Johnson & Johnson (J & J), the 124-year old American multinational, is renowned for referring to its Credo (statement of values) when making business decisions. The Credo, which begins with the sentence We believe our first responsibility is to the doctors, nurses and patients, to mothers and fathers and all others who use our products and services, spells out the companys responsibilities to its various stakeholders including consumers, employees, and shareholders. Decades after the events, J & J is yet praised for its swift product recalls during the early 1980s when in-store tampering of Tylenol bottles in Chicago resulted in several cyanide poisoning deaths. At the time, the company said that its swift response was based on the expectations set forth in the Credo. Talc and asbestos are naturally occurring minerals, often mined alongside one another. While talc is a component in many cosmetic products, including baby powder and makeup, some claim that it nonetheless poses health risks. Asbestos is a known carcinogen that is linked to serious health issues. Given their co-presence in nature, it is possible for talc that is used in cosmetic products to be contaminated with asbestos. This issue has become public only within the last few years. In February of 2016, a Missouri jury ordered J & J to pay $72 million to the family of Jacqueline Fox who died of ovarian cancer after using J &Js baby powder and Shower-to-Shower products for feminine hygiene over several decades. In May of 2016, a St. Louis jury awarded Gloria Ritesund $55 million in damages because she developed ovarian cancer and had to have a hysterectomy after using J & J talcum powder over 40 years. Soon, the company faced over one thousand state and federal lawsuits claiming that the company ignored the link between its baby powder and Shower-to-Shower talc products and ovarian cancer. A jury member involved in the Ritesund case told Bloomberg News, We felt like they knew for decades that they should have put a warning on this product. However, Terry Kohut, J & Js Director of Communications, said that the verdicts counter decades of sound science proving the safety of talc as a cosmetic ingredient in multiple products, and while we sympathize with the family of the plaintiff, we strongly disagree with the outcome." The science of the matter was not definitive. While the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reported "limited evidence in humans" for a connection between genital use of talc-based body powders and ovarian cancer, Dr. Daniel Cramer, an obstetrician-gynecologist with the Epidemiology Center at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, reported that talc was found in the lymph nodes of ovarian cancer patients as early as 1982. Paul Demers of Cancer Care Ontario, a member of the IARC committee that evaluated the evidence of talc being a possible carcinogen, noted, "We have some evidence to be concerned about it is not definitive enough to say probably carcinogenic." What is clear, based on an internal J & J memo from 1987, is that the company was aware of the potential risks of talc. This memo, written by a medical consultant, noted: "anybody who denies (the) risks" between "hygenic" talc use and ovarian cancer will be publicly perceived in the same light as those who denied a link between smoking cigarettes and cancer: "Denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary." In October 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a report of its study on talc-containing cosmetic products. The research indicated the presence of asbestos in several of the products studied, and the organizations worked with manufacturers, including J&J, to recall products with trace amounts of asbestos. Although the percentage of products testing positive for asbestos was small, and there is no consistent link between talc products and asbestos, the fact that any asbestos was detectable in any cosmetic talc products raised concerns. By April 2020, J&J faced thousands of lawsuits alleging a link between the companys talc products and cancer diagnoses, some claiming that manufacturers (including J&J) have not done an adequate job of screening their talc products for asbestos. At this point, the company stopped selling talc-based Johnsons Baby Powder product in the U.S. and Canada. As of July 2022, the company faced over 38, 000 talcum powder related lawsuits, and had paid nearly $4 billion in settlements, verdicts, and defense costs. In August 2022, J&J indicated that it would it remove all talcum powder products from the global market in 2023 and replace talc with cornstarch.

Questions Using two ethical theories, determine whether it acceptable (or not) for J&J to not inform their customers of the potential risks that come with the extended use of talc products? (27 points)

In contrast to the talcum powder issue, J&J swiftly recalled all their Tylenol bottles from the U.S. market when people died of cyanide poisoning as a result of some bottles being tampered with in a store. Based on your knowledge of moral intensity and ethical decision-making, discuss why J & J might have responded so differently to these two situations. (9 points)

Based on your knowledge of moral disengagement mechanisms, explain how J&J might have justified the continued sale of talcum powder products in the global market after it stopped the sale of these products in North America. Additionally, indicate how moral disengagement can be minimized at the organizational level. (12 points)