Topic: What was morally wrong about writing the code for the pharmaceutical quiz? Should Sourour have done anything differently? What and why? (or why not?)
In Bill Sourour’s article, “The Code I’m Still Ashamed of”, he recounts his experience as a young programmer tasked with writing a quiz for a pharmaceutical company. The quiz was designed to recommend the pharmaceutical company’s drug regardless of the answers users provided. This deceptive practice was particularly problematic because the drug in question had severe side effects, including depression and suicidal ideation. Sourour later learned that at least one individual had died by suicide after taking the drug. The experience left him deeply remorseful, as he had played a role in misleading vulnerable individuals for corporate profit. In this case analysis, I will argue that an ethics of care perspective shows that the code was morally problematic because it prioritized corporate interests over the well-being of users. Additionally, Sourour should have acted differently by advocating for ethical transparency and refusing to write misleading code, as his responsibility extended beyond technical execution to the care of end-users.
A key concept in professional ethics is the obligation to prioritize the well-being of users and the broader public. Organizations such as the Association for Computer Machinery (ACM) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) provide codes of ethics that emphasize honesty, transparency, and harm prevention. For example, the ACM Code of Ethics states that computing professionals should “avoid harm” and “be honest and trustworthy”. In contrast, the pharmaceutical quiz that Sourour developed was designed to manipulate users into selecting a specific medication, undermining their autonomy and potentially endangering their health.
From an ethics of care perspective, the primary concern should be the relationships and responsibilities programmers have towards users. Unlike utilitarianism, which might justify deceptive coding if it results in greater overall benefit, an ethics of care approach emphasizes the duty to consider the well-being of those affected by the technology. Sourour’s interests over the health and safety of individuals.
Sourour should have acted differently by questioning the ethical implications of the project and advocating for user protection. Although young programmers may feel pressured to follow orders, professionals have a duty to push back against unethical directives. While Sourours raised his concerns to the Project Manager on the account, he was told, “Yes that’s what the requirements say to do. Everything leads to the client’s drug”. Instead of responding, “Okay. Cool” Sourour should have re-emphasized his concerns and address possible legal and ethical ramifications of having the quiz always pointing to the pharmaceutical company’s drug– raising it above the Project Manager if necessary. Had Sourour’s employer remained unresponsive to his concerns it would have been morally justifiable for him to resign himself from the project, demonstrating a commitment to ethical integrity.
Mary Beth Armstrong’s analysis of confidentiality across different professions underscores the tension between professional obligations and ethical responsibility. In medicine, confidentiality is central to trust but is overridden when nondisclosure causes harm. Engineering and accounting professions similarly balance confidentiality with broader ethical obligations to public safety and transparency.
In the context of Sourour’s case, confidentiality should not have been an excuse for ethical negligence. While he may have been bound by contractual obligations to his employer, the deception inherent in the quiz posed a clear ethical conflict. The concept of whistleblowing aligns with an ethics of care perspective that prioritizes the well-being of vulnerable individuals over blind adherence to professional secrecy. If Sourour had challenged the deceptive nature of the quiz or reported the company’s practices, he would have demonstrated a commitment to care and ethical responsibility.
Moreover, the pharmaceutical company’s actions exemplify a failure of care ethics. Rather than considering the potential risks to users, they manipulated information to maximize profits. The absence of informed consent in the quiz was a violation of ethical standards observed in medicine and other professions was a violation of ethical standards observed in medicine and other professions that deal with sensitive information. By refusing to participate in the deception, Sourour could have upheld ethical standards that align with the principles of both the ACM/ IEEE codes and Armstrong’s discussion on confidentiality.
In summary, Sourour’s role in developing deceptive code was morally problematic because it facilitated deception and put users at risk. The ethics of care framework emphasizes the moral responsibility of developers to prioritize human well-being over corporate interests. Sourour should have done more to challenge unethical practices, as his role extended beyond technical execution to ethical accountability.
Critics might argue that young professionals often lack the power to resist unethical directives, especially in hierarchical work environments. While this is a valid concern, ethical integrity requires individuals to make an earnest attempt to push back against harmful practices. Moreover, workplaces that cultivate ethical cultures benefit from employees who hold each other accountable, reinforcing the importance of ethical discourse within professional settings.
This case serves as a reminder of the broader responsibilities programmers hold. Ethical dilemmas in technology will continue to arise, and professionals must be prepared to critically evaluate their work’s impact.
References:
Armstrong, M. B. (1994). Confidentiality: A Comparison across the Professions of Medicine, Engineering and Accounting . Professional Ethics, A Multidisciplinary Journal, 3(1), 71–88. https://doi.org/10.5840/profethics1994314
Sourour, B. (2019, June 3). The code I’m still ashamed of. freeCodeCamp.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20240218203417/https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/the-code-im-still-ashamed-of-e4c021dff55e