How Loud Should The Whistle-Blower Be?
This document is about the debate of when and if "whistle blowing" in a professional environment is valid. The article gives a scenario of a dilemma associated with using company money to cover up an internal affair that went on between a lady named Belinda and a co-worker. It brought about the topic of whether or not real life professional events taking place were ethical or not. One of the real world matters that this pretend scenario was compared to was the scandal and cover-up at Penn State regarding a man named Jerry Sandusky. Some of the considerations that people involved in this scandal were thought such as justice versus mercy, truth versus loyalty, individual versus other, and short-term versus long-term implications. The article states long term effects of not blowing the whistle on an incident. Having to deal with the side effects of what future problems the case could bring about is another issue.
In my opinion I feel like if something is immoral or unethical it needs to be told, to an extent. Being a snitch for minor things can make you unreliable if done too much. Telling on someone to get ahead is not what to correct approach should be in terms of succeeding. All the topics talked about in the article are good examples of when telling a problem is the ethical thing to do.
There are no comments to this post(Back to babulan blog | Write a Comment | Subscribe)
facebook | del.icio.us | digg | stumbleupon | RSS | slashdot | twitter