Business Law

Summer Ethics Module 2014

In the scenarios given, a type of patented drug is being sold as a hot commodity, but I, as the company executive, was told by a research scientist that the drug may develop brain tumors as a long term effect. Since this is only a possibility that the drug is problematic, there is no violation of law if I do nothing about it, as everything is still uncertain. However, the choice of action of me not doing anything about the information given by the scientist, despite "It is legal," still causes ethical dilemmas.

First, the drug is sold as a "patented drug" and it is "FDA-approved". Therefore, it is not a violation of my company about "taking things that don't belong to you", because all the drug sales are legal and its usage is authorized. Secondly, the product must have been tested before it was launched, and all the ingredients of the product have to be stated on the medicine package. Consumers choose to buy it because the drug is trustworthy and it is directly or non-directly stated that using the product is safe. If there is introduction of the drug promoted as a 100% safe commodity with no side effect, it now can be violating "saying things that you know are not true". Also, if there was no ethical violation of "Hiding or Divulging Information" before the scientist came in and gave the information, it now exists one if I know that there could be side effects of the new drugs, but not telling the public about it, as I fail to disclose this research information to my customers.

It comes to a more complex level when it comes to a choice of whether running additional tests on the drugs, and my supervisor says no. From my superior's perspective, the reason of not running a test is clear- testing the drugs is implying the public that the product is not safe enough, and customers will stop buying it as soon as the testing is announced, and the profit will drop. However, if we don't run the test or communicate with our customers, there will be a violation of "taking unfair advantage", because our business keeps making profits out of customers who are not educated or are not able to discover the issues of the products.

I know that this statement by the research scientist is only a "hypothesis" of the drug, so there might be no consequences of using the drug, and so far, there is still no negative results reported by the consumers. "Even if I choose not to disclose the possible danger hidden in the drug, nobody will get hurt." This is a language of rationalization of "It doesn't hurt anyone", and is not ethical due to the threats that the drug may bring to its consumers. Moreover, I may also think it is not necessary to run the test because it is costly for the company, and can say that "if we don't run the test, somebody else will do it", as a language of rationalization. There is an ethical issue here, when we know that test should be run due to the existing concerns for the customers, but still choose not to carry the testing responsibility.

Using the "Blanchard and Peale" model, the answer towards the question "is it legal" not to take action is yes, as the drug sale is legally authorized, and the scientist's concern is not confirmed as accurate. However, by asking "is it balanced", it is clearly shown that by not reporting the scientific concerns, the company is making promising money, when putting its consumer under a threat. Therefore, it is not balanced, and I see it as unfair to the consumers. Also, using the "Laura Nash and Perspective" model, I should ask myself the question "How I would view the issue if I stood on the other side of the fence", meaning as a consumer of the drug. My answer will be that I think it is important to know about the existing information, including the possibility of getting a brain tumor in the future. Although the final research result about the side effect is not yet confirmed, and the medicine is still legally on sale, there is still an ethical issue of continuing to sell the product without letting the public know about the information, when science experts feel concerned about the product. From my customers' perspective, I would want this information, or some information of