In the case of Joseph Darby, he was simply following the DOD policy of reporting a fundamental violation of justice so whistle-blowing does not constitute an ethical issue of done correctly. .
Utility theory determines whether something is morally permissible by weighing out the outcomes of the decision based on two criteria: the short and long term consequences and everyone involved. If Joseph Darbys actions were to be judged by this rule, utility theory would say that he made the right decision. By talking with authorities Darby put a stop to the prisoner torture and potentially saved many others from the same fate. This decision affects not only the prisoners involved, but also their friends and family that are connected and affected by what happens to them. Additionally, Darbys action ensured that everyone involved in the scandal was properly handled by the justice system to ensure that their dishonorable actions did not have an effect on other people later down the line. On the negative side, Darbys actions caused a negative light to shine upon the military from the public point of view and he also received several threats from coworkers and was forced to retire early from the Army. In the end, the positive consequences of reporting the scandal to authorities far outweighed the negative consequences.
Even though whistle-blowing is not an ethical issue because it is justified by the Constitutional Paradigm, some people may argue that it is wrong to rat people out. In the case of Joseph Darby, upon press release of the case, he was shunned by members of the Army and even received death threats because of what he did. This is a common result of whistle-blowing and sometimes deters people from doing the right thing. Additionally, whistle-blowing can lead to distrust between teammates and can disrupt the normal function of a unit. Although whistle-blowing can sometimes be viewed negatively in the eyes of the public, the morality of information leaking poses an even greater issue.