Abortion Profiteers

         In November 1978, the Chicago Sun-Times published the Abortion Profiteers, an investigative tell apart that revea conduct deplorable corruption and deceit in some(prenominal) shoot dough Avenue miscarriage clinics. Five months ear deceitfulnessr the Sun-Times had receive a tip from a credible government origination (who wished to tarry anonymous) that it was possible four local abortion clinics were falsification pregnancy tests so that they could perform un makeed abortions upon unsuspecting women. The Sun-Times began its investigating in conjunction with the Better Government Association (BGA). First, hush-hush investigators make up as women in need of pregnancy focusing and submitted manly person urine samples to the referral agencies for testing. After the referral agencies reported several of the male samples to be positively pregnant, they referred the reporters to Michigan Avenue clinics for abortions. The Sun-Times deepened its invest igation by having its hugger-mugger reporters obtain jobs at several of the abortion clinics.          four months of undercover investigation provided the Sun-Times with all the evidence it needed to peril the Madison Avenue clinics, although admittedly some of this evidence had been pull ahead through the illegal write of medical files. During this time the investigators see chilling tales not only of false abortions, but late-pregnancy abortions, unlicenced medical personnel, Medic be fraud, improper anesthetic administration, and many other amateur and un estimable works. The publication of the Abortion Profiteers shocked the community and it at last resulted in the closing of two Michigan Avenue clinics, the internment of one of the doctors, and new regulatory laws for outpatient abortion clinics. At the dumbbell of this chilling tale are several issues that pose well-known(prenominal) ethical dilemmas for the media.         Fi rst, is undercover investigative reportage a! n ethical mean of obtaining education? Some would suggest no. Opponents of undercover news media claim that it is unethical for reporters to falsely represent themselves in rove to on purpose deceive people of their occupation. They would beg that instead of move undercover investigative reporters to the abortion clinic, the Sun-Times should bemuse contacted the law of nature and false the investigation over to them. Advocates of investigative journalism support this practice by claiming that the ends justify the means. They determine that the reporters did not blatantly lie to the abortion clinics, they simply omitted some of the truth. Many undercover journalism supporters view that the police are frequently hampered in their investigations by the oft mundane process of obtaining search warrants and other proficient police procedures. They typically cipher the situation from a useful attitude in that they study the majority of the people forget pull ahead fr om undercover journalism.         If, for the sake of argument, undercover investigative reporting was deemed to be ethical in this situation, then it raises the question of whether the investigation was conducted ethically and professionally. The undercover reporters from the Sun-Times began its investigation in cooperation with the B.G.A. and I view that this was a good start. However, the reporters violated the law when they made unauthorized copies of to a greater extent than one hundred medical records. While I definetely believe that breaking the law was absolutely unprofessional, I figure that the investigators actions are still arguably ethical. The offense of illegal copying appears insignificant in comparison with the atrocious acts that the abortion clinics were committing. The reporters pressed their actions by claiming the need for evidence.         Another ethical question that this story poses is whether or not a reporter has an obli gation to prevent maltreat to those more or less th! em.

The undercover journalists from the Sun-Times interacted with many women at the abortion clinics who were beingness misled and addicted false pregnancies. While they did not participate in the real(a) abortion procedures, they did extradite contact with the patients both onward and later the operation. During the course of their investigation the reporters witnessed frequent complications and even several deaths. Did the reporters score an obligation to these women? Some would argue that the journalists should have through with(p) more to prevent harm. The Sun-Times had learned within the first a dyad of (prenominal) weeks of its investigation that these false abortions were indeed being performed and it could have scratch the investigation over to the police at that point. This would have defend many of the innocent women who were needlessly harmed (and killed) during the following four months. However, others would argue that the need for evidence justifies the additional four months of investigative work. They forge the utilitarian perspective and state that the harm done to a few results in the security system of the many.         I also view this situation from a primarily utilitarian perspective. Although I feel that the journalists should not have illegally copied medical records and perhaps should have conducted a somewhat shorter investigation, in the end I believe that the ends justify the means. The Chicago Sun-Times reporters succeeded in uncovering a wind vane of deceit and scandal that ultimately led to new laws to protect women in outpatient a bortion clinics. Although I come back that the inves! tigation could have been more professional, in the end it resulted in greater protection for the most people.                   If you want to get a full essay, monastic order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay