How Protected are Your Protected Values

A632.5.4.RB

Based on Irwin and Baron's discussion (pg.251); Reflect on three of your major protected values, support those values with at least three major beliefs and show the pros and cons of each belief in terms of trade-offs you are willing to make to support or not support that belief. Do you feel as strongly about them as you did when you began this exercise?

Protected values are the values that people hold with such conviction that they are unwilling to yield to any form of trade-offs. According to Irwin and Baron (2005), “People often draw a line in the sand to create values that are protected from trade-offs. These protected values (PVs) are considered absolute and inviolable” (p. 152). After reflecting on my personal values, I have identified the following three protected values that have developed over time and personal experiences, they are: education, safety/security, and the family unit. Also during this reflection, I was able to identify the driving force of these beliefs and trace the origin (peeling the onion) to its establishment that further guided my actions, personality, and profession. For example, growing up as the youngest of three boys, raised by a single mother, specific terms kept coming to mind as I thought about it. Words like: struggle, ignorance, mental/emotional starvation (from nurturement), and uncertainty. To provide context, because our mother worked two jobs to provide the basic necessities for the family, the eldest of the kids (teenager) was left to help raise the other kids (youths). Needless to say, education was not among the top priorities, safety/security was relative, and the concept of a family unit was less than ideal. At some point I was able to break away from this environment and the family dynamics that seem to trap those unwilling to travel beyond their comfort zone.

Thus, through this journey, it started to become clear to me that education was a significant factor as it developed knowledge and growth, as well as revealed how much I truly didn’t know. I believe that education serves as the foundation for a productive and fruitful life. Ultimately, the individual decides where and how to use their abilities, that in and of itself, provides options. Having options as a result of education or specialty (trade) allows its possessor to have more control over their situation and circumstances. This compared to someone who has a limited education and is in a position of living reactively to their situation and circumstances. As a tax payer, I am willing to ensure that public schools have the funds necessary to provide a quality education to their students. Moreover, I believe that everyone should have educational opportunities at any stage of their life. The benefit of having education available increases the individual’s capabilities and earning potential, as well as ensuring that the community at large has productive contributors to the whole through taxes, involvement, and possible community leadership. The con is that this is an individual driven process. In other words, one cannot make another benefit from an education, merely make it law that those under a certain age attend school. Furthermore, this process is dependent on producing future contributors. Thus, when individuals fail to contribute by actively choosing to live off government services and not “replenish the well,” these actions can lead to the straining of the system. Nevertheless, I believe that everyone should have the opportunity to decide their course. With education, they chart a path that provides better opportunities, more options and positive control over their situation.

As I noted above, safety and security (safety/security) while growing up was dependent; in that we as a family and as kids raising kids lived reactively to our conditions and as a result of our own devices. Having witnessed first-hand the chaotic nature of merely surviving and the environment the survival mode breeds, I believe that everyone should enjoy safety/security in their everyday lives. In fact, as a high school junior, I concluded that I wanted to be a part of a strong, capable, and caring group to provide such safety to others and desired to enter the law enforcement profession. I felt so passionately about this course of action that I majored in criminal justice for my undergraduate degree. Through this experience, I expanded my scope of safety/security for others that I eventually pursued and received a commission in the U.S. Army Military Police Corps. I believe we as human beings or as a community have the obligation to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. I mean this in the context of those actively hurting others (crimes) for any form of gain or malicious intent. No person (law abiding) should be forced to live under such duress in a way that it affects or impacts their lives in a negative manner. The benefit is that when communities operate in a safe environment, participation is encouraged and relationships are strengthened. The con side of this is again that individually driven. People decide (free will) to commit heinous acts against others. Even though the most effective and best trained police force cannot prevent all crimes, such a force would be postured in a way to educate and work with the communities it serves in order to better provide the safety/security that is needed.

The family unit I knew growing up was far from ideal. However, I believe that the family unit (according to any groups definition) should involve loving relationships, growth and development, and be a joint adventure. Unfortunately, there are many external and internal factors that challenge this value. In fact, it is these challenges that place its participants in a position of compromising or abandoning this value. According Irwin and Baron (2005), “But a deeper concern is that people sometimes abandon their values deliberately. This may be because these values are not well constructed and so only appear to be strongly held because they have not been put to the test” (p. 253). Indeed, such adversity and tests have the ability to refine our perceived values. Nevertheless, I believe that the family unit is among one of the most powerful and productive means to addressing many of the issues we as a society have self-created. The negative side to this equation is that there are time and situations in which attempting to keep a family unit would cause more injury than not. This factor cannot be ignored, because at every stage of our lives, our priorities change, our perspective expands, or we just happen to grow apart for whatever reason. These unfortunate events may set in-motion the strengthening of the family unit as a protect value or perhaps because the family unit was a protected value, the situation evolved to the family dismantling (safety concerns, etc.).  

Protected values are values that are inherent or develop over time and experiences. Through the course of life and different context, these protective values cause one at some level to reevaluate their values and/or the cost to benefit of making such trade-offs. According to Jonathan Baron and Mark Spranca (1997):

People who hold protected values may behaviorally trade them off for other things - by risking lives or by sacrificing nature or human rights - but they are not happy with themselves for doing so, if they are aware of what they are doing. They are caught in binds that force them to violate some important value, but the value is no less important to them because of this behavioral violation.

I believe that it is important to periodically take stock of our values. As we grow and our understanding of things/people/events around us expands, it would behoove us to stay abreast of our own protected values. Furthermore, it would benefit us to use situational (scenario) conditions that could affect or compromise our values in order to conduct our own testing of our values. For example, I was forced to conduct such an internal test of my values when as a young leader, I was deployed to Iraq. With the noted protective values above, would I be able to deprive someone (in a combat environment) of these closely held values of mine if put in a life and death situation. After much though and reflection, I was able to compromise (to a degree) that I would be able to hold the lives of others (non-combative & other coalition forces) above the belief that everyone is entitled to such values I held as I was fully aware that my service to a large group people required that I make the best decision in a difficult situation that ensure our success and safety.

References

Baron, J., & Spranca, M. (1997). Protected values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 70, 1-16.

Hoch, S. J., & Kunreuther, H. C. (2005). Wharton on making decisions. (1^st edition). Kindle edition.