The Impact of Needle Stick Injuries: A Closer Look at Becton Dickinson and Ethical Considerations

🏥 Becton Dickinson is the largest healthcare company that specializes in medical devices.

💉 In the 1980s, there was a rise in needle stick injuries among healthcare workers, leading to concerns about the transmission of diseases like Hepatitis B and AIDS.

⚠️ Despite the increasing number of needle stick injuries, Becton Dickinson chose not to change the design of their needles in order to minimize costs.

🔒 In 1986, a nurse and an engineer obtained a patent for a safer needle design, which Becton Dickinson later licensed and marketed as the SafeSet needle.

In 1991, the price of needles was significantly high, hindering hospitals' accessibility.

A nurse named Maramot got contaminated with an unprotected needle while treating an AIDS patient.

The incident led to the implementation of safety measures, such as providing hepatitis B vaccines and safe needle disposal.

Backingson introduced cheaper and safer needles, challenging the market dominance of Becton Dickinson.

Critics argued that the Backingson needle was not as safe as it claimed to be compared to standard needles.

GPOs, such as Premier and [Brand Name], were criticized for prioritizing financial interests over patient safety.

🔍 In 1998, Ret Technolog introduced a new safe syringe

⚖️ In 2001, Retractable sued B Premier and No for violating antitrust laws

💰 In 2004, B Premier settled the lawsuit with a $100 million fine

💡 According to the theory, producers have a responsibility to provide safe needle sizes to consumers.

📜 The contract theory suggests that businesses have moral obligations to fulfill the terms of the contract and avoid misleading statements.

⚖️ The utilitarianism, justice, and caring approaches all support the idea that Dickinson should provide safe needle sizes.

🔑 According to the social cost view, the manufacturer has a responsibility to provide safe needles to reduce the risk of accidents.

🔐 From a justice perspective, the manufacturer should distribute the benefits and burdens of safe needles equally among different groups.

👀 Considering the principle of care, the manufacturer has a duty to prioritize the well-being of healthcare workers, patients, and the community.

💡 In this video, the case of Becton Dickinson and Needle Sticks is discussed, highlighting the issues regarding the company's pricing and market dominance.

⚖️ Ethical approaches such as utilitarianism, justice, rights, and caring are explored to analyze the ethics of the case.

🔒 Becton Dickinson should prioritize the safety of their products and take responsibility for any harm caused. They should also avoid monopolizing the market through the GPO system.