Nestes Corporation Case. Fanal Case Study. Health and Medicine.

Instructions for Case Analysis 
This is a largely fictional case—it involves fictional characters and companies. However, it draws on a variety of actual cases. Imagine yourself in the position of an ethics analyst who is asked to go work for the company and draft a report analysing the situations, identifying the main moral wrongdoings, justifying the conclusions why they are wrong. In writing the report, identify the main issues and discuss each separately. There are four to six distinct situations--you should identify them all (for example, health and safety issue, privacy issue, etc...). One or one and a half single-spaced pages per issue should be sufficient, but it can be a bit more or a bit less depending on the complexity of the issue. Your analysis should contain the following parts: 
a) Identify the problem and assess it. This is a good place to ask yourself this question—where does this situation fit as far as legal and ethical responsibilities are concerned? For example, if there (hypothetically) were a workplace safety issue where the employer ignores the dangers to employees and their objections, you would evaluate the actions of employers and pass a judgement on whether and why they were wrong as far as regulations and expectations of responsibility are concerned. If there were a privacy issue, you could determine whether there was a privacy violation by considering the workplace relationship, the nature of the infringement, and possible justification. Here you could appeal to legislation (i.e. Health and Safety Guides from the Legal Perspective uploads or PIPEDA guidelines), but note that not every situation in the case can easily fit the assessment on the basis of regulations or legislation. b) Justify your moral assessment in a normative theory (theories) we have discussed in class (this could be deontological rights approach; utilitarian analysis or other moral standards discussed. 
If in the section above you passed a moral judgement, in this section you need to ground the moral judgements in moral principles and ultimately a moral standard. To ground your analysis of the situation, keep these questions in mind: Who is harmed by the activity? How serious is the harm? Who is responsible for the harm? Does it violate essential human interests or moral rights? Can this harm be morally justified by conflicting moral values? What are the real motivations of the parties involved (e.g. perpetrators and critics)? Appealing to this normative foundation should justify your analysis and help to clarify moral values involved. You need to show how moral obligations identified in a) follow from the moral theories we have covered in class.Instructions for Case Analysis This is a largely fictional case—it involves fictional characters and companies. However, it draws on a variety of actual cases. Imagine yourself in the position of an ethics analyst who is asked to go work for the company and draft a report analysing the situations, identifying the main moral wrongdoings, justifying the conclusions why they are wrong. In writing the report, identify the main issues and discuss each separately. There are four to six distinct situations--you should identify them all (for example, health and safety issue, privacy issue, etc...). One or one and a half single-spaced pages per issue should be sufficient, but it can be a bit more or a bit less depending on the complexity of the issue. Your analysis should contain the following parts: a) Identify the problem and assess it. This is a good place to ask yourself this question—where does this situation fit as far as legal and ethical responsibilities are concerned? For example, if there (hypothetically) were a workplace safety issue where the employer ignores the dangers to employees and their objections, you would evaluate the actions of employers and pass a judgement on whether and why they were wrong as far as regulations and expectations of responsibility are concerned. If there were a privacy issue, you could determine whether there was a privacy violation by considering the workplace relationship, the nature of the infringement, and possible justification. Here you could appeal to legislation (i.e. Health and Safety Guides from the Legal Perspective uploads or PIPEDA guidelines), but note that not every situation in the case can easily fit the assessment on the basis of regulations or legislation. b) Justify your moral assessment in a normative theory (theories) we have discussed in class (this could be deontological rights approach; utilitarian analysis or other moral standards discussed. If in the section above you passed a moral judgement, in this section you need to ground the moral judgements in moral principles and ultimately a moral standard. To ground your analysis of the situation, keep these questions in mind: Who is harmed by the activity? How serious is the harm? Who is responsible for the harm? Does it violate essential human interests or moral rights? Can this harm be morally justified by conflicting moral values? What are the real motivations of the parties involved (e.g. perpetrators and critics)? Appealing to this normative foundation should justify your analysis and help to clarify moral values involved. You need to show how moral obligations identified in a) follow from the moral theories we have covered in class.