Introduction This case study highlights the conflict between personal gain and public welfare, reminiscent of the gas leak incident at the LG Polymers plant in Visakhapatnam. The central ethical dilemma lies in choosing between duty to one's family (private gain) and moral righteousness towards the affected villagers (public welfare), best examined through the lens of utilitarianism. The choice of approach here is highlighting ethical dimensions.

Stakeholder Identification The engineer, her family, the villagers, the company, the environment, and future generations.

Answers

(a) Arguments against keeping quiet:

1. Violation of Rights: Discharging toxic waste violates the villagers' fundamental right to a healthy environment and clean water, as implied under Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Indian Constitution. Remaining silent makes her complicit in this violation.
2. Utilitarian Principle: While losing her job would negatively impact her family, the suffering of the villagers outweighs this personal cost. Utilitarianism demands maximizing overall happiness, which, in this case, is achieved by stopping the pollution.
3. Deontological Duty: The engineer has a moral duty to prevent harm, regardless of personal consequences. Kant's categorical imperative dictates acting according to principles one would want to be universal laws. Discharging toxic waste is not a universalizable principle.
4. Virtue Ethics: Silence corrodes virtues like courage, integrity, and compassion. Speaking up, even at personal cost, cultivates these virtues, contributing to her moral development and the common good.
5. Lack of Due Diligence: Keeping quiet implies a dereliction of duty towards her profession and society. Engineers have a professional responsibility to ensure public safety and environmental protection.
6. Crisis of Conscience: Her conscience pricks her because she recognizes the inherent immorality of the situation. Ignoring her conscience erodes her moral compass and leads to moral distress.

(b) Advised Course of Action:

1. Internal Escalation (Whistleblowing): The engineer should first document the waste discharge with evidence and report it to higher management, appealing to their conscience and sense of corporate social responsibility. This upholds the principle of hierarchy and chain of command.
2. External Whistleblowing (if internal escalation fails): If the company fails to act, she should report the issue to the appropriate regulatory authorities (Pollution Control Board, environmental agencies) and, if necessary, the media. This demonstrates moral righteousness and prioritizes public good over personal good.
3. Seeking Legal Counsel: She should consult a lawyer specializing in environmental law to understand her rights and options for legal action. This ensures that her actions are legally sound and protects her from potential retaliation.
4. Networking and Advocacy: She can connect with NGOs, environmental groups, and affected villagers to build a stronger case and raise public awareness. This aligns with the common good approach and fosters social justice.
5. Exploring Alternative Employment: While continuing her efforts to stop the pollution, she should discreetly explore alternative job opportunities to mitigate the financial risk to her family. This demonstrates prudence and foresight.
6. Public Awareness Campaign: If the company and authorities remain unresponsive, she can help organize a public awareness campaign to pressure the company and government to act. This aligns with the utilitarian principle of maximizing public welfare.

Conclusion

This case highlights the tension between personal and professional ethics. The engineer's moral righteousness should guide her actions, prioritizing public welfare over personal gain. The Bhopal Gas Tragedy serves as a stark reminder of the devastating consequences of prioritizing profit over safety and environmental protection. The engineer's actions can empower other employees to speak up against unethical practices, fostering a culture of ethical conduct and corporate social responsibility. Moving forward, mandatory ethics training in engineering curricula and stronger environmental regulations with effective enforcement mechanisms are crucial to prevent such dilemmas.