In this reading, Terrance McConnell discusses the ethics of whistle blowing. The
reading is split into 5 main sections, with introductory case examples and a short
asserting that whistle-blowers ought to be protected by the public, and that organizations
or perceived unethical behavior. There are several facets of and requirements for whistle-
blowing:
First, the whistle-blower must have pertinent insider information about actions
that an organization is taking, such as misconduct during clinical trials for a product.
for clinical trials of a cancer vaccine. Mathias saw that researchers were injecting human
subjects with the untested vaccine without first testing it on animals, then lying about the
benefits of the vaccine and covering up their misconduct. Her medical training,
McConnell asserts, was instrumental in both helping her realize the researchers’ unethical
behavior, as well as identifying her as a credible source once she blew the whistle.
Next, the whistle-blower must have personal morals and values that contradict the
organization’s actions. An employee who mindlessly works in the best interests of the
mindful employee is more likely to question the organization’s actions. McConnell says
media, including TV stations, magazines, and newspapers. However, there are many
alternatives, such as Henry Beecher’s article in a medical journal detailing the accounts
leaked information about the administration’s unethical behavior; however, since the
informant only revealed minimal information at a time, and since they never publically
whistle-blowers typically are backed into a corner with no other options, since their
whistle-blower themselves. Multiple conflicts of interest mean that the individual needs
to weigh the importance of revealing private information against the potential backlash
they face.
obligations are moral requirements that an individual faces due to the nature of their job
or role within the organization. General obligations, in contrast, are basic requirements
that any individual with a moral compass must follow; these can include “not to kill, not
to steal, and not to assault others” (McConnell). The difference between these two sets of
related obligations dictate that they act in the best interests of the organization, whereas
their general obligations state that they protect people from further harm. McConnell
writes that instead of a ‘structural answer’ where individuals always prioritize one set of
obligations over the other, they should follow a more general ethical perspective and
determine the most appropriate response on a case-by-case basis. He calls this a “future-
is that whistle-blowing should only occur if it will end the organization’s current
unethical actions. Sissela Bok augments this idea, writing that “past errors or misdeeds”
this idea, however, expands beyond just the organization’s actions, and examines the idea
of reparations for those harmed by the organization. He states that victims of malpractice
and their heirs are owed amends, and that if the organization is unwilling to pay those
reparations, whistle-blowing is warranted. He also says that “exposing a past injustice can
open people’s eyes to similar injustices” and keep them more informed, thereby
of the organization and backlash on the whistle-blower, the act produces “significant
how sure the individual is of their assessment, as well as an estimate of the damage that
their action will cause the organization. Examining whether the act is obligatory,
however, requires an understanding that the whistle-blower will and historically does face
significant punishment for their action. McConnell writes that “…whistle-blowers often
do not fare well. Some have been fired and others have been demoted or reassigned to far
less desirable positions” (McConnell). Whistle-blowing can fall into a category ethicists
label “supererogatory”, which means that although the act would be morally good, the
individual would not be blamed if they realized that the cost they incur is far greater than
Organizations that wish to remain ethical need, broadly, three aspects. The first is
to promote policies and an internal structure that allows employees to not only openly
discuss their qualms with the ethics of the org’s actions, but to also be seriously heard.
The second is a commitment to protecting the employee from punishment should they
whistle-blow. Finally, organizations need to constantly reassess their actions and ensure