Ethics

Model Answer

Introduction

An engineering graduate faces a critical ethical dilemma: should she prioritize her job security or the health and well-being of downstream communities affected by the illegal dumping of toxic waste? This situation demands careful consideration of her moral responsibilities and the potential repercussions of her actions.

Body

(a) Reasons Against Keeping Quiet

1. Duty to Protect Others: As a member of society, she has a moral obligation to safeguard the well-being of others. By staying silent about the toxic waste, she allows harm to come to the villagers who rely on the river for their water supply. This inaction violates her ethical duty to help those in need.
2. Ethical Implications: Discharging hazardous waste is inherently unethical. Remaining silent makes her complicit in her company’s harmful practices, undermining her integrity and honesty. Ethical principles demand that individuals act with compassion and responsibility towards affected communities.
3. Long-Term Consequences: Ignoring the issue poses severe long-term risks for both the environment and the community. Continued pollution may lead to irreversible ecological damage and health crises among villagers. By speaking out, she has the potential to prevent further harm and protect the community’s future.

(b) Recommended Course of Action

1. Gather Evidence: She should collect evidence, such as photographs and documents, to substantiate her claims. This will strengthen her case when reporting the issue.
2. Anonymous Reporting: To protect her identity, she can report the matter anonymously to regulatory authorities, environmental organizations, or media outlets. This ensures the issue is brought to light without jeopardizing her job.
3. Seek Legal Advice: Consulting an environmental lawyer can provide her with guidance on her rights and potential protections against retaliation.
4. Whistleblower Protections: Researching applicable whistleblower laws can help her understand protections available to her when exposing wrongdoing.
5. Internal Awareness: If safe, she could raise the issue internally with trusted colleagues who may support her cause, potentially prompting management to address the problem.
6. External Support: Engaging with environmental NGOs can provide her with additional resources and support for her actions.

Conclusion

In navigating this ethical dilemma, it is imperative for her to prioritize both her safety and the health of the affected communities. By following these steps, she can expose the harmful practices while minimizing risks to herself and her family. Ultimately, making the moral choice can lead to a positive impact on both the community and the environment.