Would it be wrong of Rushton as a Group Managing Director of the organization to ask Walter about his health? Defend your answer by applying to moral principles.
In the Kant’s Ethics, the Rushton is not wrong to ask Walter about his health, because Kant’s Ethics is saying a person doing their duty, means that person is right no relationship with the what result. Example Rushton as a Group Managing Director of the organization, this is his duty to ask for Walter about his health. Another, Rushton also is not wrong to ask Walter about his health, because in Utilitarianism Ethics is a theory in normative ethics holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes utility, specifically defined as maximizing happiness and reducing suffering. Simple said that it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong. In this case Rushton is asking for Walter about his health, this will make the Walter unhappy, but in the most of Walter’s colleagues will happy , because they can be relieved in their working place. In conclusion, Rushton it not wrong to ask Walter about his health.
In what way, should the company address the problem of public fear and prejudice when employee with AIDS has direct contact with customers?
In that way, the company should provide more relevant about AIDS information to customers. People simply touching someone with AIDS or being in contact with them do not transfer the disease. If there was contact between open or exposed flesh then that's a different story. AIDS will transfer the disease just has only a few ways, example during sexual contact, as a result of injection drug use and as a result of an occupational exposure. So the company can talk about AIDS transfer disease information to customers. This way can make customers know about AIDS knowledge and also can save customer’s worry. Another way, the company can transfer AIDS patients to other less direct...