Reference no: EM131317196
I. Developing a Practical Ethical Viewpoint (Have you clearly picked and stated an Ethical Viewpoint) (You need to choose one for each case study)
B. Universal Ethics
C. Ethical Relativism
D. Virtue Ethics
II. To help you choose the ethical theory do the following (By looking at the moral situations):
A. Interpret what is right and wrong according to each of the four theories
B. Give an argument that each theory might provide
C. State your own assessment of the strengths of each theory
III. Find the Ethical Conflict (Develop questions to identify the ethical issues)
A. Is any party being exploited solely for the advantage of another?
1. Is there any lying?
2. Is anyone or party injured
3. Is there a deliberate falsification of information
4. Has there been a creation of unequal competition?
5. The above mentioned items are prohibitions(these are actions that you must refrain from doing)
B. Is every effort being made to assist and affirm the human dignity of all parties involved?
1. Is there encouragement of fulfillment of legal and human rights
2. Take personal responsibility for results
3. The above mentioned items are obligations(these are actions that you are required to do)
C. Anything that is not an obligation or a prohibition is a permission.(Permissions are actions that you may do if you choose)
D. Summary of finding the Ethical Conflict
1. List the professional practice issues at stake
2. Identify your practical ethical viewpoint including any linking principles
3. Determine which character's perspective you will adopt
4. Identify two or more detection questions that define obligation and prohibition within the ethical theory you have chosen.
5. Apply the detection questions to the cases to bring attention to the ethical issues.
6. Discuss the interrelationships between the dictates of the ethical issues and those of the professional practice. How might they work together? How might they be opposed? (Professional practice, what are people in that particular job or arena expected to do)
IV. Resolution-What is the best way to resolve this conflict
A. Truth vs. loyalty (Is the truth best or is it better to be loyal)
B. Short term vs. Long term (Is this consequence a short term or long term consequence)
C. Justice vs. Mercy (Is this a case of dispensing justice or is this a case of dispensing mercy)
D. Individual vs. Community (Does your decision affect an individual or a community)
Please do the required pages which are six to eight pages. You are allowed to pick any Thinking Critically exercise or Ethical Dilemma case study in your textbook. You have to make sure that you pick a case study that you have not done before. Please make sure to include your headings.
Introduction-Explain the case study the facts.
Body of Paper-This is where you state the different ethical theories, strengths and weaknesses, which theory you choose, why you choose that theory, what would you do, do you agree with what was done.
Conclusion-Summary of what you told me in the paper.
Do not forget your citation as you are using the textbook and any other materials to help you write your paper.
Look at the case study. Find the conflict. Look at the case study from various perspectives. Choose a way to resolve it? Analyze it by how you personally see the world.
TEACHING OR SELLING? Drugmakers Worried about Conflicts of Interest Modify Their Approach to Sponsorship of Continuing Education
In response to increasing criticism over its sponsorship of physician-education courses (and the suggestion of undue influence on doctors' prescriptions and procedures), the drugmaker Pfizer announced in July 2008 that it would no longer pay marketing communications companies to arrange continuing medical education (CME) courses, which doctors must take to maintain their licenses. Pfizer said it would support medical education only when it was put on by hospitals and professional medical associations. Zimmer Holdings, a medical device manufacturer that manufactures hip, knee, and elbow implants, suspended funding of all CME activity. The company said it will restrict the way it funds courses in the future by identifying an independent third party, such as a professional society, to organize educational programs.
"We understand that even the appearance of conflicts in CME is damaging, and we are determined to take actions that are in the best interests of patients and physicians," Dr. Joseph M. Feczko, Pfizer's chief medical officer, said in a press release.
Industry support for CME has quadrupled since 1998, to $1.2 billion a year, according to the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), an organization in Chicago that approves CME providers. More than half of that is funneled to marketers, with the rest going to hospitals, medical associations, and other nonprofit entities.
As industry money for continuing education proliferates, so do worries that many of the courses have become at least partly aimed at promoting products. The industry and its outside marketers say they ensure that the courses remain free of commercial influence. But some medical experts argue that when employees of communications firms are beholden to pharmaceutical and device companies, they will produce CME courses that are slanted in favor of their sponsors, even if they don't realize what they are doing. "There's not only a perception of bias, there's a reality," says Dave Davis, a vice president of the Association of American Medical Colleges.
In January 2010, Pfizer appeared to modify its 2008 position by announcing a $3 million grant to Stanford University to create continuing medical education courses that the company claims will come with "no conditions and the company will not be involved in developing the curriculum." However, critics have argued that the curriculum will most likely focus on at least two areas in which Pfizer has major product lines: smoking cessation and heart disease.
1. Where is the conflict of interest in this CME relationship?
2. Do you think doctors are likely to be influenced by such promotional tactics? Why or why not?
3. If the pharmaceutical company is paying for the event, shouldn't it have the right to promote its products at the event? Why or why not?
4. Pfizer stated in 2008 that it would only support medical education put on by hospitals and professional medical associations. How can it then justify the Stanford grant?
5. Has Pfizer simply replaced one conflict of interest with another? Why or why not?
6. Propose an alternative approach to ensure that CME is provided without a conflict of interest.
Sources: Arlene Weintraub, 'Teaching Doctors or Selling to Them." Business Week, July 31, 2008, Out t Wilson, -Using a Pfizer Grant, Courses Aim to Avoid Bias, The New York Times. January 11, 2010, and Jacob Goldstein. "Stanford's Continuing Medical Ed., Brought to You by Pfizer: The Wall Street Journal, January 11, 2010.