Description of the Case & Language Case Study Paper

Ethics
Student’s Name
Class
Date
Ethics
Description of the Case
Case 2 was chosen for the current analysis. The claim states that Terry, a supervisor in the water pollution at the environmental quality department, involved members in the enforcement section to study the deep-wall injection of harmful chemical waste by numerous petrochemical processing plants. Preliminary findings of the chemical analysis indicated that there was sufficient evidence of toxic materials migrating towards the aquifer, which was the primary source of drinking water for the rural communities.
Terry needed to submit the report to her supervisor, who was the assistant secretary for hazardous waste, water, and air. Terry was happy with the report and applauded her staff for it. After finishing going through the report, she recalled her last damaging report that majored in fish destruction caused by the movement of toxic waste in the northern section of the province. However, when she submitted the report to the chain of commands, she did not get a response to the report.
Terry pressed for a response and recommended that an action should be taken to solve the issue. However, she was told that her report could not be passed on to the Premier’s Office, and also, the department had employed a private consultant to investigate the problem. In contrast, the preliminary findings submitted by the consultant indicated that Terry’s results were not valid. As such, the preliminary findings suggested that the petrochemical plant that employed more than 200 employees in the economically depressed region did not produce harmful waste. Moreover, Terry recalled that the annual budget for the previous year had cut two positions from her permanent staff and denied three positions she had requested for the enforcement section. Although Terry proceeded to submit the report, she did not receive a response. After three months, she called the assistant secretary and was told that her report was not sent to the Premier’s Office. Also, the assistant secretary indicated that a private consultant firm had been hired and had just finished conducting a similar investigation. Terry was informed that her preliminary findings were not valid because they contradicted with her report. As Terry was conversing with her assistant secretary, her assistant walked in. She passed the information to her assistant, who responded by stating that they should leak a copy to the press.
Ethical Dilemmas or Issues Identified In the Case
The case presented has various ethical dilemmas. For instance, Terry knew that the preliminary findings concerning the emission of harmful substances by the petrochemical plants were valid. The industries knew that they were polluting the environment because the hazardous materials were being moved to the clean water reservoir. Although her team conducted the research and confirmed that the freshwater was being polluted by harmful chemicals emanating from the plants, the report submitted to the assistant secretary was not considered. As a result, Terry knew that it was unethical for the Premier Office to ignore such a report, and instead employ a private consultant firm to conduct similar research, which generated contrasti...