Dow And Shell Case Study

1530 Words7 Pages
No, Dow and shell did not cover some of the important actions for workers. They should have done a lot more ethically for the workers involved in the manufacture of DBCP based on the consideration of the basic ethical principles as followings: The first argument is that Dow and Shell should have suspended production in 1961 before any acceptable solution on safety protection to workers can be installed in the process. Since they knew the potential impacts could be very harmful for humans’ health from the research result in 1961, there was no ethical justification to continue the production considering the principle of moral responsibilities, ethics of care, nonmalenficence and ethics of virtue. Besides, it could hardly estimate the direct and indirect cost covering damage and compensation to workers’ health and society in the future. Their continuous manufacturing on DBCP could not be justified even under utilitarianism with constraint on measuring the costs and values on its intrinsic goods. Their continuous production could be harmful to workers’ health even if there were no better alternative to generate higher efficiency with better cost benefit solution to most people. The priority on intrinsic…show more content…
There had been multiple indications from the toxicology test research with conclusion on DBCP’s toxic effect on human beings. Those workers were vulnerable with continuous exposure to DBCP required proper protection by employers. The reports from Dr. Torkelson in 1961 also mentioned the further monitoring and studies should be maintained. Considering ethics of care, duty and moral responsibility, Dow and Shell should have continued more in depth and specific investigation and studies to verify the risk and impact to workers. They should drive for further investigation to understand its impact for people’s health and specific safety criteria for workers’

    More about Dow And Shell Case Study

      Open Document