Monsanto Case Study

Case Study: Monsanto

April 17th, 2012

In 1901 James Francis Queeny, a pharmacist with over 30 years experience at the time, founded a company known as Monsanto. The company’s immediate product was Saccharin, an artificial sweetener; and later moved onto manufacturing plastic in the 1940’s. It was not until about a century after its founding and after decades of research and development, which Monsanto switched from a chemical based company to a biotech giant.

The main ethical questions surrounding Monsanto’s practices can be considered through either the deontological or consequential view point. Some of Monsanto’s critics will have an issue with what they believe to be the root of Monsanto’s corruption, the basic ethical question of whether or not people should be able to patent life. The majority of Monsanto opposers however, are critical of how Monsanto operates their business, their policing tactics and the monopolization of the industry - all of which are looking at the consequences of patenting life.

Prefacing the discussion we should mention that, according to the 1980 Supreme Court Decision, Diamond v. Chakrabarty patenting genetically modified organisms is legal. This is only included in order to note that while this practice is not illegal, that does not mean it is ethical. The real question becomes whether or not people should have this kind of proprietorship over living organisms in and of itself. Many will argue that people do not, and that this action is enabling us to “play God” and turn life into a commodity. Supporters however, claim “patenting of higher life forms is justified on the grounds of fairness to inventors and investors”. In other words, that the basic right to patent what you want takes precedence over life. On their website, and backed by their actions of course, Monsanto officials ultimately agree with this second viewpoint.

Asking whether or not it is ethical to question life is important, but the...