Reference no: EM131674727

Question: In Arkansas, methamphetamine (meth) was manufactured primarily in small toxic labs (STLs) located in homes, tents, barns, or hotel rooms. According to the plaintiffs (a number of counties in Arkansas), Arkansas had one of the highest numbers of STLs in the nation. The counties alleged that they had spent signifi cant amounts of taxpayer dollars combating the manufacture of methamphetamine, including law enforcement costs for locating, eliminating, and cleaning up STLs; prison and jail costs for housing illegal users, dealers, and manufacturers; addiction treatment costs for users and addicts; payments to family service agencies for housing and treating children whose parents were arrested on meth-related charges; and costs for treating the physical side effects of meth use and exposure to its production. To recoup these costs, the plaintiffs sought compensation from Pfizer, Inc., and other manufacturers of cold and allergy medicines. They brought the suit against these manufacturers because meth cannot be produced without ingredients from their cold and allergy medicines. What ethical duties, if any, do you think the drug manufacturers owe to the state or people in this case? Apply the WH framework to help reach your conclusions.