TheParagon

The author closes this opening section with a civic truth: "judgement is not a task, it is a field, it must be held, not outsourced, it is what makes ethics possible".

Delegation and Displacement
The author proposes that delegation is not neutral, it is a structural decision about who is allowed to judge and who is required to relay. In many UK institutions, judgement has been delegated to systems; algorithms, protocols, scoring models. Staff are trained to follow outputs and not to reflect. Citizens are processed through forms, not met in dialogue, the result is displacement: no one answers and no one is allowed to.

Delegation often begins with good intent, Systems are introduced to ensure consistency, reduce bias and improve efficiency, but over time, these systems become dominant. Staff lose discretion, Citizens lose their voice and Judgement becomes procedural, not relational.

The author names this as judgement displacement; a civic condition where the power to decide is removed from those present. A teacher may know a student’s effort, but must relay an algorithmic grade. A clinician may sense urgency, but must defer to triage scores. A housing officer may recognise vulnerability, but must follow allocation rules. These are not failures of care, they are failures of structure.

To resist displacement, institutions must redesign delegation.

This means restoring human loops; points where staff can override, reflect and document. It means supporting custodial roles; staff who are trained and trusted to hold judgment. It means building dialogic records, where decisions include testimony, context and reflection.

Delegation must be answerable, if a system makes a decision, someone must be able to contest it. If a staff member relays a judgement, they must be able to reflect on it. The author insists: delegation without answerability is abandonment.

The author closes this section with a civic truth: judgement cannot be outsourced without consequence. When displaced, it leaves silence, when restored, it becomes care.

Here are three grounded examples of judgment reclaimed:

Example 1: A Teacher Refuses to Relay Algorithmic Grades

Context: During the 2020 grading crisis, a Midlands teacher was instructed to submit algorithmic predictions based on school performance history, not individual effort.

Judgment Reclaimed:

The teacher submitted a parallel record: annotated coursework, engagement notes and a personal reflection.

They refused to relay the algorithm’s output without context.
The school supported the submission and the appeal was upheld.