for A-1 to do nothing and just settle claims would be an estimated $12,000,000 in legal fees, increased insurance premiums and 22 deaths. The cost to recall and repair the trailers would be an estimated $18,000,000. The utilitarian theory states that we look for the greatest good for the greatest number after both positive and negative effects have been calculated. If we approach this analysis from this perspective then the obvious decision would be to recall and repair the trailers. The greatest good in this act is the avoidance of death or other injury. Next, I feel that by I will discuss the analysis from two theories. First I would like to look at it through the utilitarian theory. The cost recalling the trailers and acknowledging an issue would only be a positive for the company. The good from doing this is that although an initial loss of $18,000,000 is evident; recouping the $6,000,000 in future earnings is also evident. The company would definitely benefit in the long run by absorbing the $18,000,000 loss now and salvaging their name and continuing to do business. Looking at this analysis as a rights ethics theorist gives us a slightly different outlook. The rights theory holds that no calculation of greater good justifies depriving an individual of certain absolute rights. In this case, I feel that the recall of the trailers would not deprive anyone of any absolute rights. However, I feel that doing nothing, settling lawsuits, and allowing deaths to happen would be depriving individuals of their rights to be safe and secure in products and services bought in good faith. This would be a travesty of justice as well as unethical. Concluding, I feel that the recall and repair of the trailers would be the ethical thing to do. In the long run, more lives would be adversely affected by simply not doing anything and dealing with the problems as they arise in the form of lawsuits, injuries, and even death.