Great Deal! Get Instant $25 FREE in Account on First Order + 10% Cashback on Every Order Order Now

Read the case below and answer the following questions. Isabel Arnett was promoted to Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Tamik, Inc., a pharmaceutical company that manufactures a vaccine called Kafluk,...

Read the case below and answer the following questions.
 
Isabel Arnett was promoted to Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Tamik, Inc., a pharmaceutical company that manufactures a vaccine called Kafluk, which supposedly provides some defense against bird flu. The company began marketing Kafluk throughout Asia. After numerous media reports that bird flu may soon become a worldwide epidemic, the demand for Kafluk increase, sales soared, and Tamik earned record profits. Tamik’s CEO, Arnett, then began receiving disturbing reports from Southeast Asia that in some patients, Kafluk had caused psychiatric disturbances, including severe hallucinations, and heart and lung problems. Arnett was informed that six children in Japan had committed suicide by jumping out of windows after receiving the vaccine. To cover up the story and prevent negative publicity, Arnett instructed Tamik’s partners in Asia to offer cash to the Japanese families whose children had died in exchange for their silence. Arnett also refused to authorize additional research within the company to study the potential side effects of Kafluk.
Based on your study of Ethics in Business Decision Making, answer the following questions.
 
QUESTIONS
 
1.      1.Why did Isabel Arnett make the business decision that she made? Justify your answer.
 
2.   22.This scenario illustrates one of the main reasons why ethical problems occur in business. What is the reason?
 
3.   3.Would a person who adheres to the principle of rights consider it ethical for Arnett not to disclose potential safety concerns and refuse to perform additional research on Kafluk? Why or why not? Give reasons.
 
4.  4.If Kafluk prevented 50 Asian people who were infected with bird flu from dying, would that change the ethical consideration in this scenario? Why or why not? Give reasons.
 
5.  5.5.Did Tamik or Arnett violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in this scenario? Why or why not? Justify your answer.



Oct 07, 2019
SOLUTION.PDF

Get Answer To This Question

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here