Fall Semester Blog Post #5
Part 1: Ethical Decision Making
Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible. Clearly state the ethical issue.
- 35% of children in the region suffer from stunted growth
- Traditional gruel does not provide key nutrients
- Grant provides sufficient funds
- Gruel made from corn maize and bananas is introduced at 2 months
- Pesticides used to grow crops used in the porridge could potentially result in health implications for infants
- Many women in the area are HIV positive
- Most mothers believe that 24 months of breastfeeding is necessary
- The longer children breastfeed, the more likely they are to contract HIV.
- 500 women from three contiguous sub-locations have indicated their interest in joining the cooperative, in hopes of improving their livelihoods
Step 2 and 3: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome and Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders
- Mothers and children: primary stakeholders as they are directly affected by nutritional choices.
- Motivations:
- Mothers wish to provide their children with the most nutritious diet available. Whether that is the combination of breastfeeding and gruel or breastfeeding and porridge.
- Mothers do not want to transmit HIV to their children
- Motivations:
- Pesticide Sellers and producers: secondary stakeholder
- Motivations: they want to make money and continue selling
- Healthcare Providers: Those who are treating the women and children in the region.
- Motivations:
- Want to prevent the transmission of HIV, promote healthy infant development, and provide quality care to their community
- Motivations:
- Farmers – Growing the crops used in the porridge
- Motivation:
- Want to produce crops and get paid for them
- Motivation:
- Government: departments that might be providing support
- Motivation:
- Aim to improve youth and overall well being of the community
- Motivation:
- The funders that sent the grant to start the women’s cooperative
- Motivations: don’t want the money to go to waste
The ethical issue in this case is whether it : Is it okay to substitute current breastmilk supplements with a new contaminated supplement if it is meant to ultimately decrease children’s exposure to HIV?
Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using basic ethical core values as guide Approaches [1/2/3: repeat for every action] • Potential solution • Ethical Principle or code • Pros • Cons
- Alternative Solution 1: Implement an HIV testing service for expecting and breastfeeding mothers. If they test positive, then they should put their infants onto the porridge treatment, whereas if they are negative, maintain the status quo.
- Ethical Principle or code: Consequence-based thinking
- Pros:
- Only exposed to pesticides if HIV is a threat.
- More people are made aware of their HIV status, allowing better treatment regimens to be followed.
- Less likely infants will contract HIV.
- Cons:
- Money is split between two initiatives, so both may never be fully developed to their full potential.
- Farmers are paid less since less crops are used.
- How far can this really go? What would the start and end be?
- Alternative Solution 2: Stop growing crops with pesticides
- Ethical Principle or code: Consequence-based thinking
- Pros:
- Ingredients are no longer harmful to children. Children have a decreased chance of contracting HIV.
- Cons:
- Increased pests in cash crops, leading to a smaller harvest, less food for the community, and less income for the farmers.
- Alternative Solution 3: Use the grant money to research methods of growing crops without pesticides
- Ethical Principle or code: Duty-based thinking and consequence-based thinking
- Pros:
- Crops are grown without pesticides
- Farmers continue to have a high yield
- Infants are less prone to contracting HIV
- Cons:
- May require significant time and resources
- Could take lots of time for farmers to adapt to new practices
- May or may not work
- Alternative Solution 4: Engineer the product’s processor to remove pesticides
- Ethical Principle or code: Virtue-based thinking
- Pros:
- There is a nutritious supplement without pesticides
- Farmers continue to make money on their crops
- Infants are less exposed to HIV
- Cons:
- Maybe hard to produce on a large scale
- Less profitable
- Cooperative gets too big and you have more distrust which leads to it all falling apart
Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection
According to the National Pesticide Information Center, removing the majority of pesticide residues is easy to do. While there is no method that is 100% effective, most residues can be removed from washing or heating the crops.
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.
- Solution: Engineer the product’s processor to remove pesticides
- How does the decision minimize risk for everyone:
- Infants and mothers are exposed to less pesticides and HIV overall.
- How does it compare to other approaches
- It allows for local businesses to be profitable while also protecting stakeholders from illnesses. Other solutions would have required producing less product, which would ultimately harm the farmers’ revenues and the nutritional health of the population.
- How does the decision minimize risk for everyone:
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.
- Impact of the venture:
- Technological: Would have to develop an engineering solution to effectively remove pesticides during processing.
- Social: There would be no stigma associated with the new product, e.g., hesitancy to use a product that only HIV positive individuals purchase.
- Economic: Farmers would draw more revenues, but the cooperation would be less profitable.
- Environmental: More energy and resources would be required to remove pesticides. Also, farmers would continue to grow their crops with pesticides which are likely bad for the environment.
Part 2: Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy
Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible
- Women work 9 hours a week and earn about $3
- Women enjoy working together and are happy with the cooperative
- Cooperative members have the opportunity to sell produce from their small farms to the cooperative which provides them more income
- Cooperative arrangement saves women time and money
- Significant issue with women being required to turn over money to their husbands who often misuse the money
- Committee overseeing the cooperative upset with the situation but dont think change is possible
- Women upset that the food is not reaching the children
- Six months left until you leave the cooperative completely
Step 2 and Step 3 : Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome. Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the stakeholders.
Problem Statement: Women are successfully earning an income to support their family, however, once their husbands are in control of their finances, it is not put towards family development.
- Me
- Personal Motivation: Personal engagement with the project, ethical opinion in the situation
- Professional Motivation: Reflects on my credibility and ability to get more resources in the future
- Cooperative members (women)
- Personal Motivations: Want financial independence, better living conditions, and be able to spend the money on the well being of their children
- Professional Motivations: Want to contribute to the cooperative and be active community members
- Cooperative leadership team
- Personal Motivations: Advocating for the rights of the women/cooperative members and address social inequalities
- Professional Motivations: Ensuring the cooperatives sustainability
- Children
- Personal Motivations: want to eat nutritious food
- Men who are responsible for their wives’ income
- Personal Motivations: Use the money received from their wives for personal interest such as alcohol and frivolous things
- Professional Motivations:
Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture.
Approaches [1/2/3: repeat for every action] • Potential Solution • How does it solve the problem? o Pros o Cons • How does it save face of those involved? • Implications on relationships o Short-term o Long-term • Implications on the venture o Short-term o Long-term
- Engage the men
- Find a way to store the money and make it available to the women at certain times
- Solution 1: Pay the Women in food (or whatever they ask for) with a little money on the side.
- How does it solve the problem?
- It provides women with what they need while still providing the family with money to keep the husbands happy
- Pros:
- Women get essentials
- Women are able to provide food for children
- Cons:
- Could become more expensive
- It is more difficult to gauge fair wage/food distribution among workers
- How does it save face?
- Husbands believe their wives are receiving money, so it does not seem like you are undermining them. Also, the rest of the board believes a
- Implications on relationships
- Keeps husbands happy (hopefully)
- Implications on venture
- Short term: Will be more expensive for the Venture
- Long term: Could strengthen the community
- How does it solve the problem?
- Solution 2: Vouchers instead of cash
- How does it solve the problem?
- This could be seen as a short term solution because it could quickly turn bad (there are more cons the more you think about it)
- Pros:
- Can use the voucher to purchase food
- Eliminates risk of husband taking all the money
- Cons:
- How do you know that the women will buy nutritious food?
- Which food provider would the voucher work for?
- Could lead to black market
- How does it save face?
- Implications on relationships
- Short term: Husbands upset that they are no longer receiving money
- Long term: Bigger void between relationships/family
- Implications on venture
- How does it solve the problem?
- Solution 3: Educational workshops
- How does it solve the problem?
- Educates the community on financial decisions and encourage healthy spending habits
- Pros:
- Fosters a sense of equality within households
- Might encourage cooperative members to allocate the earnings for the family
- Cons:
- Will see resistance from men
- Required a lot of time and resources to create program
- How does it save face?
- By promoting joint decision-making, this solution respects the roles and opinions of both men and women within the community. It avoids directly challenging traditional gender roles.
- Implications on relationships
- Short term: Some resistance and tension may arise
- Long term: There could be improved communication
- Implications on venture
- Short term: Venture may take a hit as they have to provide time and money to create the program
- Long term: It could strengthen the community
- How does it solve the problem?
Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection
- 78.3% of malnourished children recovered as a result of a food voucher program in Cameroon. This shows that if people are paid in food either directly or indirectly, proper nutrients are able to make their way into households (NIH)
Step 6: Select the best course of action – that solves the problem, saves face and has the best short term and long-term implications for your relationship and venture. Explain reasoning and discuss your solution vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in class.
- Solution 1: Pay the Women in food (or whatever they ask for) with a little money on the side.
- Reasoning: We decided this was the best solution because it allows the women to continue bringing back money to their husbands while also providing them with nutritious food for their children.
- Other Solutions posed more problems in the long term
Step 7: List the sequence of actions you will take to implement your solution.
- Seek input:
- First speak to the women and get input on how they would feel about the change
- Frame that it is not changing gender roles or the culture and explain it’s just better for the company
- Get the men on board and get them to see the value
- Identify Community leaders
- Get them on board ahead of time
- Individual conversations with other 6 board members