Ethics of Compliance Southwest Essay Example for Free

Ethics of Compliance Southwest Essay The purpose of this paper is to present, discuss, and examine the topic of ethical and social responsibility. It will discuss Southwest Airlines failure to comply with the Federal Aviation Administrations rules on inspecting aircraft and what violations occurred. On March 6, 2008, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspectors submitted documents to the United States Congress, alleging that Southwest allowed 117 of its aircraft to fly carrying passengers despite the fact that the planes were not airworthy according to air safety investigators. In some cases, the planes were allowed to fly for up to 30 months after the inspection deadlines had passed, rendering them unfit to fly. Records indicate that thousands of passengers were flown on aircraft deemed unsafe by federal standards. Clearly, this is an issue tied to social responsibility and ethics at the highest level, ignoring the safety inspections put peoples lives in jeopardy. This situation actually began in 1988, when an Aloha Airlines Boeing 737 suffered an accident that killed a flight attendant. The top of the planes fuselage tore off, opening up a large section of the planes roof, killing the flight attendant. The accident occurred because of cracks in the planes fuselage. Since then, the FAA has required regular inspections of 737 fuselages to ensure an accident like this does not occur again. In 2007, two FAA inspectors began to question documentation and inspections at Southwest Airlines. They had reason to be concerned, because they felt their concerns were being ignored, and their supervisor was not investigating their complaints. FAA inspectors Bobby Boutris and Douglas Peters testified before Congress about their experiences, and asked for whistleblower status, meaning they could not be fired from their jobs because of their testimony. Boutris was the first to question records kept by Southwest about airplane inspections. In 2003, he was in charge of inspecting engines for the 737, and he could validate the Southwests reports. He told an NPR Radio reporter, I had found a lot of inconsistencies with the records, Boutris says. They were different from aircraft to aircraft; it was very hard to determine compliance' (Goodwyn, 2008). He notes that he complained to his supervisor, Douglas Gawadzinski, but he ignored Boutris complaints. In 2006, Boutris took over safety responsibility for the entire 737-700 series aircraft, and when he reviewed Southwest, he found the same recordkeeping problems he had uncovered in 2003. He notified his supervisor and wanted to send a letter of investigation, again his supervisor G awadzinski refused to acknowledge his concerns. Boutris believes it is because Gawadzinski had a close friendship with Paul Comeau, a former FAA employee who went to work for Southwest as their manager for regulatory compliance. Anything to do with Southwest and the FAA went through these two men, and Boutris believes they routinely covered up inspection irregularities or lack of inspections. Boutris continued to complain, and Southwest asked for him to be removed from their inspections. Reporter Goodwyn continues, At first, Gawadzinski refused to remove Boutris. But it wasnt long before the supervisory maintenance inspector told Boutris he was out and that his career was in jeopardy because there had been undisclosed complaints from anonymous Southwest officials (Goodwyn, 2008). At this point, Douglas Peters, another FAA inspector, were brought in to review Boutris investigation into Southwests compliance. Goodwyn notes, The more he looked into the matter, the more he agreed with Boutris that the flying public was in danger. Peters says the situation defied logic. That something so critical would be not addressed I cant explain it. Its a mystery' (Goodwyn, 2008). People from Southwest began to contact Gawadzinski directly, instead of going through Peters. Another reporter states, The whistle-blowers complained repeatedly in memos written in 2007 that their concerns about Southwest were not being taken seriously. The underlying safety concern — the airline was unable to keep up with mandatory inspections — had been raised as early as 2003, one charged (Levin, 2008). Finally, in March 2007, Southwest admitted to flying 47 737s without completing the problem fuselage inspections, which triggered a Congressional investigation. Even more disturbing, the airline continued to fly the planes even after disclosing they had not been inspected – it took almost a week to ground the planes. The two men testified before Congress in April 2008, and the FAA fined Southwest $10. 2 million for the blunders. Reporter Levin continues, Last month, nearly a year after the initial problems were discovered, the FAA levied a $10. 2 million fine against Southwest. The vast majority of the fine was imposed because Southwest had certified that it stopped flying the planes as soon as it learned of the missed inspections, FAA officials said (Levin, 2008). These are the basic facts and timeline of the case. The major overriding issue in this case is that the FAA and Southwest conspired to cover up inspection information, and they did so at passengers and crewmembers expense. The inspections were mandated because the FAA knew this particular plane had critical safety issues. By not inspecting planes and allowing them to continue flying, they were putting everyone on those planes in jeopardy, and they knew it. That is perhaps the biggest ethical concern of this case, that the company knew they had not completed checks, but continued to fly the planes anyway. One of the whistleblowers was told they did not ground the planes because it would disrupt Southwests service and flight schedule (Goodwyn, 2008). Every airline has a social responsibility to keep their passengers and crews as safe as possible. Flying is a relatively safe form of travel, however accidents do occur. Maintaining high maintenance and safety standards is simply the right thing to do in the transportation industry; it is the ethical, moral, and socially responsible choice. For an airline to lower those standards, especially because of worries about disruption of service, is simply incomprehensible. For example, the entire airline would be in jeopardy if one of the planes had crashed, and it was found to have been because of a crack that was not detected because of a missed inspection. Indeed, inspections on the aircraft did turn up cracks in some of the planes in question, cracks that had to be repaired before the airplanes took flight again (Wilber, 2008). Thus, Southwest put people in danger, and that is a major ethical violation that has not thoroughly been addressed in the media or by the airline itself. In addition, the FAA was compliant in this ethical transgression, because they allowed it to happen, calling into question the integrity of the organization that is supposed to be primarily concerned with airline safety and maintenance. If the agency doing the oversight is questionable, it brings the entire system into question. This issue should be studied further because it raises so many moral and ethical questions, and it should be studied because it seems, since there seem to be no lasting ramifications for the FAA, that it could happen again, which is even more disturbing. The stakeholders in this case are the people who fly on Southwest Airlines. Southwest damaged their reputation by letting down their stakeholders, and that is extremely disturbing. They put passenger safety in jeopardy over worries about income and disrupted flights, when their first concern should have been safety and only safety. This calls into question the entire integrity of the company. This is more than just the classical interpretation of right and wrong, it is a moral dilemma that should have had an extremely simple solution. Ground the planes, inspect them as quickly as possible, and get them back in the air. The fact that there was any other solution seen to the problem indicates just how unethical and morally irresponsible Southwest was, and the stakeholders should demand compensation for the threat this decision made to their safety. Southwest simply got lucky that one of the affected planes did not develop more serious issues, and the $10. 2 million dollar fine seems quite low in retrospect, considering the damage that could have occurred to people and property had a plane crashed. The economic responsibility of this situation is clear; Southwest had to pay a large fine and ground the planes, losing revenue anyway. Their reputation suffered, although it did not seem to make a dent in their passenger. Most people did not even seem to care that Southwest had endangered them and only a few spoke out in blogs or in other areas when the news broke. Southwest has a serious responsibility to keep its passengers and crews safe, and they lost the trust of at least some people because of their callous disregard for safety. That is a huge moral responsibility, and Southwest has never really acknowledged their failure, which is an even larger ethical concern, it seems. In a statement before Congress, Southwest CEO Gary Kelly said, Our compliance with certain specific Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness directives has been called into question. We have committed to a thorough review and to make any changes necessary to ensure that we are in full compliance with FAA airworthiness directives and our own maintenance programs, policies, and procedures (Kelly, 2008). However, in previous testimony before Congress, Kelly and Southwest Executive Chairman Herb Kelleher both maintained that Southwest did comply with all FAA requirements, and the safety of passengers was never in question (Kelly, 2008). Thus, Southwest maintains they complied with all FAA regulations and did inspect the aircraft, only under a different maintenance directive than the one the two whistleblowers charged had not been done. It seems like a technicality, and that Southwest is not taking true moral or ethical responsibility for the incidents. They also stated that they did not think they would be fined for the maintenance issues, and it seems as if in their testimony, they were attempting to lay groundwork to fight a fine. However, they did eventually back down and stop contesting the fine, probably because they felt they looked bad enough already. Some recommendations for this case have already been completed. The FAA inspector, Gawadzinski, was transferred to another division, without contact with Southwest. Southwest placed several maintenance and safety personnel on leave, and developed new maintenance and safety guidelines. The two top executives maintain they did not know about the 2007 maintenance charges until March 2008, and as soon as they learned of them, they implemented stronger maintenance and communication directives so they would be notified and aware of any problems. These would have been at least some of the recommendations made in this case. Another would be for Southwest to undergo a major campaign to gain back the publics trust, as many people would seem to have trust issues in flying on Southwest planes. This would include a media campaign that would address trust issues, and perhaps even a campaign including top executives flying on their own planes. This would not be too costly or difficult to administer, and it would let people know that the company is actually sorry about its actions and is going to be more responsible in the future. It also seems as if the company should apologize to their stakeholders and their crewmembers, not in front of Congress, but in front of them, and with humility. Frankly, their testimony and apology to Congress sounded defensive and insincere, and a true measure of humility might be to offer anyone who flew on those planes some type of compensation or personal apology to make the situation even a little bit more palatable. Of course, that would entail a large expense, but it would make their intentions a bit more acceptable. Finally, they have to be open and above board with their maintenance issues and they have to make quite certain there is nothing questionable about any of their practices. Their maintenance and safety department must be impeccable, and it must always be open to scrutiny not only by the FAA, but by the public, as well. They owe that, at the very least, to the people that choose to fly on Southwest Airlines. In conclusion, this case indicates how deeply ethical issues can affect a business. Allowing planes to fly uninspected is a terrible disservice to the passengers and crews of this airline. It indicates a deep-seated lack of respect for the public, the employees, and the agency created to maintain air travel safety. It also indicates an arrogance that the company can flaunt the system and win. Southwest Airlines has deeper issues than maintenance and safety. It has to take a strong look at its ethics and principles, and alter them to create a more socially responsible organization that respects and values the people it serves. Without a change, the organization will certainly suffer more ethical violations in the future.

Case Analysis Essay examples -- Business, IBM

Introduction IBM provides services, software, and systems to clients across throughout the world. During the transformation to a global corporate enterprise, IBM maintained its core values and principles. As a leader in the industries in which it serves, IBM entered its second century in business dedicated to its culture of fairness and corporate citizenship. IBM utilizes a consistent approach to technology and innovation, and has a positive impact on the communities in which it operates. IBM is passionate about social responsibility, interested in making a positive change in society, and is making a profound difference throughout the world on global issues such as AIDS, cancer, education, and hunger (Kanter, 2011). Why is IBM interested in creating â€Å"even bigger change† in society? Organizations of today are experiencing increased pressure from government, employees, and competitors to take an active role in environmental, social, and government issues on topics from climate change and many more, in their supply chain. To address these concerns organizations have developed corporate social responsibility and sustainability initiatives. These efforts are necessary to sustain a long-term ability to create shareholder value, while providing critical benefits to society (Bonini, Koller, & Mirvis, 2009). Effective organizations fully understand the global communities in which they exist and do business. Acquiring this knowledge requires a deeper level of engagement and comprehensive interaction with public, private, and voluntary institutions within community. As a progressive organization, IBM realizes there is a close link between its core values and sustainability and its strategy and purpose. Its corporate... ... IBM understands that community and business must be one for mutual benefit and long-term success. Effective corporate citizenship is a by-product of engaging corporate values to that of its people, which will be more meaningful and longer lasting in the end. References Bonini, S., Koller, T. M., & Mirvis, P. H. (2009). Valuing social responsibility programs. Mckinsey Quarterly, (4), 65-73. Kanter, R. M. (2009). IBM in the 21st Century: The coming of the globally integrated enterprise, Harvard Business School Kanter, R. M. (2011). IBM’s Values and corporate citizenship. Harvard Business School. Retrieved from http://hbr.org/product/ibm-values-and-corporate-citizenship/an/308106-PDF-ENG Ofori, D. F., & Sokro, E. (2010). Examining the Impact of Organisational Values on Corporate Performance in Selected Ghanaian. Global Management Journal, 2(1), 52-65.

The Effects of Team Dynamics on Corporate Communication

Good communication skills are one of the required skills from the human being to maintain and achieve the expected outcomes of the organization or team. An effective communicator tends to work well in a team. Working as a team in any environment is more productive and the expected outcomes tend to be more of a profitable than working alone. In this report there will be the discussion on the effects of team dynamics on corporate communication. The topic will be divided into sub sections: developing positive team dynamics, effect of team dynamics on individual’s behaviour, personality types and team dynamics and also the author personality type will be discussed. The communication theories and the categories identified by Belbin will also be discussed. It is clear that people got deferent personalities and different ways of adapting the group dynamics, the personality type and team dynamics will be discussed. The types of personalities as described by MBTI will be discussed individually. What is Team Dynamics? â€Å"Team or group dynamics concern the fluid and on-going interaction between and among team members, their actions and reactions. Team dynamics relate to the interpersonal and interdependent process of work—how things get done by and through people, and how team members relate to their task and to each other†(Team Dynamics. n. d. ). It is clear that if team members have the shared vision, goals and objectives about the performance of the team, the team can reach it objectives and it can build healthy team dynamics. Developing a Positive Team Dynamics People are unique and got different beliefs, it is therefore very correct that you study your team mates very well and emphasis more on what is important for the group. Having well defined standards and reporting standard to a group leader that will lead to a healthy group dynamics. These standards can only be effective if the team members are committed to the positive interests of the team. After deciding on team rules or standards the team can easily develop the personal relations and develop trust to each other. This trust and personal relations became visible by the time we managed to delegate someone to represent the group on dance practise, we trusted the person the he won’t let us down. We also managed to learn the dance from him. And that has made us to bond more. Effect of Team Dynamics on individual’s behaviour Most people are more effect when working as a group than working alone, other people will find this as a problem. Working in a group of people of different cultures could lead to more tensed environment within the team, it is therefore very correct to learn or try to understand the do’s and the don’ts of other members culture and that will lead to profitable results as it stated that â€Å"Teams working together increase problem-solving skills and innovation, quality, and decrease turnover and absenteeism† (Teresa Armstrong, n. ). After developing positive team dynamics, the group will had the common goal of achieving the expected outcomes. This was shown on the camp when we were doing speed introduction, we managed to know each other better and had a chance to know the dos and don’ts of other peoples culture. This made us to perform well on the activities that were given and submit them on time. What is Personality? Hjelle and Ziegler (1987, p. ) explains that â€Å"personality refers to the overall impression that an individual makes to others†, at the same time Robbins (1979, p. 90) explains that â€Å"personality is the sum of ways in which an individual reacts and interact with others† Personality affects the performance of the entire group, and these authors agree on the definition of personality. The team need to study each member’s personality, hence that will create a healthy working environment. Personality Type and Team Dynamics The Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is used to understand the personality of individual, and that can be effective in developing team dynamics. MBTI shows the following characters of personalities: Extroverted/ Introverted, Sensing/Intuitive, Thinking/ Feeling, Judging / Perceiving. Extrovert/Introverted These kinds of people are either described as people who are out spoken, work well in a group (extrovert) or people who focuses on the inner world and this kind of person likes to work individually. Introverts can sometimes frustrate the Extroverts, because of the strength of the Introverts shines when they alone and they are not more in group discussions as it stated that â€Å"Extraverted types who work best by thinking out loud and considering matters in dialogue can be frustrated by Introverted types whose best work on thinking and considering is done internally and detached from active interaction† (Personality Pathways, 2009). Even though these personalities are differing in terms of preferences, they can contribute to the team positively. Hence the introverts in a group will be treated as the knowledge source or the strategist of the group while Sensing/Intuitive Since in the team people have different personalities, here there will be a discussion on how the groups or teams benefits to people with sensing and intuitive personalities. Effective communicators they first identify the problem and then propose solution(s) to the problem, so people with this kind of personality in the sense that they are more realistic, practical and got self confidence. Psychological Types ( 2008a) explains that â€Å"Intuition is an ability to deal with the information on the basis of its hidden potential and its possible existence†, it is therefore clear that this kind of personality can effectively contribute towards the group or team. Hence they are able to foresee the possible outcomes of the task and this will help the group to effectively communicate with vision of the possible solution. This kind of personality is clearly found on someone who is the go-getter and someone who is creative. Thinking/Feeling Psychological Types ( 2008b) explains that â€Å"Thinking is an ability to deal with information on the basis of its structure and its function. Feeling is an ability to deal with information on the basis of its initial energetic condition and its interactions†, people with this kind of personality (thinking) are more in the decision making side. Someone with thinking personality has the greater ability of doing things in logical manner and he ends to pay more attention on the bigger picture of the given task. People with the feeling personality type are more concerned about feelings of other individuals and they are more ethical, which makes them to be good in developing team dynamics. Team with good ethical rules they tend to be more effective and produce quality results. In any working environment there will be some times conflicts and sometimes conflicts can lead a group to informed or uninformed decisions. So people with the feeling personality don’t like conflicts and that could be their weak link, because when working as team there are high probabilities of conflicts and sometimes conflicts are healthy for the survival of the team. Judging/Perceiving Judging Personality type is essential to the success of the group, because people with this kind of personality are creative in making plans, organizing tasks to be done. By having an individual with that kind of personality and the communication channels of the group or team are clearly defined, the team is advantage of achieving its objectives in expected time. The individuals with judging personality is more like the backbone of the group or team because someone with this kind of personality doesn’t give up on the given tasks and that individual can be sometimes be called the information centre of the group, because some of the possible solutions for the group might come from that individual. The other type of personality is called Perceiving. This type of personality is referred to someone who can adapt in any situation that the group find its self in. Individuals with perceiving personality is referred to as more open minded as it stated that â€Å"Perceiving is the preference outwardly displayed. Perceiving people are flexible, and they like to keep their options open and think randomly† (My Personality. Info. n. d). If an individual is described to have the perceived type of personality, the individual need the attention of the group, because the performance of this individual depends on his/her mood. And can be costly to the team performance and the team level of communication, because if the individual is not in mood then the entire team will be affected too. Having well defined ethical behaviour in the group and well established accountability standards that will lead to mutual respect mong group member, effective communication and profitable results in the given activities. The Author’s Personality Type After conducting the online personality type test, the author of this paper was described as ESTJ where E stands for Extrovert, S – Sensing, T – Thinking and J – Judging. The results of the test were exactly the author’s personalities. Even though the test results exactly explain the personality of the author, and the author is strongly agree with the fact that these results are true and also feels that these results are not fully explaining the author of this paper. The reason the author believes that is an extrovert is because of the fact the author can easily adapt to the new group and can easily get along with people of different culture and different backgrounds. This was shown on the camp when I had to be in the cabin with people that I saw for the first time. I managed to get along with my cabin mates and I made many friends from that camp. The effective communicator is not someone who speaks loud but it’s someone who can effectively convey the message to other people without any difficulties and the massage received is clear and unambiguous. The author is also having the sensing type personality, because of the self-confidence that the author has and how realistic the author is. The online personality test also sees the author of this paper as Thinking type of personality, and the author fully agrees with the test results because of the fact that when it comes to decision making for the benefit of the team or group the author excels. Every individual got its own talent and specialization area, and the author of this paper believes that clear communication channels and clear definition of roles in the team, that will healthy working environment. The online personality test has further seen the author of this paper as someone who is having Judging type of personality, and the author strongly agrees with that outcome because of the contributions that the author contribute towards the given tasks of the group and the self discipline the author has. The ESTJ type of personality is more essential towards the success of the group, because in a group there will be different personalities such as INFP. This kind of personality reacts to group dynamics differently as ompared to ESTJ type of personality. So if the group dynamics are well developed to the benefit of the team, and all different personalities are given platform to express its opinions that will lead to effect working environment. Since team dynamics are more concerned about how the group interact, how tasks are scheduled from the start to the end and also how the decision making is made, the personality type of the author of this paper allows the author to fit in any kind of working environment. Knowing what is expected of you in a group, that’s what makes team members to work effectively and deliver what is expected of them. When the team roles are divided is done according to the expertise of an individual member of the group, hence that will enhance productivity within the group. The author of this paper has the very power full mind of looking at things in a way in which will benefit the group. References http://www.personalitypathways.com/MBTI_intro.html http://www.socionics.com/main/types.htm http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/judging-perceiving/

Animal Testing Is Wrong - 975 Words

I believe that animal testing is wrong because, the animals are treated inhumanely. Humans have no right to use animals like they are objects that can just be thrown away like they do not matter. These experiments result in extreme and torturous pain. Animals are brought into laboratories and tested on against their will. An estimate of almost twenty-six million animals is used every year in the United States for scientific and commercial testing. Animals are used to check the safety of product, determine how toxic medicines are, and to develop medical treatment. There are many non-animal test methods that can be used. These methods are more humane, they are also faster, and can be closer related to humans, they can also be cheaper than animal testing. â€Å"Huntingdon Life Science (HLS) kills an average of 500 animals each day for tests† (Kinship Circle). Sadly, many different species of animals have to indoor these terrible conditions and painful tests, such as, primates, ra ts, mice, dogs, and cats. In animal testing primates are treated horrible in laboratories. Primates are sensitive, intelligent, and share many important biological and psychological characteristics with human beings, unfortunately, makes them prime targets for experimenters, who treat them as if they were disposable pieces of laboratory equipment. â€Å"At the Oregon National Primate Research Center scientists fed monkeys excessive amounts of food and restricted their movement, essentially simulating theShow MoreRelatedAnimal Testing Is Wrong?1288 Words   |  6 Pages ANIMAL TESTING IS WRONG The words animal testing mean to perform procedures on living animals for the research of basic human biology and diseases, finding out the effectiveness of new medical products, and testing the human health and environmental safety of consumer and industry products like cosmetics, household cleaners, food additives, pharmaceuticals and industrial/agro-chemicals and means using other living organisms except humans for testing. All procedures, even those classifiedRead MoreIs Animal Testing Wrong?923 Words   |  4 PagesIs Animal Testing Wrong? It s on the internet, it s in magazines, it s even on the news. Animal testing is a major debate among both academics and everyday people. The most common animals used in testing ae mice, rats, and apes. Some people think that animal testing is obsolete in this day and age but it isn t obsolete because animal testing helps determine what chemicals are potentially harmful to humans, it helps determine what medicines are potentially safe for human use, and it helps advanceRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Wrong1495 Words   |  6 PagesHarmful Testing on Animals is Wrong In American society, many groups and organizations are debating whether or not animal testing should be banned. Some people believe that there are reasons why animal testing should be done. Others believe that animal testing is morally wrong. Some experts believe that there are other options available. I believe that animal testing is wrong based on three observations: animal testing is unethical, pointless, and abusive. Numerous years ago, animal testing was startedRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Wrong And Cruel Animals1195 Words   |  5 Pageshas made me realize that animal testing is wrong and cruel to animals. I will be going over some of the history of animal testing, giving examples of some of the tests that are being performed, and mentioning some of the laws and acts created. While reading through this think is this test necessary when the animals will be put through cruel procedures. This is why I think that animal testing should be reevaluated to see if it is really worthwhile. What is animal testing some people ask, and whyRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Morally Wrong? Essay1373 Words   |  6 PagesHumans are animals, and as such it is morally wrong to use them to test pharmaceuticals intended for use by humans. Those who support animal experimentation believe it is a necessary evil, in part due to the false information put out by the media. The so-called benefits of animal testing have not helped humans for years, yet in many countries the law still requires researchers use animals to test their medications. In fact, although alternatives have been found, few steps have been taken to put anRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Morally Wrong? Essay1305 Words   |  6 PagesSeeing as humans are animals it is morally wrong to use animals to test human products. Due to the false information put out by the media, those who support animal believe what the media states about it being a necessary evil. The so-called benefits from animal testing have not helped humans for yea rs, but is now legally required in many countries. Although alternatives have been found, few steps have been taken to put an end to animal experimentation. The way activists present their argument isRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Wrong Essay1418 Words   |  6 PagesMany people have animals around the world, whether it be dogs, cats, reptiles, birds, even horses and llamas, and they all love them very much. A lot of people will do anything to ensure the comfort and safety of their companion and friend. Many people may be shocked and horrified to find that over 100 Million animals die each year due to animal testing. This essay will go into more detail about some reasons why people might find animal testing wrong, and some reasons why a lot of people see it asRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Morally Wrong?878 Words   |  4 Pageslot of different types of animals suffer through painful and unnecessary tests. An animal being used for scientific experiments is wrong because it is inhumane, expensive, and unpredictable. Animals in laboratories live lives of loss, pain, loneliness, and torture. Various studies have shown that animal experimentation often does not even help humans. Some even lead to harmful human reactions to the drugs being tested on animals. Yet we continue to use animal testing while other courses of actionRead MoreAnimal Testing Is Wrong Essay1603 Words   |  7 PagesAnimal testing has been around since the third and fourth centuries BC, when it was performed by Greek philosopher-physicians. However, it is unknown when people began to question this process. In today’s society, the idea of testing products on animals has become more and more controversial with numerous groups being created and becoming even more vocal. While people will decide for themselves where they stand in this argument, I would hope that most would agree that animal abuse is wrong. So,Read MoreAnimal Testing is Wrong! Essay923 Words   |  4 PagesPicture yourself in a testing laboratory; needles, drugs, and knives pointed in your direction with you having no idea whatà ¢â‚¬â„¢s going on around you, this is how animals everyday are treated, we have to stop this now! Millions of animals are killed in laboratories everyday with no chance to object to what the testers are about to do to them. Animals feel as much pain as humans do so why does it make it okay to test on them when they are so alike to humans? Every day people test makeup, shampoos, and