Paternalistic Deception

            Paternalistic Deception is when an individual takes on a paternal role, and then they act in a way that they believe will benefit an individual. The problem is that they often deceive the other individual. According to Janet Austin “Dishonesty is a key element of many of the serious offence provisions under the Corporations Act 2001 and many of the economic crime provisions of the various state Crimes Acts and Codes. If a client is charged with such an offence the obvious question which arises is whether the client has in fact been dishonest.” The author goes onto explain that it is difficult to advise a client, because “current tests of dishonesty tend to reflect standards of ethics and morality generally accepted by the community which may not accord with the client’s or even the lawyer’s personal standards” (2012, p.1). Even the Judicial Courts have a set of guidelines (laws) that they base their answers on. The article Likelihood of Confusion: Subjective Guilt, Objective Deception discusses the moral and legal implications of deception by looking at the “evidence of fraudulent intent;” therefore, the ‘courts’ opinions’ against or for an individual will be based on the intent to deceive and the consequences to the action (2010, p. 4). Deceiving an individual of the right to make a choice often has a negative effect on both parties, and should be avoided.

Paternalistic Deception appears, to me, to be a way for the leader or helper to cope with the event; rather than, a way for the individual that is being deceived to cope. It would be healthier to be honest, and deal with the uncomfortable truth. That way the individual can be offered effective coping skills. Leaders and helpers don’t want to be crutches for their employees or clients. They want to be mentors.

References

AUSTIN, J. (2010). When Does Sharp Business Practice Cross The Line To Become Dishonest Conduct?. University Of Queensland Law Journal, 29(2), 263-278.

Cole, N. (2010). Likelihood of Confusion: Subjective Guilt, Objective Deception. Journal Of Contemporary Legal Issues, 19(1), 308-314.