Author Question: Do infant formula manufacturers bear any moral responsibility if consumers misuse and are hurt by ... (Read 58 times)

mynx · **on:** Aug 11, 2018

Do infant formula manufacturers bear any moral responsibility if consumers misuse and are hurt by misuse of a safe product? Can you think of any other products that may fall into this category?

What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

The case mentions that Nestl rejected one public relations agency's proposals because they were too militant. One of those proposals was for Nestl to try to infiltrate opposition groups. What do you think of this tactic?

What will be an ideal response?

Rilsmarie951 · **Reply #1 on:** Aug 11, 2018

Answer to Question 1

Although a consumer who misuses a product bears a high degree of responsibility
for his/her actions, that fact does not necessarily absolve the manufacturer. If the
manufacturer knows that the likelihood for abuse exists and, as in the case of
infant baby formula, that there are certain economic incentives for misusing the
product (saving money), then the manufacturer should take steps to minimize or
eliminate abuse. Gun makers, especially those whose manufacture the cheap,
pocket-sized handguns commonly referred to as Saturday Night Specials, are
embroiled in a similar controversy. Those are not the kind of guns used by sports
enthusiasts or sought by collectors. Too often, they are the weapons of choice in
armed robberies, armed assaults, and murders. Alcoholic beverage
manufacturers face similar issues.

Answer to Question 2

This tactic is unethical on several levels. It certainly involves the subversion of
truth. If the outcome of such a tactic changes the relationships between these
groups and their stakeholders, it could also be argued that it would corrupt
channels of communication. It could also be disastrous from both a public
relations and legal standpoint if this infiltration was uncovered