J & J Loses Third Trial Over Cancer Link To Talcum Powder (Term Paper Sample)

ARTICLE ANALYSIS: MORAL ETHICS - ‘J & J LOSES THIRD TRIAL OVER CANCER LINK TO TALCUM POWDER’
By Student’s Name
Course Title
Name of Instructor
University Affiliation
State
Date
Introduction
The adoption of moral ethics has brought a tremendous impact on the operation of modern business organizations. The application of ethical theories in the business practices has led to the creation of a sustainable environment within the workplace. The implementation of the ethical theories such as utilitarianism can ensure that the modern businesses build a good relationship with the consumers in the market. This is because the moral theory guides in determine the best action that can achieve the maximum benefit to a majority of the people. Using a case study of the Johnson & Johnson lawsuit, the paper examines the impact of utilitarianism ethics on business operations in the contemporary society. Business organizations should embrace utilitarianism ethics so as to ensure that their operations result in maximum benefit to the consumers.
Overview of the situation
a) What did J & J Pharmaceuticals do?
According to the article, Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals produced various feminine hygiene products for the global market. Among the products that the firm had manufactured included baby powder and shower to shower talc products. The organizations, however, released the products into market without putting any warning label concerning the long term effect of their usage. The company was aware that the public would not know that the products could cause cancer. The company also ignored the research that proved that the use of the talc products could cause ovarian cancer in the long term. This action led to a court case in which the company was ordered to pay $ 70 million to Deborah Giannecchini; a woman who had contracted cancer after using the talc products.
b) How did J & J do It
The pharmaceutical company manufactured the talc products without any warning label hence the public was not aware of the dangers of using the products. The firm also did no create awareness on the mass media about the ability of the talc products to cause cancer among the women. Johnson & Johnson believed that since the public was not aware of the negative impact of the baby powder, the demand for the products would not be affected. The company also relied on the clinical research that had confirmed the safety of their products. Despite knowing the research that linked ovarian cancer with continuous talc use, the pharmaceutical company did not notify the consumers.
c) What differed from the expected?
The multinational pharmaceutical company was expected to have put a warning label on the talc and cosmetics products. However, the company failed to inform the public about the long-term effect of the product’s use. Had it put the warning label on the cosmetic products, the victim, Deborah Giannecchini would not have contracted the ovarian cancer. Moreover, another Act that differed from the expected is the fact that Johnson & Johnson failed to incorporate the clinical studies that had proved that the talc products increased the chances of getting ovarian cancer. As a global pharmaceutical company, they were expected to apply clinical research in manufacturing their products. Moreover, J & J was expected to undertake practices that could bring happiness to the majority of the consumers.
d) The individual, organizational and social consequences of J & J practice
Through failing to notify the public about the long-term effect of the cosmetics and ignoring the research that linked the use of talc products to increased risk of ovarian cancer, the company has lost the trust that the individual consumers such as Deborah Giannecchini had developed over the years. The individual consumers now perceive the company as a business organization that does not care for the health of the consumers. The organizational consequences that can be probably experienced include a high number of employees who will be leaving the company due to the destroyed reputation. The firm can also experience a reduced sales volume. Socially, J & J will be considered an unethical company that only seeks to gain profits at the expense of the health of the members of the society. The consumers in both the local and global market will shift to other pharmaceutical companies. After reading the article, I felt that the company’s behaviour was unethical and was only aimed at generating revenues.
e) Other similar occasions
There are several scenarios that I have felt that business organizations or individuals have failed to serve the interest of the people. For example, the cell phone manufacturing companies have been promoting their products without warning the consumers about the possible cause of cancer due to the radiation emitted by the phones during conversations. This is an unethical practice. Moreover, unethical practices in health care organizations such as knowingly misdiagnosing a patient for financial gain also shows that some actions do not bring happiness to the majority. Some medical professionals also fail to inform the public about the negative impact of some of the medicine that is used for treatment.
f) My understanding of utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that argues that actions should be judged by their effect on the people. An action can be said to be right if it can bring maximum benefit to a majority of the people. Therefore, actions are either good or bad depending on their ability to bring happiness and pleasure to the people. The impact of an action on the people, therefore, determines the morality of the action (Fraedrich & Ferrell 1992, p. 291). For example, acts such as stealing funds from a bank will have a negative impact on the people. The act is, therefore, immoral since it has failed to result in maximum pleasure or happiness on the majority of the people. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism that determines the morality of an action using the effects on the people. According to the utilitarianism ethical theory, the purpose of morality is to increase happiness and please in all people. Therefore, an action can be justified as moral if it can result in happiness among the people. For example, the act of promoting education in the society can only be justified as moral after the society benefits from education. For instance, the individuals who have acquired education can get employment thus improve their livelihood. According to Renouard (2010, p.88), proponents of utilitarianism such as John Stuart Hill argued that morality should be able to have a positive contribution to the people in the society. In such cases, the impact of moral codes, customs and taboos are of the actions are ignored.
There are two types of utilitarianism ethics; act and rule utilitarianism. According to the act utilitarianism, the morality of an action depends on the action’s ability to bring maximum pleasure and happiness to an individual. This ethical theory, therefore, is concerned with individual actions. Individuals who participate in crime can be said to undertake immoral acts based on the act utilitarianism. The only available effects of an action on the people are either bad or good, and the moral action must result in happiness and pleasure. The rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, refers to the acts that conform to the acceptable behaviour or rules. According to the ethical theory, an action can be said to be moral only if it conforms to the general moral rules. For example, committing murder and lying are unethical behaviour. People who do not involve themselves in such actions are therefore said to undertake rule utilitarianism (Woiceshyn 2011, p. 320). This is because they have not participated in actions that do not conform to the acceptable behaviour in the society. Utilitarianism has brought a great impact on the lives of the people since it shapes the behaviour that is exhibited by the members of the society.
Application of Utilitarianism to the J & J case study
The utilitarianism ethical theory is relevant to the case study. The company should have applied the ethical theory so as to prevent any legal case against the consumers such as Deborah Giannecchini. According to the utilitarianism ethics, the morality of an action is determined by its ability to have a positive contribution to all people in the society (Fudge & Schlacter 1999, p. 298). The act must bring maximum happiness and pleasure to a greater majority of the people. Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceuticals, however, failed to recognize this aspect of the ethical theory. The company should have observed the theory and therefore manufactured products that could bring happiness to the people. Through failing to put a warning label on the talc products, the consumers bought the products without knowing the dangers such as the increased risk of contracting ovarian cancer. Deborah Giannecchini, for example, is said to have used the talc products for the last forty years leading to exposure to cancerous cells. This scenario occurred since the firm’s action was immoral. The action undertaken by the company can be said to be wrong and immoral since it had failed to bring happiness and pleasure. Instead, the action had resulted in pain and anguish. This is because consumers such as Mrs. Giannecchini was diagnosed with cancer and has a high percentage of succumbing to the dangerous disease.
Another instance where the utilitarianism ethical theory would have been applied in the pharmaceutical company was through recognizing the clinical research that had linked the use of talc products to ovarian cancer. The company, in the quest of practicing ethical behaviour, should have recognized and applied the findings of the thirt...