Have you ever been put in a situation where you didn’t know what to do? Sunnylake Hospital was faced with an unexpected dilemma, and no one knew what was the best route to take. Someone hacked their record system and is denying the hospital access to it. They recently transferred all their patient’s medical records to this system. Now with zero access, the patients are at risk, as with the hospital. Not only is this case difficult, but it also puts their ethics to the test. The question they should ask themselves is, is it moral to pay the hacker?
Paul Layman is the CEO of the hospital, and he does not know if he should pay the hacker, or continue to let the IT try to resolve the issue. The problem with paying the hacker is they will lose $100,00. If they wait, the patients are also waiting. Jacob Dale is just as stressed as Paul. Jacob is the director of the IT, and he is frantically trying to figure out how to help his fellow employees get back into the system. Another person who is freaking out about this is Lisa Mankins. She is the head of the legal counsel at the hospital. She keeps urging them to pay the hacker, because if not you will have to pay more in legal issues. One person is not like the rest. George Knudsen is upset at the situation. He told Jacob and Paul that they should keep the paper copies because there are…show more content… One way is the pragmatic rule. With this rule, you act as though someone is going to put a billboard up with the two choice you can make on it. In this situation, it would be “Sunnylake Hospital paid $100,000 to have a hacker give them access to their medical records.” or “Sunnylake Hospital had patients suffer for hours while IT was trying to work out technical difficulties.”. The way that sounds best is the first one. If word gets out that the patients were waiting on a problem could be fixed, then people probably wouldn’t go to that hospital
