Ethics Case Study Of Heinz

In scenario one, the choice of whether or not to steal the drug is presented to Heinz, and out of desperation, he steals it for her. This leads into scenario two, where Officer Brown is faced with a decision on whether or not to report him. While we are aware of the reasoning behind Heinz's actions and would likely attempt to say that Brown should not report what he saw, we must also consider that he is unaware of the circumstances behind Heinz's actions, and even then any repercussions that may ensue if Heinz is later convicted (as he could easily be charged for obstruction of justice for failing to report it). Therefore, it is in my opinion that Officer Brown should report the incident.

While we may believe Heinz is in the right for committing the theft out of desperation due to the pharmacist's experimental drug, we need to consider the first and fourth stages of moral development. The first one governs that consequences arise based on one's actions, which in this case appear as Officer Brown noticing the theft. This leads into the fourth stage, as despite his close friendship with Heinz, failure to report this could lead to another witness reporting the incident instead, which in turn would lead to legal repercussions against him,
While we can agree that what Heinz did was wrong from a legal stance, we must also state that the pharmacist is also in the wrong for charging such an outrageous price for the drug rather than going with a cheaper, yet still fair price for it. If we had more information, such as if there were no other potential witnesses or if Heinz would be able to acquire a loan, then we would be better able to decide on what would be the right response. As it stands, however, Brown is unaware of the reasoning behind Heinz's theft, and has to make what he feels is the right decision in