Ford Pinto

1) Did Ford act unethically in the Pinto case? (page 88)

Yes, Ford acted extremely unethically in the Pinto case. The difficulty in this case is whether or not Ford administered business morally and ethically in regards to recalling the Pinto. There are many components included in this case, but the complete facts that I retrieved from the article essentially confirms that Ford knew about some potential difficulties and selected to disregard them until someone pointed them out to the authorities and to the public. The problem that appears for Ford is the ethical and moral considerations of avoiding the problem until someone found out and the force it could have on the future of the Ford Motor Company.

2) Is American industry at too much risk for lawsuits to remain competitive? Should lawsuits such as the one against Ford be disallowed or limited? Why or why not?

Lawsuits aren't supposed to be competitive, they are supposed to make the party whole, and with that said; American industry is indeed at too much risk for lawsuits to remain competitive. Lawsuits such as the one against Ford should take place once. The first incident that occurred should have been the limit. After the first case was decided, court rules should apply such as suspensions of Senior Managers within Ford without pay, termination of employment, and closing of dealerships. This would make a huge impact on the type of automobile parts utilized when creating a vehicle from scratch.

3) Should we try to restrain, in this and other product liability situations, the litigiousness that seems to characterize American life? How might we do this?

America should try to hold back on lawsuits depending on the reason. In a case like Ford Pinto, Ford took a huge risk that produced negative results such as deaths, accidents, and bad reputation. When an incident pertains to death, what are the alternatives, especially when there is a negative track record and the results are repetitive? In a case such as someone buying a cup of coffee from Dunkin Donuts and the hot coffee accidentally spills on that person, which leads to a permanent burn mark, which leads to a law suit. Isn't coffee supposed to be hot? America has to figure out a way on how to return common sense and fairness to our state's courts.

4) Will your answers to any of the above change now that the US government (you, the taxpayer) is part owners of the car companies? Does your ethical stance change if the government (or a private company partially owned by the government) is the party under discussion rather than a totally private company?

As part owner of the car companies, my responses will bear no difference. The truth of the matter is that "what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong". My ethical stance remains the same regardless of whom or what party is under discussion.