By: Gerkeil Owens
In the case presented by Sourour, he was hired to develop a pharmaceutical quiz app that would generate leads for the company’s sales team. The app was designed to appear as a helpful educational tool but was actually a marketing tactic to gather personal information from users. Sourour initially agreed to the project but later felt guilty about his involvement, particularly after learning that the company had a history of unethical business practices. Despite his reservations, he completed the project as requested. In this Case Analysis, I will argue that deontology shows us that the code was morally problematic because it violated the principle of honesty and transparency, and that Sourour should have done something differently by refusing to participate in the project once he became aware of its unethical nature.
From a deontological perspective, ethical actions are judged based on adherence to moral rules or duties, rather than the consequences of those actions. One central concept from the Codes of Ethics relevant to this case is integrity. Integrity requires individuals to act with honesty, transparency, and moral consistency, even when faced with pressure or temptation to do otherwise. Additionally, Sourour had a duty to consider the broader impact of his actions on society and stakeholders, because it was a pharmaceutical quiz and when it comes to things dealing with pharmaceuticals it’s very important and sensitive information for individuals. With this being important information for individuals, they can have a serious condition that’s harmful to them or alter their lives completely, so with Sourour knowing this and still going through with it is bad because that can misinform individuals who are trying to find answers for their illness and then can lead to many individuals possibly dying or making their illness even worst . By allowing the quiz to be implemented without addressing its unethical nature, he failed to fulfill his ethical responsibilities to protect the well-being of users and ensure that accurate and unbiased information was provided. By developing a deceptive quiz app that collected personal information under false pretenses, Sourour compromised his integrity and violated the ethical principle of honesty.
Furthermore, Armstrong’s concept of ethical decision-making emphasizes the importance of considering the broader impact of one’s actions on society and stakeholders. Sourour had a duty not only to his employer but also to the users of the app, who were misled into providing their personal information. By prioritizing the interests of his employer over the ethical implications of the project, Sourour failed to fulfill his ethical responsibilities to all affected parties. From Armstrong’s perspective, Sourour had a moral responsibility to consider the potential harm caused by his actions and to prioritize the wellbeing of the individuals who would be affected by the quiz app. However, by choosing to proceed with the development of the app despite ethical concerns raised by himself and others, Sourour failed to fulfill this moral responsibility. Furthermore, Armstrong emphasizes the importance of honesty and transparency in ethical decision-making. Sourour’s failure to disclose the conflict of interest and the true purpose of the quiz app violates these principles and undermines trust in the integrity of the product. As well as not holding up on his end of being a professional and actually thinking about the bigger picture of those who can be affected by this app and led astray thinking this app can be helpful to them, but in all reality it’s just to get their information and be a money grab. Which is horrific because this could be putting people’s lives at risk from an informational and pharmaceutical perspective.
This was a great idea to create a pharmaceutical app because it could’ve help those with certain conditions and illnesses get help quickly, understand their illness even more, and they could’ve gotten the resources they needed delivered to them if the app was ethically sound and if the creators were thinking that way, while in the process of creating the app. But Sourour thoughts were in the wrong place by knowing it was wrong and regretting it, but still going through with letting this app get out in the public with no pushback or anything. Which is why the use of the ethical tool deontology is great in this case analysis because deontology, as a moral theory, focuses on the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions based on their adherence to moral rules or duties, rather than solely on their consequences. When discussing Bill Sourour’s actions with the pharmaceutical app, deontology is best to use because it emphasizes the importance of ethical principles and moral duties, which were clearly violated in this case. Deontology emphasizes the importance of following moral rules or principles regardless of the consequences. In the case of Sourour’s pharmaceutical app, ethical principles such as honesty, transparency, and respect for the autonomy of users were violated. Sourour’s decision to design the app to lead users to a single product, regardless of their answers, disregarded these moral rules and contributed to the deception of users. Deontology emphasizes the importance of respecting the autonomy and dignity of individuals, which would’ve been the right way to handle this case especially while dealing with individuals’ information and health.
Sourour’s actions undermined the autonomy of users by manipulating the quiz app to promote a specific pharmaceutical drug without providing accurate information or alternative options. This disregard for the autonomy of users is a clear violation of deontological principles.Deontology emphasizes the existence of moral duties that individuals are obligated to fulfill. In the case of Sourour, as a professional coder, he had a moral duty to ensure that his actions aligned with ethical standards and did not harm others. By prioritizing personal interests over the well-being of users and failing to disclose the true purpose of the quiz app, Sourour failed to fulfill his moral duties as a professional.
The codes of ethics presented by the IEE and ACM offer clear guidelines for professional conduct in situations like this one with Bill Sourour.The IEE Code of Ethics emphasizes the paramount importance of public safety, health, and welfare, as well as the disclosure of factors that might endanger the public or the environment. Sourour’s failure to address the conflict of interest and prioritize the well-being of the public is a clear violation of this ethical principle. Similarly, the ACM Code of Ethics highlights the responsibility of computing professionals to ensure that their products are used in socially responsible ways and avoid harmful effects on health and welfare. By designing a quiz that misled users and promoted a pharmaceutical drug with potentially harmful side effects, Sourour failed to meet this ethical standard and could be held responsible for any resulting harm.In light of these ethical considerations, Sourour should have taken proactive steps to address the ethical concerns raised by the pharmaceutical quiz. He had a duty to disclose the conflict of interest to affected parties, including his employer and the public, and to refuse to participate in the development of a quiz that could potentially harm users. Additionally, Sourour should have sought guidance from ethical experts or professional organizations to ensure that his actions aligned with ethical principles and prioritized the wellbeing of users. Ultimately, Sourour’s failure to uphold ethical standards and prioritize public safety demonstrates a serious lapse in professional responsibility and integrity.
The actions taken by Bill Sourour in designing the pharmaceutical quiz app were unethical and conflicted with the principles of Deontology and Armstrong’s concept of professional responsibilities. The quiz deprived users of their autonomy by eliminating choice and deceiving them with misinformation. It violated ethical principles of honesty, transparency, and respect for individuals who have illnesses and conditions.To address the situation ethically, Sourour should have refused to code the quiz upon realizing its unethical nature. He should have raised concerns with his supervisor and, if necessary, escalated the issue to an ethics committee or external organization. Similarly, Sourour’s supervisor should have questioned the design of the quiz and pushed back against its implementation.Sourour and other coders have a responsibility to uphold ethical standards and should speak out against requests to develop programs or algorithms that manipulate or deceive the public. By prioritizing ethical considerations and refusing to participate in unethical practices, professionals can uphold the integrity of their profession and protect the well-being of individuals.
In assessing the actions taken in the case, it is clear that Sourour should have refused to participate in the development of the pharmaceutical quiz app once he became aware of its deceptive nature. By choosing to prioritize his own moral values and integrity over financial gain or professional obligations, Sourour could have avoided contributing to the company’s unethical practices and upheld his ethical duties to honesty and transparency.
In conclusion, while Sourour’s decision to complete the project may have been driven by practical considerations or external pressures, it ultimately represented a moral failure that could have been avoided through adherence to ethical principles and a commitment to integrity.By analyzing the situation through a deontological lens, it becomes clear that Sourour had a moral obligation to refuse to code the quiz or to raise his concerns with his supervisor and relevant authorities. The deceptive nature of the quiz, which misled users and potentially put their health at risk contradicted the ethical duty to act in accordance with principles of honesty, transparency, and respect for persons. Moreover, the ethical codes presented by professional organizations such as the lEE and ACM underscore the responsibility of individuals in the technology field to prioritize the safety, health, and welfare of the public. Sourour’s actions, or lack thereof, violated these ethical principles and could have resulted in significant harm to individuals. Analyzing this case through a deontological lens Bill Sourour highlights the importance and the need of ethical considerations in technology and underscores the need for individuals in the field to adhere to ethical codes and principles, such as those outlined by deontology, to ensure responsible and morally upright behavior to protect society from unethical business practices and to protect individuals from horrible situations like this one.