Law 310
Week 1 Assignment | DeVry University Professor Crowder March 1, 2012 | Insert name |
Chapter 2:
2. Resolve this ethical dilemma posed by Carl Kaufmann of Du Pont:
Assume that federal health investigators are pursuing a report that one of your manufacturing plants has a higher-than-average incidence of cancer among its employees. The plant happens to keep excellent medical records on all its employees, stretching back for decades, which might help identify the source of the problem. The government demands the files. But if the company turns them over, it might be accused of violating the privacy of all those workers who had submitted to private medical exams. The company offers an abstract of the records, but the government insists on the complete files, with employee names. Then the company tries to obtain releases from all the workers, but some of them refuse. If you give the records to the feds, the company has broken its commitment of confidentiality. What would you do?
Assuming that a federal health investigator wanted a report of your employee medical records, you know it’s wrong to give out information without employee consent. Only a few agree to discard information what should you do? According to Chapter 2, “Section 406 defines a code of ethics as written standards that are reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote such behaviors as honest conduct, full disclosure in reports, compliance with all applicable laws and rules, prompt reporting of violations and methods for conforming to the code’s expectations.” Seeing that rules forbid them to hand out personal information they are stuck between two situations which could cause a dramatic outcome. On one side you have investigator trying to find a link as to where the cancer might have come from or began. On the other side before you allow an employee to purse a position with your company they signed a privacy contract to keep all there information private. Giving away this
Chapter 2:
2. Resolve this ethical dilemma posed by Carl Kaufmann of Du Pont:
Assume that federal health investigators are pursuing a report that one of your manufacturing plants has a higher-than-average incidence of cancer among its employees. The plant happens to keep excellent medical records on all its employees, stretching back for decades, which might help identify the source of the problem. The government demands the files. But if the company turns them over, it might be accused of violating the privacy of all those workers who had submitted to private medical exams. The company offers an abstract of the records, but the government insists on the complete files, with employee names. Then the company tries to obtain releases from all the workers, but some of them refuse. If you give the records to the feds, the company has broken its commitment of confidentiality. What would you do?
Assuming that a federal health investigator wanted a report of your employee medical records, you know it’s wrong to give out information without employee consent. Only a few agree to discard information what should you do? According to Chapter 2, “Section 406 defines a code of ethics as written standards that are reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote such behaviors as honest conduct, full disclosure in reports, compliance with all applicable laws and rules, prompt reporting of violations and methods for conforming to the code’s expectations.” Seeing that rules forbid them to hand out personal information they are stuck between two situations which could cause a dramatic outcome. On one side you have investigator trying to find a link as to where the cancer might have come from or began. On the other side before you allow an employee to purse a position with your company they signed a privacy contract to keep all there information private. Giving away this
Cited: McAdams, Tony (2009). Law, Business and Society [9] (VitalSource Bookshelf), Retrieved from http://online.vitalsource.com/books/0077587596/id/ch02lev1sec09