Adderall Case Study Summary

Frank and Bobby have their own validation for doing a cheat-sheet or using medication. Despite their self-conviction, both practices are equally unethical. While Bobby’s creation of cheat-sheet is a clear violation of rationality, Frank using Adderall to stay awake is equally distasteful. The issue is their lifestyle and constant procrastination. It is expressed that the second type of consequential theory excuses any ethical path and is primarily focussed on one’s self (Werhane, pg. 3).
Frank’s Adderall consumption is a violation because:
1. He has consumed drugs prescribed for somebody else
2. He did not procure them in a right manner,
3. They are meant for the treatment of a specific condition, and not in any way meant to stay awake,

As Bobby’s case is a more straightforward case of unethical behavior, so is Frank’s case equally unethical. While the immediate incidence of unethical behavior is based on two separate acts, both have them have fundamentally flawed behavior of alternating to classes. This means that only one of them attends the class in an attempt to both of them acquiring knowledge. This can be further exaggerated to only one person in a community attending college, and the rest drawing from the same source. Kant believes you should do the right thing even when you believe the consequences for not doing the right thing, is far less unfavorable than for doing the right thing (Werhane, pg. 7). Wouldn’t that be an extremely unhealthy and unprofessional premise for a college student? I think it is very interesting that, “The term deontological comes from the Greek word for duty (Werhane, pg. 6).” Therefore, their entire behavior at the University is fundamentally flawed and violate of ethics for any college going student in any educational