02. Keeping money that someone has dropped is legal, but again, many would find it unethical. But given that laws are made by political processes, why should we assume that the law determines what is ethical and what is not? It is more likely that the law will be written by and for those with political power. Ezekiel J Emanuel, MD, PhD, chair of the Division of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, agrees that what Shkreli did was no different from what other pharmaceutical companies have been doing for years. For example, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc. acquired the heart drugs Isuprel and Nitropress and quickly raised prices by 525% and 212%, respectively. Shkreli, which increases the price of Daraprim by 5,000%, can be considered more cheeky. It was also completely legal. And unethical, says Emanuel. But was that wrong? Anyone who tells you, or simply implies, that everything legal is also ethical, is most likely engaging in self-serving rationalization. If this idea arises in the private sector, it is likely that someone will try to justify profitable behavior that is unethical but not yet illegal.
When the same idea arises in academic circles, it is more likely that the self-interest they are trying to preserve is their own interest in avoiding the difficult work of determining which business behaviors are unethical and why. I would like to say first of all that I liked the article and I agree with you. The part I want to add and emphasize is that the accounting professor was not necessarily wrong since he was teaching accounting, and in this world, ethics governs most laws, because the purpose of accounting laws and regulations is to present a clear and truthful representation of the financial situation of the company for the purposes of investors. So in this world, legality determines ethics and ethics determines legality. I know that`s not what you talked about, but I think you should keep that in mind and could help explain it to students like the one you mentioned in the article, because I also see that as ethical respect for other teachers. I enjoyed reading this, but thanks for sharing. CEOs have a responsibility to keep companies profitable. Their success often depends on income statements. However, some companies also attach importance to high ethical standards. There is no doubt that CEOs are often faced with difficult decisions that can negatively impact employees or customers. That doesn`t mean it`s the wrong choices. CEOs should have their company`s ethical barometer at their fingertips and remember that just because something is legal doesn`t mean it`s always right.
On the other hand, just because a decision can be considered imprudent does not mean it is the wrong choice for the long-term viability of the organization. When it comes to the business game, my rule is to know the rules and play the game on the sidelines. If something is “legal,” then it is permissible under the laws of the land; It is a law passed that establishes the minimum standard of behaviour expected of all people who visit and live in the country. Although the law is a formally established and enforced concept, ethics is more flexible and is usually enforced by the personal moral compass. For something to be “ethical,” it will adhere to a set of codes or values determined by the typical human perception of what is right (ethical) or wrong (unethical). While the law relies heavily on what is right in a very “black and white” sense of the word, ethics places much more emphasis on emotional factors such as compassion, generosity and kindness, and offers more opportunities to be somewhere between “black and white.” In short, “the law sets minimum standards of conduct, while ethics sets the highest standards. Many business ethics programs are called “compliance” programs because they emphasize the employee`s duty to comply with laws and organizational codes. In most cases, this leads to a “just do what you need to do to avoid trouble” mentality that ignores the ethical implications of behavior and treats behavioral norms as mere obstacles to be overcome or avoided.
Compliance is about what I have to do; Ethics is about what I should do. When companies make compliance their ultimate goal, they create a minimalist idea of following the strict letter of the law. Soon, their goal becomes to do what they can. Ethics lawyers for two former U.S. presidents recently called President Donald Trump the most unethical U.S. president. President Trump`s lawyers have denied that no ethics laws were violated. Meanwhile, immigration critics insist on the “illegal” status of immigrants as an original sin that cannot be overcome by years of taxes and other contributions to American society. These claims imply that respect for the law imposes a moral stain on absolution and violations of the law. Principle 3: CCMs will always remain objective in their dealings with their clients.
The next logical step is to question the morality of the laws themselves and the morality of the government`s actions to enforce them. If a law wrongly deprives a person of his property or freedom, it is wrong. When the government enforces these laws, it commits unethical aggression against the people. One area where morality and law are similar in health care is that both can be considered general principles or rules that apply to specific cases or situations. It is not always clear which rule or principle applies to a particular situation. In many societies, including the United States, much attention is paid to the law that applies and determines the legality or illegality of an individual`s particular act. Courts decide this issue in specific cases that set precedents that are then cited in subsequent similar cases. The same must happen in health ethics. It is not enough to have moral principles; Attention must be paid to the question of which principles and rules apply in a given situation. This attention to the need not only for rules and principles, but also for an extremely careful determination of the application of these rules to certain situations, is much appreciated in law, but perhaps underestimated in morality.