Budny 4:00
L07
Ethics of 3D Bio Printing
Thomas Bui (tmb100@pitt.edu)
Introduction
My name is Thomas Bui and I am a Bio Engineer
currently working at the company, Organovo. I have been
working here for the past five years. My team and I have been
doing developmental research for the past couple years. Now
we have successfully found a way to create organs from 3D
printers. I help with the process of by 3D printing kidneys
through the use of CAD, Computer Aided Design. 3D Bio
printing can be used to change the current medical problems
in the world.
The Moral Dilemma
As an engineer, it is my job to create newer, better
innovations in order to improve the lives of people in the
world. 3D Bio-Printing has shown that it can make the world
better. This new technology enables doctors to do many more
kidney transplants every year. Before this, according to the
Rutgers Law Review Article, “only 30,000 transplants [were]
performed in America every year” [1]. Many people were left
without transplants and eventually had some problems with
their body. However, my company, Organovo, has recently
made me do something completely, morally wrong; they want
me to speed up the process of 3D printing the kidneys without
telling the companies that ordered them in order to satisfy the
demand. Furthermore, I am also not allowed to tell anybody
that I sped up the process by skipping steps in the 3D Bio
Printing process. A typical kidney can take up to two days to
be fully functional. My company wants me to print a kidney
in at least half that time. Though this would make the
company more money, speeding up the process may also
make the quality of the kidneys much worse. If these kidneys
were to be used for transplants, it could potentially do more
harm than good for the patient.
Problems with 3D Printing to Quickly
The kidney, a complicated organ, should be treated with
great care. Rushing a 3D printed kidney would end very
badly. According to an article in CNN, it takes about 45
minutes to print each strip and another “two days for the cells
to grow and mature” [2]. If the kidney is not fully ready yet,
many problems occur. First, for example, if not given the full
two days, certain cells may not be able to be produced. Cells
are not like lego building locks. A kidney requires dozens of
types of cells and those cells “need to be in specific places,
while other cells need to be somewhere else” [3].
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
Submission Date 2015-11-03
Lastly, the kidney must be in an exact, perfect shape so
that it may fit the patient for a transplant. Rushing the 3D
printing process may hinder the correct use of the materials
needed. For example, if given the wrong materials for a
certain part of the kidney, some nerves may not work which
means that the patient would fully operate normally or
respond to certain signals. This would most definitely make it
harder for that person to do simply, daily activities.
Rules of Practice
If I do this, my company would make me break many rules
of conduct created by the NSPE, also known as the National
Society of Professional Engineers. First off, I would be
breaking Section II.1. This rule states that “Engineers shall
hold paramount the safety health, and welfare of the public”
[4]. According to the Rules of Practice, I am required to report
the possible defects to appropriate professional bodies.
However, since my company is asking me, there is nobody in
the company that I can report this to because they want me to
do it no matter what. Speeding up the process of 3D printing
kidneys would bring in more revenue for the company.
However, they all refuse to see the consequences of these
actions.
Secondly, despite this, according to the Section II.4,
“Engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful
agents or trustees” [4]. This means that I have to do what I am
told. It states that I must “disclose all known or potential
conflicts of interest that could influence… the quality of [my]
services” [4]. If I do tell them of potential conflicts, I fear that
I will be fired from my job. At the same time, however, I
would also not be responsible for the potential deaths of
thousands of people that need kidney transplants.
Lastly, Section II.3.a states that “Engineers shall be
objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or
testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent
information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which
should bear the date indicating when it was current” [4].
However, I can not report this otherwise my company would
lose a great deal of money. As an engineer, it should be my
duty to publicly announce the defects of the kidneys
produced.
The Ethical Choice and its Outcomes
There are two choices I can do in this situation. I could
make the unethical choice and follow my company’s order
and not tell anybody about the defects of the newly printed
Thomas Bui
kidneys; or, I could make the ethical choice. With each choice
there comes a consequence to each one.
If I were to make the ethical choice, I would go to the
people we were selling the kidneys to and tell them about the
defects in the kidneys. In doing so, I would most likely be
fired by my company. However, at the same time, I would be
able to save thousands of people’s lives. The kidneys would
not be able to be sold. Patients would have to go to another
company to get kidney transplants and receive fully
functional kidneys from there. Furthermore, while talking to
my parents for advice, they highly encouraged me to take this
option. My parents have a better perspective because they are
older and have far more experience in the real world than I
do. They told me that it is better to do the right thing even if
it costs my job. Furthermore, if I ever did need help finding
another job they could even help me with that. However, if I
were to let the defects remain unknown, the guilt following
the deaths of many people would never leave me.
However, being a whistleblower has many negative
consequences as well. In most cases, the charges brought forth
from the whistleblower are often ignored. Since these would
be serious allegations, the company could either start a cover
up or the company could try to discredit me. Furthermore,
becoming a whistleblower would mean that it “represents a
failure on everybody’s part” [5]. Worst case scenario, I could
be re-appointed to solve the current problem. My company
would then “deny access to needed information and make
[me] the scapegoat when wrongdoing persists” [5]. Though I
am ethically doing the correct thing, the company may not see
it that way and may in turn try to make be look like the bad
guy.
Outcomes from Similar Cases
The life of a whistleblower becomes tough after he rats out
his or her company. The term, “rat”, in itself, has a very
negative connation to it. In life, we are taught that ratting
others out is a bad thing. However, a professor of business
ethics told Management Review that “We need to begin to
turn tattletales into moral heroes” [6]. Furthermore, Donald
R. Soeken states, “If you blow the whistle on somebody
below you, you’ll get a pat on the back. Above you? You’ll
be fired” [6]. The part about ratting our someone higher than
you almost always end up being true. Despite all of this, there
have been some happy endings for some whistleblowers.
Chester Walsh was an employee at GE Aircraft Engine. He
began collecting documents that were inconclusive
throughout the mid 1980’s. He gathered evidence for four
more years even wearing a wire at one point. By 1990, Walsh
filed a suit against GE, “alleging that employees in GE’s
aircraft division in Cincinnati, together with Israeli Brig. Gen.
Rami Dotan, falsified documents to misdirect the $40 million
originally meant for purchase… of F110 engines for F-16
fighters” [7]. As a whistleblower, Walsh was allowed to
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 2
Submission Date 2015-11-03
collect twenty-five percent of the money made from the suit
which ended up being 13.4 million dollars.
A. Ernest Fitzgerald was an Air Force financial analyst. In
1968, he reported a 2.3-billion-dollar cost overrun in the
Lockheed C-5 aircraft program. Instead of taking the advice
of Air Force officials, Fitzgerald decided to openly testify
about the program. Instead of people thanking him, he was
instead heavily criticized even by the president who was
Nixon at the time. It was later reported that Nixon told his
aides to “get rid of that son of a bitch” [7]. Furthermore,
coworkers that disliked him called him “attic fanatics because
of their cramped upper-floor Pentagon offices” [6]. However,
after this ordeal, he became an advocate for whistleblower
protection and helped enact the Civil Reform Act of 1978, a
precursor to the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989.
Allan McDonald and Roger Boisjoly were engineers at
Morton Thiokol Inc. They knew of the possible defects of the
1986 Challenger Shuttle and had told their superiors about
them. They even tried to postpone the launch but to of no
avail. However, after they ratted out their superiors the two
felt “ostracized by colleagues who believed they had broken
ranks and punished by their employer” [8]. After their
testimonies, the two were reinstated but demoted to much
lower paying jobs. However, by May of that year, William P.
Rogers restored the two to their normal jobs. Despite being
whistleblowers, McDonald now “appears to have been
embraced once again by Thiokol” [8]. Due to the failure of
the rocket launch, Thiokol’s reputation had been tarnished;
but McDonald has become a “symbol of integrity and
forthrightness” [8].
The Unethical Choice and its Outcomes
Rather than making the ethical choice, I could choose to
not tell anybody about the defects in the printed kidneys.
From reading about previous cases, it is easier to not be a
whistleblower. Whistleblowers live very difficult lives after
their testimonies against their companies. It effects not just
that person but also their friends and family.
Firstly, testimonies take a great deal of time. Some cases
have taken up to seventeen years. This is due to the the
amount of cases that must be dealt with. The whistleblower
must first prepare a statement and then file it with the
government. Next, serve the Complaint and a Disclosure
Statement with all the evidence on the government. If the
government decides to intervene, one has a trial. This process
could take up to years and is always a tortuous legal process.
Furthermore, all files are under seal during the investigation.
The whistleblower, I, would not be able to tell anybody about
the current investigation including my friends and family
resulting in great isolation as the case progresses.
Secondly, the risk of losing a job is almost assured. If the
whistleblower is not fired, they will most likely be moved to
a position of lower stature. Of the three cases I brought up,
Thomas Bui
only one was able to retain his job. The rest were fired or
ostracized by their previous co-workers.
Lastly, the burden from whistleblowing is immense. There
is so much stress involved in taking up a whistleblower case
that death is a possibility. Furthermore, monetary rewards are
rare and rarely life-changing. For example, Jim Holzrichter, a
whistleblower, ratted out his company, Northrop, and
Northrop pleaded guilty in 2005. However, Holzrichter did
not receive his compensation until 2010 which summed up to
only two million dollars. During those five years, his family
went from middle-class to poverty and his “kids were grown
and gone with families of their own” [9]. Though not as
severe, results from whistleblower cases are often similar to
Holzrichter’s.
Conclusion
No matter the choice one makes, there will be great
consequences mentally and physically. I could either make
the ethical choice or the unethical choice. Despite the greater
consequences of making the ethical choice, I would make it
an instant.
The overwhelming guilt of not stopping something I could
have would never leave me. I would be the one that is
responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. When Mr.
Boisjoly was asked if he would do it again, he responded, “My
answer is always an immediate yes. I couldn’t live with any
self-respect if I tailored my action based upon potential
personal consequences” [8]. In my opinion, the needs of the
many outweigh the needs of the few, in which I am the “few”.
By choosing the ethical route, I would almost certainly lose
my job and the respect of some co-workers. However, in the
best case scenario I would be able to regain the respect I
deserve in the future just like Mr. Boisjoly.
Moreover, there are four things I know for certain. Firstly,
I would be able to sleep at night knowing I saved lives.
Secondly, I give hope to future whistleblowers to tell the truth
in the future. Thirdly, a monetary reward may be there for me
and I would receive roughly twenty-five percent of the
lawsuit. Lastly, the law will always end up on my side.
Lawyers are now writing statutes that encourage
whistleblowing and are trying to punish anybody that hinders
whistleblowers from tattle tailing.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Mukherjee (2013). “Oregon Man Begs For Kidney
Donor On The Street” Think Progress. (online article).
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/01/23/1483691/oregonman-begs-for-kidney/
[2] B. Girggs (2014). “The next frontier in 3-D printing:
Human
organs”
CNN.
(online
article).
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/03/tech/innovation/3-dprinting-human-organs/
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 3
Submission Date 2015-11-03
[3] P. Knoepfler (2013). “Want to 3D Print Yourself a New
Oran? Top 10 List of Challenges” The Niche. (online article).
https://www.ipscell.com/tag/making-new-organs/
[4] NSPE (2007). “Code of Ethics for Engineers” National
Society of Professional Engineers. (online article).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/Ethics/
CodeofEthics/Code-2007-July.pdf
[5] B. Ettorre (1994). “Whistleblowers: Who’s the real bad
guy?” American Management Association. (online article).
http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/old/12_00/basics/whistle/rst/bad_g
uy.html
[6] W. Olson (1998). “How informers ended up behind every
office potted plant” Overlawyered. (online article).
http://overlawyered.com/articles/olson/trippwire.html
[7] J. Peterson (1992). “Whistle-Blower in GE Scandal Gets
$13 Million” Lost Angeles Times. (online article).
http://articles.latimes.com/1992-12-05/business/fi1438_1_ge-employee
[8] D. Sanger (1987). “A Year later, two engineers cope with
challenger horror” The New York Times. (online article).
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/28/us/a-year-later-twoengineers-cope-with-challenger-horror.html?pagewanted=all
[9] A. Smith (2013). “The Elusive Rewards and High Costs
of Being a Whistleblower” Kiplinger. (online article).
http://www.kiplinger.com/article/business/T012-C000-S002high-costs-of-being-a-whistleblower.html#
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
T. Bui. (2015, May 23). Conversation
A Ta. (2015, July 27) Conversation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my parents and my cousin for helping
me make a decision about the ethical choice in this paper and
possible ethical choices in the future.