[from Hartman, Ch. 8] In 2001, TAP Pharmaceuticals pled guiltyto participating in a criminal conspiracy with doctors by providingfree samples of Lupron for which the doctors later billed Medicareand patients. Federal prosecutors also charged TAP executives andmidlevel managers with fraud, alleging that TAP employees bribeddoctors and hospitals with cash, free vacations, and free samplesas an incentive for them to prescribe Lupron. Defendants arguedthat the samples and gifts were standard industry practice and didnot amount to a bribe. In December 2004, a jury acquitted theindividuals involved. TAP itself settled its case with thegovernment by agreeing to pay $150 million restitution to consumersand insurance companies for what the government charged wereartificially inflated drug prices. The prices were inflated becauseof the alleged bribes paid to doctors. TAP did not admit to anywrongdoing, claiming that it settled to avoid further legal costs.Studies have shown that samples, as well as small gifts andlunches, can lead doctors to prescribe more expensive brand nameswhen cheaper generic drugs would be as effective.

1. What additional facts might you need to know to make a fullyinformed judgment in this case?
2. What outcome do you believe the pharmaceutical companies arestriving to achieve through these practices?
3. What alternatives might be available to pharmaceuticalcompanies to serve a similar outcome without incurring legalliability or crossing ethical lines?
4. Do the doctors or hospitals bear any ethical responsibilityunder these circumstances?
5. What duties do the pharmaceutical companies, doctors, orhospitals have?
6. What does the principle of fairness require in thiscase?
7. What rights are implicated?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In order to make a fully informed judgement the facts that are required are clear and precise proof ... View the full answer