Example Of Becton Dickinson Case Study
In the case of Becton Dickinson and needle stick, we get to see how the large manufacturers step on the small manufacturers and how they take advantage of them. While doing this, they put thousands of lives in danger. They may have compensated the small manufacturers but still there are some situations that no amount of money can compensate. Nobody can fix a damaged life; therefore, it is important to protect it at all cost. It appears that the large scale manufacturers are not interested with people’s health. The fact that the agencies came up with methods that could solve the problems, but none of them was implemented shows lack of commitment to the public health. It was not right when the large manufacturers blocked the small manufacturers from selling their safe syringes to hospitals that could have saved many lives (336).
Ethics means to deal with morals; pertaining to right or wrong in conduct. Manufacturers of medical supplies should ensure that they provide the best equipment that will ensure patients healthcare is taken care of at the best and safest method. Becton Dickinson, however, did against to what is expected. Rather than focusing on the safest syringes for both the health workers and patients, they were more interested in minimizing the capital outlay as stated by Robert Stathopulos. It was also unethical for the Dickinson manufacturer to prevent the Retractable from selling their safe products to hospitals and healthcare centers. Retractable syringes were rated the safest, however, they still found themselves blocked out of the market by the dealings that involved the Dickinson and the major GPOs.
This case involves the large manufacturers, the small manufacturers and the government. The large manufacturers have more capital and power as compared with the small manufacturers. This power could prevent the small manufacturers from carrying out their business sufficiently. They may have the required products, but since there is a great power above them they find it hard to get the required products into proper use. This, however, shows that the small manufactures are not respected. The appropriate thing would be to look at the products without basing their judgment on which manufacturer is more powerful and with that they could help the country as a whole. Ethically, the government, the large, and the small manufacturers should work hand in hand to formulate the best ways to resolve the problem, since that what the principle of respect dictates.
It is so sad that the government that should be the first to ensure the small manufacturers grow is the same government that does the opposite. The Becton Dickinson has done many irresponsible activities that are against the principle of integrity. All manufacturers need to produce the best products regardless of the cost. The health of their health workers and patients should be their priority. In addition, all manufacturers should have the right to produce and market their products provided they have a license. Becton Dickinson prevented Retractable from selling its’ products despite their safety ratings in the industry.
Another act Becton Dickinson performed was duplicating Retractable design syringe, manufacturing and selling the syringes under its own name which is against the principle of justice. In my opinion, all manufacturers should be given equal rights and should have privileges without any obstructions. The government should ensure the small manufacturers are protected, and their rights are respected as with the principle of respect. Any company that violates the law, however, should face justice regardless of their power (338).