Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Ethical Dilemma: Release or delay the Therac -25 - Coggle Diagram
Ethical Dilemma: Release or delay the Therac -25
Delay the device release
Pros
Company and developers will not be responsible for negligently killing people
More time to develop and test the Therac will result in better performance
Saving the company from injury lawsuits.
Saving patient lives from injury and/or death
The company is making X-Ray machines. So it will come into contact with a patient in a hospital, and if something goes wrong with the machine it could lead to misdiagnosis of patient in a hospital.
Cons
The company will lose money/funding while further testing occurs.
Time and money to create testing guidelines
Patients who need the treatments must wait
The reputation of the software/company.
Possibily of scrapping the entire project.
Who is harmed?
Sick patients who can't get treatment
The industry
Hospitals that cant otherwise get equipment
The reputation of the developer and company.
AECL
Stakeholders
Who benefits
AECL, by making a good reliable product
Stakeholders of AECL and hospitals that buy the Therac - 25
Ultimately the patient by reducing their risk for errors.
Whose rights may be abridged?
Patients who desperately need radiation to survive and otherwise wouldn't be able to receive it
What if everyone took alternative 2?: The risk of injury/death would be less, but some who need treatment would not get it.
Release the device with known bugs
Pros
Patients who need treatment can receive the treatment.
If bug is known and a solution can be given to users, can save on production time
Lower production time means lower cost
Issues can be dealt with and resolved as they arise.
AECL can move on to developing new technologies and developments
Cons
patients can be injured or die in result of malfunction
Hospitals may buy very expensive and faulty equipment
Could lead to costly lawsuits
AECL will loose a lot of reputation and market share
Without an effective analysis process in place, proper testing cannot occur.
Who is harmed?
Patients who experience one of the bugs
Doctors
AECL in event of lawsuits
families of people killed
other companies who produce radiation equipment, People will think its all unsafe
Who benefits?
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Stakeholders
Patients who need this radiation therapy now
Radiation equipment manufacturers who can spin this as the fault of AECL and gain their market share
Whose rights may be abridged?
Patients who experience overdoses of radiation due to faulty equipment or software
What if everyone took alternative 1?: The risk of software malfunction could cause injury or death.
Stakeholders
Hospitals
Doctors
Shareholders
Other employees
Patients
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Shareholders
employees
Any future changes that may prevent this dilemma?
Requiring safety critical software be developed and review by multiple teams of people
Being upfront and realistic about the limitations of software and how all software can machines can fail in unexpected ways
Test device in its entirety before making sales
Relevant facts
Software written by 1 person
Mostly reused software from previous model
Software did not have adequate safety procedures
Hardware safety precautions removed in favor of software
Previous modules software failures prevented by hardware safty features
Software and hardware never testes together until assembly at client location
Company assured users that it was impossible to overdose or injure patients with his device
When confronted with evidence of malfunction, AECL insisted it was an electrical problem with the hospital
When given proof it was the Therac-25, the solution was to tape off a connector