28 August, 2020

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible. Clearly state the ethical issue. The ethical issue in this prompt is one where the designer has to decide whether to get rid of the self-disable function, in order to reduce costs, at the expense of potentially spreading disease among the population. 

 

The facts in this situation are:

• The self-disable function prevents further use of a syringe
• If a syringe is used multiple times there is a potential for spreading the disease
• Including the self-disable function is more costly in terms of production
• Having a lower cost would make the syringe more accessible for individuals. 

 

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome. The stakeholders in this ethical dilemma include:

• The doctors and nurses
• Hospital administrators
• Patients and their families
• The designer

 

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders. 

• Doctors and nurses aim to help as many people as possible and improve the health of their patients. They also aim to uphold their pledge of doing no harm to patients
• Patients want to be cured of their illness while paying a low cost so that treatment may be affordable
• Hospital administrators seek to provide healthcare services for the community while ensuring that they can continue to operate, therefore, they must make financially sound decisions
• The designer aims to make a low-cost syringe which is effective in delivering medication

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using basic ethical core values as guide

1st Course of Action: Add the self-disable function on the syringe

• Ethical Principle: Duty-based principle. Although costly, allowing for the syringe to self-disable after use will allow for the safest administration of the medication. A very ethical course of action. 
• Pros: 
  • The safest course of action for everyone, not only the patients, but also for healthcare professionals who are handling the syringes
  • Will reduce the spread of disease
• Cons: 
  • Will be very costly for the general public
  • Hospital administrators will have to pay more to purchase the syringes
  • Not very accessible

 

2nd Course of Action: Do not include the self-disable function on the syringe

• Ethical Principle: Consequence-based thinking. Follows Utilitarian thinking of doing what will ultimately be best for the majority. 
• Pros:
  • Will help the most amount of people, as most funds will go directly to the production of the syringe
  • Allows for people with lower income to receive healthcare services
• Cons: 
  • May enable the spread of disease among the population
  • Has the potential to do more harm than good (depending on the severity of the disease and the resources required to treat it)
  • Not entirely safe for patients

 

3rd Course of Action: Do not include the self-disable function and use a portion of the funds to provide training to healthcare workers on the proper use of the syringe

• Ethical Principle: Consequence, Virtue, and Care-based thinking. This course of action follows utilitarianism as many people will have access to the medication. A virtuous healthcare worker will administer the medication safely and use knowledge taken from the training to dispose of the syringe properly. Likewise, Care-based thinking allows healthcare professionals to do what is best for the patient while providing healthcare services to many. 
• Pros: 
  • Allows for a large amount of people to receive the medication
  • Will be affordable in low and middle-income countries
  • Will curb the spread of the disease
• Cons: 
  • Resources and funds that could be allocated towards the production of the syringe will instead be allocated towards developing and providing training to healthcare workers

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection.

When thinking about this dilemma, I originally thought that the safest option should be pursued. Yet, I do understand that the context I have is very different from the reality many middle and low-income countries face. If healthcare workers do not have adequate training on the dangers of reusing syringes, many people may be put at risk. It is also important that the general population has access to these medications or else many will be denied access to a higher quality of life. I also believe that it is unethical to deny people life-saving medications due to cost. In the United States, we currently have an ongoing crisis where many diabetics are dying because they cannot afford the rising costs of insulin. 

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values.

Explain reasoning and justify. Discuss your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class. 

The best course of action is the third course of action: do not include the self-disable function and use a portion of the funds to provide training to healthcare workers on the proper use of the syringe. This option satisfies the highest core of ethical values because utilitarianism (consequence) will allow for the most amount of people to be helped. Virtue-based thinking and Care-based thinking will allow healthcare professionals to be virtuous and safely dispose of the syringe. Overall, this is the best approach as it is cost-effective compared to including the self-disable function, and it is more ethical compared to not including the self-disable function as healthcare workers will have the knowledge needed to be caring and virtuous when using the syringe. Assuming that the training program is effective, middle and low-income countries will be able to afford the medication while the transmission of the disease will be low. Yet, assuming the training program is not as effective it may lead to higher rates of transmission. Although on balance, this solution is still the most ethical, as it will allow for a lower rate of transmission than solution 2 while being more accessible to the general population than solution 1. Also, hospital administrators will be able to make financially effective purchases of the syringe, while the designer will have fulfilled their purpose of creating a low-cost and effective syringe. 

 

Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture. Explain the impact of your proposed solution on the venture’s technology, economic, social, and environmental aspects.

The implications of my solution, economically, is that the venture will continue to expand, as since it is low-cost, hospital administrators will be willing to buy a large quantity of syringes. In terms of technological aspects, I as the designer will have successfully delivered an effective, low-cost product to many hospitals. Socially, the population will benefit as many individuals will receive the necessary medication. Environmentally, the syringe is not reusable, but parts may be recycled. Yet, this will need to be looked into further and will potentially require additional funds.