner for their outgoing activities, in addition to ensuring the ongoing compliance with the Companies Act 2008s provisions (Levenstein, 2017). There have been various noble principles in King IV but what is missing, are the specific guidelines which were present in King III. In the approach taken up by King IV, these guidelines have been lost in the mind-shift change. In the transition from King III to King IV, the opportunity to build on, as well as, to highlight the obligations of the directors, regarding making certain the value and financial preservation of the entity has been lost (Levenstein, 2017). For instance, a great care was taken to make an emphasis over the obligations which the directors had in King III as per the terms of the Companies Act 2008 regarding consideration the business rescue proceedings or the other turnaround mechanisms upon the corporation becoming distressed financially. These codes were placed earlier so as to counter the possible liabilities arising on part of the directors trading in the company under insolvent situations. The directions given in King III were very helpful and ensured that the troubled organizations were in a position to elevate the prospective of these organizations being rescued, along with retaining of jobs and a viable entity being brought back in the economy of South Africa (Levenstein, 2017). Hence, there is a need to include these provisions, so as to improve the code of corporate governance. This would ensure that the spirit of such codes is met, and the shortfalls are dealt with accordingly. Conclusion To sum up this discussion, King III was quite a power packed code for corporate governance, but to improve upon its shortfalls, King IV was introduced. This was a remarkable improvement from the earlier codes and introduced options like apply and explain, which have brought a reform to the corporate governance codes. Though, some of the key points, which worked for the benefit of King III, like the guidelines, are missing from King IV. Hence, there are still areas of improvement needed for these codes. References Coppenhagen, V.V., and Naidoo, S. (2017) South Africa: The South African King IV Report On Corporate Governance: Themes And Variations. [Online] Mondaq. Available from: https://www.mondaq.com/southafrica/x/565808/Shareholders/The+South+African+King+IV+Report+On+Corporate+Governance+Themes+And+Variations [Accessed on: 16/03/17] Deloitte. (2017) King IV: Bolder Than Ever. [Online] Deloitte. Available from: https://www2.deloitte.com/za/en/pages/africa-centre-for-corporate-governance/articles/kingiv-report-on-corporate-governance.html# [Accessed on: 16/03/17] (2016) Are you ready to implement King IVTM?. [Online] EY. Available from: https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/ey-governance-with-king-iv-2016/$FILE/ey-governance-with-king-iv-2016.pdf [Accessed on: 16/03/17] Institute of Directors. (2016) Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa. [Online] Institute of Directors. Available from: https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.iodsa.co.za/resource/resmgr/king_iv/King_IV_Report/IoDSA_King_IV_Report_-_WebVe.pdf [Accessed on: 16/03/17] King, M. (2016) The Chief Value Officer: Accountants Can Save the Planet. Saltaire, UK: Greenleaf Publishing. Levenstein, E. (2017) King IV misses chance to focus on governance issues. [Online] Business Day. Available from: https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/opinion/2017-03-01-king-iv-misses-chance-to-focus-on-governance-issues/ [Accessed on: 16/03/17] Maleszewski, J. (2017) Corporate Governance Spotlight The King Reports. [Online] TCIIA News L Ine. Available from: https://chapters.theiia.org/tallahassee/News/ChapterDocuments/TCIIA_Newsline.pdf [Accessed on: 16/03/17] Myburgh, F., and Costa, A.D. (2017) The key differences between King III and King IV. [Online] Polity. Available from: https://www.polity.org.za/article/the-key-differences-between-king-iii-and-king-iv-2017-01-11 [Accessed on: 16/03/17]