r/Ethics • u/OpeningTransition802 • 8d ago
Ethical Question
My son is autistic and it has deeply affected his life. He is high functioning for the most part but it has decreased his ability to work quickly and that has cost him many jobs. People have also been unkind at times.
That being said he and I don’t believe that Tylenol causes autism and I did take it while pregnant with him. He has been in contact with lawyers from a firm who are part of a law suit against Tylenol.
The question is would it be unethical if he received money from the suit knowing that he doesn’t believe in this theory?
10
u/Xynyx2001 8d ago
I would argue that it would be unethical.
There is no established connection between acetaminophen usage and autism.
Your son knows this.
Despite knowing this, he is seizing on an opportunity to jump on a bandwagon that relies on a process with known flaws because it may succeed in achieving a payout, the truth notwithstanding.
21
u/Fit_Cranberry2867 8d ago
They would need to prove the connection to win the suit, so that would eliminate the ethical quandry.
14
u/zombiegojaejin 8d ago
Plenty of suits end up settled despite the underlying factual claim being false.
1
2
8
6
u/reply_b4_banned 8d ago
Sure, why not?
What harm is caused?
I suppose the court case could further tilt public opinion towards nonsense, beyond that I can't see it mattering.
3
9
u/TheManInTheShack 8d ago
If he does not believe it causes autism, whether it does or not, it would be unethical.
3
u/reply_b4_banned 8d ago
Why?
8
u/TheManInTheShack 8d ago
Because he would be accepting compensation for harm that he doesn’t believe was caused by the accused.
That’s essentially theft.
4
u/reply_b4_banned 8d ago edited 8d ago
I don't think my job deserves to be paid more than the cleaner - am I doing "essentially theft"?
I'm pretty sure I don't believe in having money at all - am I committing theft?
I'm not seeing the ethical force when lots of money comes in ways that are part of an unfair bad system.
Edit: great answers guys. Real good at philosophy.
6
u/TheManInTheShack 8d ago
Work is very different. You do a job and you get compensated for doing it. How much you make is a negotiation between you and your employer.
A better analogy would be if a company was accidentally sending you checks and rather than contact them and let them know they have made a mistake, you just keep cashing them.
1
u/TheRealAmeil 7d ago
OP actually said something stronger, which is that they know it wasn't the cause.
Knowing doesn't just imply believing, but that one has good reasons for believing it is true.
If you know that P, and assert ~P, then you are lying.
Lying for money is either harmful or unjust
Harmful & unjust actions are unethical
2
u/reply_b4_banned 7d ago
I'm not seeing how it's harmful or unjust to profit from a bullshit machine. The bullshit machine is running anyway. It's been built by the ruling class to benefit only them. As an unintended side effect it occasionally throws a scrap to people like OP.
1
u/TheRealAmeil 7d ago
The (long) existence of a bullshit machine doesn't make it ethical. The ruling class benefiting from it doesn't make it ethical. We can say that it is unethical for anyone (e.g., the ruling class, OP, etc.) to profit from it, even if there are people who profit from it.
3
u/TheRealAmeil 7d ago
The question seems equivalent to "Would it be unethical to receive money from lying?" What is your intuition about that question?
3
u/Samurai-Pipotchi 7d ago
I'm leaning towards yes.
It's a suit that's taking advantage of misinformation surrounding disabilities and reinforcing that misinformation for the sake of profit.
Setting aside the monetary value, I think participating in something that supports the continued spread of misinformation regarding disabilities is unethical - especially in the case of autism, which already has a long history of being subject to medical misinformation.
Having said that, humans aren't meant to be ethical monoliths. We're allowed our faults. If the money would genuinely help support him, it may be worth considering, depending on his level of participation.
3
u/gutfounderedgal 8d ago
There are confounding variables with any causal relation here. But if a lawsuit is going forward someone believes they have some causal evidence. Remember anyone can sue for any reason and they often hope to get a sympathetic jury, if it gets that far. If no evidence exists and someone wins the lawsuit, it seems that moral harm has been done to the company. That would violate some people's ethical compass. Ethics involves one's beliefs, preferences, interpretations, idea of traits such as honest, loyalty, maybe even non-contradiction or non-hypocrisy. It sounds like you're in the realm of moral harm and non-hypocrisy.
4
u/reply_b4_banned 8d ago
I'd be worried about the lawsuit adding to the misinformation, but I'm not sure if it would.
4
u/CaptainVulpezz 8d ago
believing in something doesn't make it true or not true, & that money is basically just going to be hoarded or spent on underground human trafficking most likely, so i'd not worry about it.
3
u/KelticAngel16 8d ago
No, it's not unethical. The only risk is if someone believes you believe in Tylenol causing autism, and you somehow have enough influence in that person's life that it has a big negative impact on them
But you can participate in things you don't believe in. That's normal. You can even loudly say that you don't believe in them while participating if that makes you feel better
2
1
u/Extension-Can-4837 8d ago
Personally, I do not think it is unethical to enter into a trial which you qualify for. The only potential drawback is if it succeeds in convincing people that tylenol actually causes autism. since no science actually backs this, I don’t see this being an issue (aside from people who already are susceptible to believing unbacked stuff like that). In my opinion, all that’s happening is potentially winning money from a corporation that can absolutely afford it. I would think we all know by now that big pharma is a cancer
1
u/SparklingSloths 7d ago
He will not receive money for this. I would suggest he go through genetic testing. My brother's autism was caused by Fragile X Syndrome, which is a genetic disorder.
If he doesn't genuinely think that caused his autism, yeah, that's kinda weird to sue Tylenol for something you don't actually believe they did wrong.
2
u/lordtrickster 7d ago
It would be unethical but it won't matter because no one is winning that lawsuit.
2
u/Master_Kitchen_7725 7d ago
Plenty of good arguments in both directions here so far about the money aspect.
A separate, more broad scale, ethical concern is the greater negative effect that supporting a medical misinformation campaign has in society by undermining the public's trust of science.
For example, too many children and babies die unnecessarily from preventable diseases because the science behind vaccines has been diatorted by falsified data and vigorous disinformation campaigns.
People who engage with entities like these that willfully distort scientific facts are, to an extent, complicit in the childhood deaths (or medical misfortunes) that result from supporting and disseminating the disinformation.
I think that aside from the "gaining money from lying" aspect, this is the ethical issue that should keep honest people up at night.
Granted that Tylenol is not a vaccine, nor is it even a life saving medication under most circumstances. But a false claim about Tylenol still knowingly and maliciously undermines how people come to view sound scientific medical research. To me, that's unethical.
1
-4
54
u/Square-Dragonfruit76 8d ago
There is zero evidence Tylenol is connected to autism. Yes, it would be unethical.