Introduction
A survey conducted by The Telegraph (2015), revealed that a large number of female students in the UK have been victims of sexual assault. Unfortunately, there has been a refusal among university and college officials in the country to investigate these accusations of indecent sexual advances. While academic authorities have been warned about their refusal to act and protect women from these forms of assaults, some officials asserted that it was not necessary to intervene because these cases are purely a police matter (Goldhill & Bingham, 2015). The apparent failure of university and college officials to protect their students from sexual advances is demonstrated in the case of Baylor University. An investigation showed that Baylor University officials failed to appropriately and immediately act on allegations of sexual violence involving some of their students (Lavigne, 2016). These school officials exemplified the case of other people who failed in their capacity to ethically act by virtue of their given positions. This paper aims to discuss instances where people in a position of authority have the duty to uphold their professional responsibility, regardless of compelling reasons that may prevent them from doing so.
The Responsibility of Schools to Protect its Students
Universities and colleges in the United States are mandated by the federal law to immediately respond to reported cases of sexual assault that involved their students. However, the case of Baylor University, where the officials failed to promptly act on the issue of sexual assault committed by its students indicated its failure to comply with its social responsibility. It was reported that the Baylor University under the watch of its president and Chancellor, Ken Starr, failed to report incidents of rape and sexual advances from 2009-2016 (Boorstein, 2016). In the UK, the law clearly stated that “higher education institutions should be proactively seeking to ensure women students are safe and equal while they study” (Goldhill & Bingham, 2015). This premise is equally so in many other countries, particularly in the United States. Therefore, the argument that sexual assaults are cases that concern only the police is outright wrong. Educational institutions around the world must always uphold their social obligation to protect and support their students against any kinds of harassments.
Personal Responsibility
As an individual, we all have our own social responsibility that we must perform according to our given capacity. For example, a corporate executive, in his capacity as an individual may have other life obligations other than to that of his employers. These responsibilities include assuming his role as head of the family, members of the church and a dutiful citizen of his country among others.
Business Social Responsibility
In his essay entitled The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits, Freidman argued that those who were held responsible for the decisions and action in business are not compelled to exercise social responsibility in their position as company executives (Freidman, 1970). He further wrote that the obligation of the corporate executive rest solely to that of his employers, thus his efforts must be directed in accordance with the desires of the business owners. Generally, the desires of business owners are for the executive to work towards making as much profit as possible.
According to Freidman, a corporate executive must not perform acts in his capacity to promote his social responsibility. This is because doing so would defeat his role as an objective employee, as he will find himself working not for the interest of the business but that of the interest of other people. For example, if a corporate executive decides to approve outlays that aim to reduce pollution, then he is not acting in the best interest of his employers as he would be spending a resource to promote general well being. Specifically, Freidman’s argument against the social responsibility of business boils down to, a) it sets up taxation without representation, b) it is undemocratic, c) unwise, d) it constitutes a violation of trust, and e) it is a pointless effort (Mulligan, 1986).
However, in A Critique of Milton Friedman’s Essay, Mulligan countered that corporate executives and business should be held accountable in upholding their social responsibilities. Mulligan pointed out that the acknowledgment of social responsibility among businesses is not demeritoroius “if the executive and his employers both understand their mutual interest to include a proactive social role and cooperate in undertaking that role (Mulligan, 1986). Overall, Mulligan claimed that business people may elect to establish and implement socially responsible actions, without fear of objectionable consequences as provided for by Freidman in his famous essay.
In Almeder’s criticism of Freidman’s position, he pointed out how the later “asserted that the sole moral responsibility of business is to make as much profit as is legally possible” (Almeder, 1992). However, Almeder argued that there is a need to regulate the profiteering motive of most businesses because failure to do so will lead to an unbalanced nature of competition which is detrimental to societal and economic well being. For example, the failure of governments to regulate business and to impose policies that requires them to comply with their social responsibility may lead to the degradation of the environment. If governments and business are to follow Freidman’s point of view, then there would be no telling when corporate activities will all be geared towards gaining profit, to the detriment of other people.
Euthanasia and Doctor’s Moral Responsibility
Another controversial issue that concerns moral responsibility is the physician-assisted death, more popularly called euthanasia. A moral premise that counters the acceptability of legally assisting the death of a patient is contained in one of the Ten Commandments of the Christian teaching which says: “Thou shall not kill”. Moreover, it was argued that doctors have distinct moral duties and “an unconditional obligation never to kill” (Seay, 2005). The moral obligations of physicians are inherent in their professional roles, and this in turn affects their relationship with other people, specifically, their patients. Accordingly, physicians as professionals, owe their greatest moral duty to that of their patients. Resolving dilemmas that concern their profession shall be determined, taking into consideration the patient’s rights, which are directly linked to the role of the doctor as a healer and reliever of suffering. Advocates of euthanasia claimed that while physicians have the moral duty to heal and protect life, this duty is violable when met with the right of the patient to be totally released from suffering. On the other hand, there are people who do not agree on the performance of euthanasia. This is because despite the suffering, life “retains value even when it no longer produces satisfaction, pleasure and so on” (Garcia).
References
Almeder, R. (1992). Morality in the marketplace: Reflections on the Freidman Doctrine. In Business ethics. Prometheus Press.
BBC News. (2015). Strauss-Kahn: Only 12 sex parties in three years. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31318120
Boorstein, M. (2016). The Kenn Starr-Baylor story shows how religious schools struggle to deal with sex assault. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/05/25/the-ken-starr-baylor-story-shows-the-struggle-of-religious-schools-to-deal-with-sex-assault/
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
Garcia, J (n.d). Health versus harm: Euthanasia and physician's duties. Retreived from http://www.uffl.org/vol16/garcia06.pdf
Goldhill, O., & Bingham, J. (n.d.). One in three UK female students sexually assaulted or abused on campus. The Telegraph.
Lavigne, P. (2016). Baylor didn't investigate sex assault claim against players for two years. Retrieved from http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/15191102/baylor-investigate-sex-assault-claim-football-players-more-two-years-lines
Mulligan, T. (1986). A critique of Milton Friedman's essay 'the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits'. Journal of Business Ethics, 5(4), 265-269.
References
Seay, G. (2005). Euthanasia and physicians' moral duties. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy,30, 517-533. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03605310500253071
