Jezza G.

Plang
September 16, 2023- Case Title: The Ethical Dilemma of a CEO

I.Indroduction

John is a CEO in a large pharmaceutical company. The company is on the verge of launching
a new drug that has a potential to save thousands of lives, but it's not yet approved by the
regulatory agencies. John knows that drug, if rushed to the market without proper testing could
have severe side effect and even cause harm to patients. However, he is under the immense
pressure from the company's shareholders and his own interest to expedite the drug's release to
maximize profits. This case explores the ethical challenges John faces in deciding whether to
prioritize profit or patient’s safety in the imminent launch of the new drug.

II.Ethical Framework

 Utilitarianism: The potential benefits of John’s case, releasing the drug might
bring happiness and health to a large number of patients. But in the other hand
rushing the release could cause harm to patients due to unforeseen side effects.
 Deontological: Ethically, there’s a duty to not cause harm to patients by waiting
the regulatory approval to ensure the drugs safety and effectiveness. There’s a
duty to act in the best interest of shareholders but this must be balance with the
duty to protect patients.
 Virtue Ethics: Being honest about the drugs status and potential risk is a virtue
that should guide in decision making. Moreover, acting with caution and
foresight to ensure the best long-term outcome for all stakeholders is also a
virtuous approach.
III.Stakeholder Analysis

 Shareholders: seek financial gain and may pressure the CEO to expedite the drug launch
to maximize profits.
 Patients and public: expect safe and effective medicine, relying on regulatory agencies
to ensure safety products. Rushing on unapproved products could lead to severe health
risk for patients.
 Regulatory agencies emphasize rigorous testing and approval processes to guarantee
the safety and effectiveness of drugs before they offer it to market.
IV.Ethical Dilemma

 The primary ethical dilemma revolves the launch of an unapproved drug that has the
potential to save lives but lacks proper testing and regulatory approval. John as the CEO
faces the conflicting interest to ensure the patient safety and maximizing profits for the
company and shareholders.
V. Ethical Analysis
  The happiness and health of the majority should be prioritized, but in this case patient
safety is uncertain, making this approach risky and potentially harmful.
 Following the duty patient safety is a paramount ethical obligation, even if conflicts with
financial interest.
 Being honest and prioritizing the safety of the patient is a virtuous conduct.
VI. Evaluation of Option
Option 1- Prioritize Patients safety and Regulatory Compliance

 Uphold ethical principle by prioritizing patient’s safety and well-being

 Align with legal and regulatory standards, ensuring compliance and
minimizing legal risks. Demonstrates the company’s commitment to
responsible and ethical business practices.
Option 2- Expedite Drug release to maximize profit

 Potential to significant financial gains and meeting shareholders’

expectation in the short ter.
 Opportunity to gain a competitive edge by being among the first to
market the drug.
VII. Recommendation

 The recommended course of action is to prioritize patient safety and regulatory

compliance. Delay the drug’s release until it obtains proper regulatory approval and
communicate transparently with the shareholders, explaining the importance of safety
and regulatory compliance for the company’s long-term reputation and success.
VIII. Implementation Plan

 prioritizing patient safety and regulatory compliance. Delay the drug’s release until it
obtains proper regulatory approval and communicate transparently with the
shareholders, explaining the importance of safety and regulatory compliance for the
company’s long-term reputation and success.
IX. Conclusion

 Prioritizing the patient safety, honesty and compliance with regulatory standards is not
only ethically but also ensures the long-term success and reputation of the company.
This decision reflects a commitment to both ethical principles and societal well-being,
aligning with responsibilities of a pharmaceutical company towards its stakeholders and
the public.