In the year 2002 Martha Stewart was tried for securities fraud and obstructing justice. Martha had used her awareness of inside information that dealt with a review being made by the FDA on an anti-colon cancer drug Erbitux created by a company called ImClone to which Martha owned stock in. There are many ethical dilemmas Martha Stewart ignored at the time she used the inside information for her own financial benefits, or in this case her protection. She ignored any morals to practice fair trade in the stock exchange and instead only protected her own interest in at the expense of the people who bought the stock of ImClone from her. Martha knew the stock value of ImClone was going to decrease after the FDA’s announcement and decided that she shouldn’t be the one to take a hit. Martha failed to contemplate how her actions would impact others included the stakeholders of her business. Martha didn’t conduct herself in ethical manner which resulted in her being accused of insider training; greatly affecting her own business, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc. (MSO) and the stakeholders of the business. At the time of the allegations, MSO stock went from being valued at $17 to $5.26 a decrease of a 70%. As well Martha had to resign as the CEO of her company because her reputation and judgment became tarnished after beings indicted and charged for fraud and obstruction. All of this occurred because Martha didn’t want to lose $45,673 from the drop in ImClone stock, but mostly because Martha failed to act ethically. If Martha had stopped and thought of the effects of her decisions and the outcomes that would follow things would have resulted much differently. Martha should have evaluated her actions prior to making them and reflect how they would impact not only herself but also the stakeholders of her business and ultimately society as well. If she had done chosen to be ethical her business wouldn’t have lost its stock value, and her reputation wouldn’t have been tarnished.

In 1964 the Ecuadorean government invited Texaco Inc. to bring operations into Ecuador and develop their natural resources and bring economic growth to their country. Under the name TexPet, Texaco worked alongside the Ecuadorean government owned company Petroecuador, and over the course of over two decades extracted 1.4 billion barrels of oil out of Ecuador. During that time the operations by TexPet created devastation throughout the land due to oil spills, and waste being dumped into the environment and natural water supply. This lead to a massive law sued brought on by the indigenous people of Ecuador who live in and around the area where TexPet operated. TexPet and Petroecuador argued that they brought great economic and education growth to the county by donations to higher education institutes and supplying nearly 3,000 jobs to Ecuadorian families. The real ethical issues here are the decisions made by both TexPet and Petroecuador that allowed dumping of 3,000 barrel of oil per day into the environment. Their actions cause massive devastation to the land, the animals and the people who live in those areas. The argument TexPet put forth in the law suit was that their operations were all in compliance with the Ecuadorian laws as well the international oil industry standards. Also studies that were done by two independent engineering firms concluded that there were no long term lasting effects. I find their actions were completely unethical, if standards are set to allow for this type of behavior by oil extractors than we have a bigger ethical issue that needs to be addressed. Its behavior and such ideology like this that is destroying our environment, when there is massive animal and fish die off the consequences are immeasurable and shouldn’t be taken lightly. I feel it’s important they rethink their approach to oil extraction. And if they went about ethically we could protect our environment, animals and people from suffering in the manner the Ecuadorian people did in this case.

In the case study, Where are the Accountants?; it brings up several areas in which accountants play an important role of ethical behavior. The first one is the idea that accountants need to follow the generally accepted accounting principles. Accountants play a vital role in the creation of financial statements and relaying of financial information which are used to evaluate and measure financial stability and performance. If accountants practice unethical behavior such as recording capital gain from the use of governmental certificates or falsifying property values based on appraisals, they create an accounting view point that is inaccurate and will continue being inaccurate if not corrected. The second area of concern comes from the role of measurement and disclosure performed by accountants. The case explains a report was issued stating that a Medicare program costs would increase from 20 billion to 1 trillion dollars, which lead to a report by the Medicare trust fund that the fund would run out. It is important that they do not make assumptions or disclose information without making sure the figures make sense. By not completing such tasks accountants can create a fiasco by misleading people based on numbers that don’t add up. The last part discusses is reactive behavior versus proactive behavior and the concern of fraud. It is very important that accountant practice with the idea of being proactive with their work and not just reactive to concerns they find. To practice ethically accountant should report unethical behavior upon discovery and not just push it aside or wait for the problem to surface. Accountants are the gatekeepers of financial information and the role they play should be accomplished with the highest regard to ethics. If we don’t practice using sound ethical behavior then we put at risks the information we outlay to the people who rely on such information to make judgments and decisions. And if they don’t have accurate information then any decisions they make will also be consequently inaccurate as well.