Often we find ourselves watching the television and a commercial will come on regarding the latest and greatest pharmaceutical drug. These commercials often show a person who is living a life of health and happiness because of how much better their lives are after taking a particular drug. For example, I cannot remember a time where I have turned on the television or read a magazine and have not viewed an advertisement for a heart medication, allergy suppressant, anti-depression drug, sleep assistor, heartburn reducer and more. In what can be considered constant exposure to these advertisements we may have asked ourselves if it is ethical that pharmaceutical companies are allowed such vast advertising power. Especially when many of these pharmaceuticals …show more content…
In this view the goal is to have actions that are morally right and to evade ones that fail to result in moral actions. In addition, when using this view you should choose an action that is morally correct regardless of the consequences. For instance, “Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory regardless of their consequences for human welfare” (Encyclopedia Britannica). For more clarification, the action is separate of the results, an action should be chosen because it is morally correct on its own and not for the results it produces. One example, is how a soldier takes an oath to go off to war to defend his family and country. This action can unfortunately result in the death of the soldier. However, the soldier has a duty to defend his family and country from the oath which is the morally righteous action. He is deciding to risk his life for his fellow countrymen and woman. The soldier may not survive the war and this could very well be the result. Furthermore, the oath which results in the duty of the soldier can be considered the moral obligation of the soldier despite the consequences and risk of one’s life. Therefore, the action is chosen because it is morally correct outside of any result of that action. Furthermore, the country would be defenseless if people were not to follow such oaths. Therefore, one could conclude the action is …show more content…
For example, for every $1.00 spent advertising prescription drugs it is estimated to increase their retail sales by $4.20(“Should Prescription Drugs be Advertised Directly to Consumers”). The additional drugs that are created are for money purposes and not to help people. The drug that is released is the one that will make the most money for the pharmaceutical company. In addition, doctors are pressured to give out drugs that they otherwise would not use. This is unethical from my conclusions drawn earlier from Kant’s Categorical Imperative. A drug that affects a person’s heath should be released based upon its effectiveness, not because of an exceptional marketing campaign. Doctor’s should determine any drug prescription based on fact about the drug and not advertising campaigns. This is the only morally way forward looking at it from the point of view of the Deontological view. False advertising is never the way forward and in way drug companies have that power now in the United States and New Zealand (Paper Instructions). This is unethical because people are not tools to achieve more money, they are ends in