Argumentative Essay on it is morally permissible for the magnet processing industries to continue selling their products despite the risks of accidental ingestion

Argumentative Essay on it is morally permissible for the magnet processing industries to continue selling their products despite the risks of accidental ingestion

Ingestion of rare-earth magnets by children has increased since the efforts of federal regulations to enforce changes in the industry was outlawed by the court ruling. The court ruled to lift the consumer product safety commission four-year ban on the product. As a result of the failure of the CPSC, the magnet industry uses voluntary safety standards which reflects equality between business and safety interests. Most cases, the desires of the manufacturers outlaw the safety desires because they decide which safety option will maintain the utility, desirability and functionality of the product. For CPSC to act, the voluntary safety standards have to affirm the inadequacy of a product, and this gives the industry a chance to win in most cases. The magnet makers wanted to depend on warnings and packaging designs to control the accident. Still, the safety advocates wanted the product to be so big that it can’t be swallowed or too weak to trigger organ damage. Manufacturers went ahead to form ASTM international, which aids in developing procedural ideals for products. It stresses on a consensus tactic designed to allow all the involved parties chance to influence the outcomes. This essay uses utilitarian moral theory to justify that it is morally permissible for the magnet processing industries to continue selling their products despite the risks of accidental ingestion. Additionally, the essay uses contractarian theory to raise objections against the selling of magnet desk toys. It further explains how such products can be regulated.

Justification

Utilitarianism theory supports the claim argument about the continued sale of magnet desk toys in two ways:

Right decision making in any situation should produce the most significant equilibrium over the harm. In other words, before making a decision, one has to ensure that the positives outweigh the negatives. In the case of the sale of desk toys, the continued sale of the toys is a government source of revenue as well of source income to the manufactures. Additionally, these toys offer pleasure, creativity and decoration to the users. Since the only disadvantage is ingestion by children, children can be prevented from accessing them as well as introducing regulations but not stopping their sale. Hence the deal should be allowed.

Utilitarianism theory also brings about the claim that decision making should consider everyone involved. That is there should be equality in decision making on any matter. The continued sale of desk toys brings balance in the sense that the consumers will continue enjoying the product, and the manufactures will keep earning. The safety standards groups will enforce laws that focus on improving the product and reducing hazards but not lowering the quality of the products or dissolving the companies. With this, all the sides are considered, and there is equality.

Objection

Contractarianism theory brings about the idea of agreement on morals but not an obligation. This means that when setting up laws and morals, the parties should agree upon each other but not impose morals on one party. Based on our argument about the sale of magnet desk toys, it is not morally permissible to allow the companies to sell their products because the parties have divergent views on the product. Allowing the sell will be sided decision which has life-threatening effects on the young generation. Additionally, it is a selfish decision on the side of the manufacturers.

Effects of Rare-Earth Magnet desk Toys

Magnetic desk toys are small in size and of high strength and break away from these toys. Once they break apart, they are ingested by children. Upon ingestion, they pull inside intestines both small and large intestines together causing life-threatening holes and blockages. These blockages and holes are only cured through surgery, and it is costly. Once the surgery is unsuccessful, death occurs.

Regulation of Rare-Earth Desk Magnets Toys

The final decision on how these magnet desk toys can be regulated depends on the agreement between the voluntary safety standards, the consumer product safety commission and the manufactures. The decision on how regulation is to be done should consider the outcomes of the action on both sides. For instance, increasing the size of the toys to be so significant to the extent that it can’t be swallowed can lower the quality of the product. This increment in size could make the product so reliable to the extent that they would sever fingers if two magnets were to snap together. Therefore, increasing the size is an advantage and a disadvantage to both parties, and it can be relied upon to regulate the sale of these products. Another way of monitoring the distribution and sale of the products is through labelling. These magnetic toys should have labels with warnings so that as consumer purchases, these toys knows the risks. With the signs on the tags, the user can decide if to purchase or not. Finally, regulation of magnet toys can be made through making adjustments on the packaging.  The way these products are packed should allow the consumer to check that all loose magnets are inside visually. This will increase the security of the customer because once the loose ones are outside, it means that these balls will not break way and be ingested by the children.

Conclusion.

In concluding, the sale of magnetic desk toys decision is based on the parties that are involved. It has two vital contradicting views. Continuing to sell will cause organ damage which is triggered by clamping of intestines. On the other hand, manufacturers will lose their source of income. Utilitarianism theory supports the sale of such products through the claim of equality and the general outcome advantages overweigh the negatives. Contractarian opinion, on the other hand, objects the argument through the application of agreement between the parties but not the imposition of morals. The sale can be regulated through the increment of the product’s size, package and size changes.