Explain the Utilitarian & Deontological Aspects of Informational Privacy for Employers & Employees
1205 Words5 Pages
Explain the Utilitarian & Deontological aspects of informational privacy for employers & employees
Patricia Dunn, placed number 17 on FORBES list of most powerful women, landed herself four felony counts by making unethically chivalrous decisions.
Patricia Dunn, once a chairwoman on the board of Hewlett-Packard, a position she held from February 2005 until September 2006. Her tenure was cut short on October 4, 2006 as she was charged with four felony counts for her role in a spying scandal. Five months later on March 14, 2007, California Supreme Court judge Ray Cunningham dropped criminal charges against her in the “interest of justice” on all four felony counts: fraudulent use of wire, radio or…show more content… Therefore, her system of ethics judged by its consequences is neither utilitarianism nor that of deontological reasoning. Patty Dunn should have approached the board from the get go. By not doing this, she followed a questionable trail of illegal activity
Her utopian dreams of maintaining discretion of HP’s goals and even her “in-house” attempt at corralling the leaker are seemingly understandable. However her tact and failure to use common ethical business practices will be discussed in detail here.
She had to have at least had an inkling that what she was about to embark upon was sensitive. Not only sensitive but dangerous! Dangerous in that cautions should always preface any actions involving personal information. Patricia Dunn is too smart to successfully play dumb.
Utilitarianism reasoning does not care whether the benefits are produced by lies, manipulation, or coercion. (Issues in Ethics V2 N1 Winter 1989) Patricia Dunn did not use utilitarianism aspects of information privacy for the employer. Instead it appears they were used more so as her personal vendetta. Patricia Dunn’s case seems to be believable until Felony count #1, overt act #9. Which reads, “…Patricia Dunn on or about February 24, 2006, requested a comprehensive summary of the resources and techniques used in the investigation.” (State of California, 2006)