Business Ethics - Case Study Example

1. American Therapeutic Inc., the entire population of the United s that might one day be prescribed the drug, and the FDA. 2. Priority rank population of individuals that might one day be prescribed the drug, 2) American Therapeutic, 3) FDA3.Ethical norms and principles were obviously violated by both the CEO of Vegesna and Chang; as both colluded to circumvent the law and engage in bribery as a means of promoting their own self interests above the safety of the population and the system of approval specified by the FDA.4.The winners in this case were American Therapeutics and the individual Chang.

Due to the fact that the drug manufacturer was able to effectively bribe Chang and circumvent the traditional procedure, the clear loser was the medical community and the process itself; as well as all of the individuals in society that may be at risk due to the hurried and unprofessional manner through which this scandal unfolded.5.Absolutely, as long as there are individuals who are willing to circumvent the system, in the hopes of accruing a further profit, and place the lives of their consumers at risk due to a hurried and ill researched drug release, the legitimacy of the entire process falls into question.6.Vegesna could have leveraged the expertise of his company as a means of finidng a path to more rapid approval; rather than dipping into the realm of bribery as a means of effecting this goal. 7.The first liability is with regards to the fact that illegal form of payment and unlawful interaction between Chang and American Therapeutics has taken place.

As such, in the event that this is discovered, both of Chang and American Therapeutics could be held liable for any damages that resulted from their collusion. Moreover, even if no harm came of this, both of these could still be held liable for corruption and bribery outside the bounds of the law.8.In order to obtain rapid FDA approval, Vegesna could easily have ensured that all of his documents were in the correct order and that the testing facilities had been vetted and approved by the FDA.

Even though this might not have resulted in an immediate level of approval, as was created by the bribery of the FDA official, it would necessarily have increased the turnaround time that he could have expected as compared to what was realized by other firms. 9.In order to prevent future payments such as the one that has been discussed, the level of interaction between a firm and a single individual at the FDA must be reduced. By engaging companies with a team of stakeholders from the FDA, the possibility and the temptation to bribe all of them will be greatly reduced; as compared to a single individual integrating with a hopeful company.