Ethics Assignment Instructions (150 points)
Complete all three parts.
PART I – Heinz Incident – (Worth 50 Points)
For Part I, read the Heinz Incident and complete the chart at the end of this reading.
The Heinz Incident
In Europe a woman was near death from a terminal disease.
There was, however, one drug which doctors
thought might save her.
It was a form of radium that a pharmacist in the same town had recently discovered.
The pharmacist believed that he “had to always do what was in his own best interest,” and decided to charge
one hundred times what the drug cost to produce so that he could solicit as much profit from his research as
The cost for one dose was a quarter million dollars, and the doctors suggested that the woman would
need four in order to be cured.
The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to secure finances,
but was only able to raise $300,000.00 which were all given in the form of gifts.
He went to the pharmacist
personally and told him his wife was dying, asking the pharmacist to sell it cheaper or allow him to pay later.
The pharmacist flatly said, "No, it is not in my best personal interest to discount the drug.”
Heinz was desperate
and he broke into the man's laboratory and stole four doses of the drug for his wife.
Heinz and his wife went to
a distant town where she received the new treatment, and was cured.
Heinz was so deeply moved by the incident that he used his savings to start his own research center where cures
for a number of different terminal diseases were discovered and distributed to the public for a nominal cost.
Over the course of the next years, thousands of individual lives were saved because of his generosity.
years after the theft, the pharmacist who originally discovered the medication was vacationing in this distant
town and he recognized Heinz as the individual who had stolen his formula in order to save his wife.
solicited the help of the local police and had Heinz arrested.
Heinz was later sentenced and a date was arranged
for court proceedings.
You were selected to be on the jury discussing this case with five of your peers.
After several days in court
where the defense and prosecuting attorneys each presented lively arguments, you and your peers were
relocated to a quiet back room where you begin to discuss the evidence.
The room was quiet, with each juror
reading through transcripts from the trial.
The prosecuting attorney presented the closing argument, with the
following statement providing a summary of his thoughts:
“In closing, I would like to emphasize the sober