Washington D.C. Firefighter Gerald Burton (January 2008)
When my decorated W.W.II veteran dad watches “Saving Private Ryan,”
or more accurately, when he can’t avoid watching it because it is one
of my son’s favorite movies, he invariably will launch into a tirade
over how outrageous and unrealistic the movie is. “Everybody stands too close together!” he exclaims. “The bar on Tom
Hanks’ helmet might as well be a bulls-eye for snipers!” Then there
is his most fervent complaint of all: “You can’t divert the mission!”
Ordered to track down Private Ryan, Hanks nonetheless gets his
men involved in an unrelated skirmish that results in the death of one
of his men. It disgusts my father every time he sees it. “It’s wrong
to get distracted from your orders for other objectives,” explains Major
Marshall, a recipient of the Silver Star. This is the principle that has D.C. firefighter Lt. Gerald Burton facing
discipline. Fire departments, like the police, have a great deal in
common with military units, and one of them is the absolute requirement
of following orders. Burton defied orders and diverted his mission.
But he is a hero nonetheless. On November 2, call alerted firefighters about a house fire. Burton
was several blocks away, driving a fire engine to a training class.
He called his supervisor to say he was near the fire and could help.
The supervisor told Burton not to go to the fire, and ordered him to
continue on to the training class. When Burton’s truck was about two
blocks from the fire, he was flagged down by bystanders who told him
that a home was burning. Burton drove to the address, and saw that it
was indeed on fire. So Burton again alerted his supervisor, who this time told him to play
a backup role rather than a frontline role in fighting the fire. But
he and another firefighter riding with him were the only firefighters
on the scene, so they extinguished the flames before the “frontline”
firefighters had time to arrive. Now Burton, who has been a D.C. firefighter for 21 years, faces a two-day
suspension without pay for disobeying an order. Disobeying the order,
in this case, meant placing the safety of community residents and their
property above protocol. Ethically, such situations pit long-term considerations
against short-term exigencies. No army, team, or department can function
effectively without a chain of command. If everyone simply makes their
own judgements about what orders to follow, chaos is the inevitable
result. In the case of Burton’s spontaneous heroics, how can the department
dispense punishment to make the point that firefighters like Burton
can’t and mustn’t defy a supervisor’s orders, without simultaneously
standing for the disturbing proposition that procedure is more important
than lives and property? The answer is that it can’t. Burton made the right choice: his supervisor’s
orders were unreasonable and risky, and he was correct to disobey them.
The department needs to acknowledge that sometimes the most ethical
conduct involves breaking the rules, and Burton understood that he was
in the midst of just such an exception. When you choose to disobey an
order, you better be right and it better work out for the best; Burton
knew he was placing himself at risk of discipline, but correctly calculated
that his risk was a lower priority than stopping the fire. He did the right thing under the circumstances, and his department
should commend him, not punish him. And how does my father come out on this controversy? He’s with Burton all the way. “A training session should never take
priority over a fire,” he says. “Burton was getting bad orders that
could have cost someone their home or even their life. That’s when it’s
your duty to disobey orders. Most people don’t have the guts.” It turns
out that my Dad also disobeyed a few orders in his time. Agreed, then. Lt. Gerald Burton is an Ethics Hero. Let’s hope his employers
see the light.
|
© 2007 Jack Marshall & ProEthics,
Ltd |