Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 1

The Ethics Assignment

Nicole Bauer (10160022), Aisha Cheung (10154042), Georgia East (30064694), Morgan

Gillanders (10114801), Annie Wauthier (10127099)

EDUC 525 Ethics & Law

University of Calgary
Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 2

Introduction:

In determining if Ben Levin should be invited to speak to the Faculty, as well have his work

referenced within the Faculty, the Analytical Framework must be acknowledged and answered. This will

give us, the committee of professors, a better idea of how to handle the complex situation at hand.

Information about the Case

Levin, a former deputy education minister and professor at the University of Toronto, was

sentenced to three years in prison for making and distributing child pornography and for counselling to

commit sexual assault (CBC News, 2015). He is now prohibited from attending any public spaces for

children unless supervised by someone who’s aware of his conviction. He is also banned from working

with children under the age of sixteen. Levin stated his innocence until two years after the initial charges

were laid when he started to see a psychiatrist and a psychotherapist. However, he still seemed to show

little remorse by justifying and minimizing his actions. His psychiatrist diagnosed him with pedophilic

interest, however researchers believe that these tendencies can be suppressed by therapy and or

medication (Mckeon, 2015).

Various Participants & Stakeholders

There are multiple parties affected by the actions of Ben Levin. Pre-service teachers have a duty

of care to their students and therefore using Ben Levin's work and potentially learning from those pieces

of work is deceptive. Teachers are responsible for their students, and because of Levin’s actions they

may see his work as hypocritical and inaccurate, as he “wrote inspiring books outlining his theories”

(Mckeon, 2015). He was a highly respected scholar and therefore would be discredited by the pre-

service teachers. “With OISE’s educational mission with children, and the very wide publicity of this

matter,” O’Sullivan wrote, “your continuing presence may have an adverse effect on OISE and its ability

to conduct its program.” (Mckeon, 2015). Levin's co-workers are affected because they are working

alongside Levin and therefore, will have a depleting sense of respect for him, especially those who co-
Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 3

authored his work. While his family supported Levin throughout the whole process, the situation he

found himself in compromised his character and resulted in jail time. Ben’s family members felt the

repercussions of his actions, especially those of his wife who had little knowledge of his crimes. His

children also felt the repercussions of his actions seeing as though “he bragged about abusing his own

children” (Mckeon, 2015) within the sites he was exploring, although the allegations were found false.

Levin is a professional and according to The Alberta Teachers Association “Professionals are the

recognized experts in their area of specialty. They have strong ethics, high standards of practice,

exclusivity over their service, and high degrees of autonomy” (Alberta Teachers’ Association, 2018).

The Ethical Problem

The committee is determining if Levin should be able to present to the faculty on educational

matters, and if his work should continue to be used in schools to support other students becoming

teachers. Seeing as though there are multiple and conflicting ethical principles this would interfere with

moral rules and standards, as well as, be an ethical dilemma.

Options

A potential option to help satisfy some concerns of the parties involved could be to have Levin

complete psychiatric rehabilitation to help supress pedophilic tendencies and help get him to a point

where he can positively contribute to the faculty again. There are programs he can utilize to help him

reintegrate into society. An example of this would be for Levin to attend the North Bay Regional Health

Centre in Ontario where they can offer programs to “Support individuals to live meaningful lives and

develop the skills and supports needed to choose, obtain, and keep valued roles in the community”

(North Bay Regional Health Centre, n.d. para.2).

Theoretical Analysis

Levin could potentially be greatly impacted by completing rehabilitation for his pedophilic
Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 4

tendencies. The likeliness of this consequence is completely dependent on Levin’s participation during

rehabilitation. However, this option may not be favored by everyone in the academic community if he is

still presented an opportunity to influence pre-service teachers. There is no single solution that could be

agreed upon by everyone involved in this matter. However, by taking the utilitarian approach and

deciding “with the intention to create the greatest good or happiness for the greatest number of

people” (Donlevy, 2019, slide 52), not allowing Levin to speak would be above reproach. This would

satisfy a larger group of people - academic community, while preventing potential negative impact on

pre-service teachers. This approach also aligns with the deontological approach as it is ethically the right

thing to do by protecting the greater number of people.

Considerations to Teaching

According to the Alberta Professional Code of Conduct, teachers are expected to treat students

with” dignity and respect and is considerate of their circumstances” (Alberta Teachers’ Association,

2018). Through this, it is apparent that Levin did not abide by this Professional Code of Conduct.

Although Levin did not harm the students that he had direct contact with, Levin still engaged in

behaviour that put his students at risk of being sexually exploited. Additionally, the Code of Conduct

articulates that teachers “act in a manner which maintains the honour and dignity of the profession”.

Levin did not abide by this Code of Conduct, as he used his professional credentials to build his online

persona and build trust within the online platform.

Educate Yourself

Firstly, we would speak with the administration at the university to identify the values and

policies of the school. Secondly, we would speak with the Alberta Teachers’ Association to identify the

policies put in place for teachers to abide by: “In practical terms, when educational policy makers or

decision makers are faced with a choice between apparently incommensurate values, the key is to first

determine those core values underlying their institution, freedom and pluralism, and then to opt in
Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 5

favour of value pluralism without preferring any one of them over the others” (Donlevy, 2015, p. 323).

Lastly, we would speak with Legal Council to be advised about similar cases and suggestions for

proposed action.

Make the Decision

Our decision is that we will not be inviting Levin to the school as a guest lecturer due to the

severity of his offences. The work that Levin produced before his offences will no longer be referenced,

as doing so would establish a culture of the school in which supports the sexual exploitation of students.

If Levin’s work were to be continually referenced in academics, the expectation will be set within the

school that intellect will help you recover from severe legal situations.

Follow Up on Decision

i. It would not be beneficial for committee members at ABC university to reconsider this decision. The

case may be monitored, to consider whether new pertinent information arises, however the decision

should not waver. As time passes following this decision, the works of Levin become less credible, not

only because of his crimes but because they will fall out of date. Though he was once a respected

professor, his reputation and credibility has been tainted. Additionally, there are many other excellent

professors whose works can be used and who can be invited to speak in his place. New and more

relevant works and studies in education are ongoing and it would not be to the benefit of the University

of the students to be focused on works that are falling out of date and do not represent the values and

expectations of professions within the profession of teaching.

ii. We would likely make the same decision in the future. The university has set a president with the case

of Ben Levin, in regard to the behaviour, expectations and values we set as a standard for the university

and the pre-service teachers within our institution. It would be arguably, hypocritical to waver in our

decision in a similar case with a different defendant.

Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 6

iii. As a committee there may be a number of unforeseen outcomes that result from our decision. Some

things to consider may be that students may have a personal investment or connection to a case of this

nature and may be upset by the conversation at hand. Additionally, in many ways we the committee are

denying students from potential learning opportunities, and the right to make their own ethical

decisions about the case of Ben Levin. Following this decision, it may be the case that other presenters

and educators may disagree with our decision and not want to work with the University in the future.

However, the University works with the best interest of the students in mind, and though there may be

unintended consequences these do not outweigh the consequences should have another decision been

made.

iv. Policies should be put in place in regard to how we respond to all legal matters concerning our

faculty. In the future, should any University faculty be involved in a legal matter they will be immediately

suspended until the matter is resolved. This policy will help ensure the safety of our students and ensure

that instructors are not only exceptional academically but also meet the moral standards of the

university. Additionally, the policies surrounding freedom of speech, freedom of expression and hate

speech should be examined to assure that the individuals we invite to speak on campus our

representing the institution in an appropriate manner.

Conclusion:

Ultimately, we believe that he should not be able to attend the school as a guest speaker. As

well, his work should not be referenced within the Faculty. Levin will be potentially assisting in the

learning of pre-service teachers, therefore there is a certain role model status that he would be

upholding and because of this we have determined that it is morally and ethically unacceptable to

continue in his line of work.

Running head: THE ETHICS ASSIGNMENT 7

References

Alberta Teachers’ Association. (2018). Code of Professional Conduct. Retrieved from

https://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Teachers-as-

Professionals/IM-4E%20Code%20of%20Professional%20Conduct.pdf

CBC. (2015). Benjamin Levin, ex deputy education minister, sentenced to 3 years in prison for child porn-

related offences. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/benjamin-levin-ex-

deputy-education-minister-sentenced-to-3-years-in-prison-for-child-porn-related-offences-

1.3092393

Donlevy, J. K. (2019, October 15). Dr. Donlevy EHTICS [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from University

of Calgary D2L site: https://d2l.ucalgary.ca

Mckeon, L. (2015). The Double Life of Ben Levin: His depraved online world, and the sting that brought

him down. Retrieved from https://torontolife.com/city/ben-levin-child-pornography-sting/

North Bay Regional Health Centre (n.d.). Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Recovery Program. Retrieved

from http://www.nbrhc.on.ca/programs-services/mental-health-programs-services/mental-

health-addictions/psychiatric-rehabilitation-recovery-program/