Paper #2
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Paper #2 as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 628
- Pages: 3
Karl Salting EGR 402 October 15, 2006 Paper #2 I would portray informed consent as a very important aspect regarding a person’s rights and personal safety upon action performed under higher authority. Anyone who puts their own life at risk not only for the benefit of human advancement but for any other purpose has every liberty to be aware of what they are putting themselves into. In the case of the Challenger disaster, the video portrayed that these rights were taken away from the seven brave individuals that took flight in the space shuttle that unfortunate day. As stated in the textbook, safety measures regarding fixing a field-joint leak was rejected because of an accompanying reduction in payload. Also, the crew did not have an escape mechanism. The McDonnell Douglas Company designed an abort module with its own thruster but the shuttle proposal was not approved. These problems were claimed by engineers to be dangerous but these pleas were ignored by the business aspect of the operation. I believe that the lives of these seven people would have been spared if greed did not play such a big part in the overall launch program. If informed about the serious measures regarding their safety, no doubt in my mind that each and every one of the individuals would have had second thoughts about launching that day. Many aspects come into play when I say that greed played such a big part that day. People were not thinking about the safety of the passengers but only about their personal gain. Pressure from the public and from within NASA and its self image of success also played a big role in why they launched that day.
I truly admire Roger Boisjoly’s act of courage. Not many people these days have the audacity to step up and go against what the majority regards as the standard of how to act. He said in the video that the reason why he brought it up to higher authorities was because of the way he was raised. He stated that he was raised in a good family where he was taught by his mother to have good morals. These good morals were obviously what he lived by and what he carried over as he grew older and became a professional engineer. He applied these good ethics into his profession. The first most important thing I learned from the Challenger disaster case was a good idea of how to react if you think something is not right in my work environment. I know now not to be as hesitant as I was before because it would not only affect my work experience but more importantly the safety of people who do not have any control over the situation. My father has always told me that a doctor has responsibility of one life during an operation in the emergency room, but as engineers we have the responsibility of many lives that are at stake with one project. The second most important thing I learned from the Challenger disaster case is how the concept of trust should not be taken lightly in these types of events. People did not trust the way that engineers said that it would not be safe. The business minded people took the lives of the passengers into their own hands without knowing anything about the safety measures that had to be taken. The engineers were the most technically minded people who knew what was wrong and the decision to launch should have been under the grounds of their authority. Even though the passengers knew that they were putting their lives into immediate danger just by agreeing to launch into space, they should have been given the benefit of the doubt by informed consent.
I truly admire Roger Boisjoly’s act of courage. Not many people these days have the audacity to step up and go against what the majority regards as the standard of how to act. He said in the video that the reason why he brought it up to higher authorities was because of the way he was raised. He stated that he was raised in a good family where he was taught by his mother to have good morals. These good morals were obviously what he lived by and what he carried over as he grew older and became a professional engineer. He applied these good ethics into his profession. The first most important thing I learned from the Challenger disaster case was a good idea of how to react if you think something is not right in my work environment. I know now not to be as hesitant as I was before because it would not only affect my work experience but more importantly the safety of people who do not have any control over the situation. My father has always told me that a doctor has responsibility of one life during an operation in the emergency room, but as engineers we have the responsibility of many lives that are at stake with one project. The second most important thing I learned from the Challenger disaster case is how the concept of trust should not be taken lightly in these types of events. People did not trust the way that engineers said that it would not be safe. The business minded people took the lives of the passengers into their own hands without knowing anything about the safety measures that had to be taken. The engineers were the most technically minded people who knew what was wrong and the decision to launch should have been under the grounds of their authority. Even though the passengers knew that they were putting their lives into immediate danger just by agreeing to launch into space, they should have been given the benefit of the doubt by informed consent.
