Fizzy drinks

Sweet, sugary, and fizzy drinks are common among children and some adults. We all know they’re bad for you, but most people aren’t sure of what goes into a typical cocktail. Many of the more reputable brands use additives and preservatives, all of which can be toxic if ingested in excess (Ebbeling et al, 2006). The normal person is thought to drink more than three pints of liquid a day. Soft drinks account for about 30 percent of this in developing countries, and this figure is steadily rising. Aside from water, soft drinks have very little value. However, pure fruit juices and smoothies come out the as good alternative to such beverages (Dorfman et al, 2012). The objective of this paper is to focus on soft drink business a business situation that presents legal and ethical issue through highlighting at least two theories under which the case will be analyzed. Besides, the paper will also explain precise areas of policies through which the situation will be examined.

Description of Ethical Theories

Utilitarianism

The theory points out that the extent of delight and misery created by the actions of an individual is what is significant in the society. Therefore, acting accordingly entails the maximization of the amount of pleasure and minimizing the amount of suffering in our environment. Achieving such outcomes sometimes require one to break some of the usual moral norms (Abdullah, 2009).

Contract Theory

It proposes the thinking of the ethics according to covenants between individuals. Undertaking the correct thing indicates respecting the agreements that the associates of the rational culture would prefer and choose. Believers of contract, therefore, maintain that ethics is not all about outcomes, characters, and ideologies (Carroll & Buchholtz, 2014 ).

Areas of the Law to Analyze the Situation

Soft drinks that are intended for human consumption are covered by national policies based on codes and standards. For instance, in the country such as Japan, the legislation includes the Food Sanitation Act for food additives and labeling of the processed foods. Similarly, in the United States, soft drinks are regulated by Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Non-alcoholic beverages ingredients must comply with all applicable FDA safety requirements put in place (Hall & Bobinski, 2014).

References

Abdullah, H., & Valentine, B. (2009). Fundamental and ethics theories of corporate governance. Middle Eastern Finance and Economics, 4(4), 88-96.

Carroll, A., & Buchholtz, A. (2014). Business and society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management. Nelson Education.

Dorfman, L., Cheyne, A., Friedman, L. C., Wadud, A., & Gottlieb, M. (2012). Soda and tobacco industry corporate social responsibility campaigns: how do they compare?. PLoS medicine, 9(6), e1001241.

Ebbeling, C. B., Feldman, H. A., Osganian, S. K., Chomitz, V. R., Ellenbogen, S. J., & Ludwig, D. S. (2006). Effects of decreasing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption on body weight in adolescents: a randomized, controlled pilot study. Pediatrics, 117(3), 673-680.

Hall, M. A., & Bobinski, M. A. (2014). Health care law and ethics. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Kleiman, S., Ng, S. W., & Popkin, B. (2012). Drinking to our health: can beverage companies cut calories while maintaining profits?. Obesity Reviews, 13(3), 258-274.

Masdoor, K. A. (2011). Ethical theories of corporate governance. International Journal of Governance, 1(2), 484-492.

Pomeranz, J. L. (2012). Advanced policy options to regulate sugar-sweetened beverages to support public health. Journal of public health policy, 33(1), 75-88.

Rossouw, D., Van Vuuren, L., Ghani, A. H. A., & Adam, M. Z. A. (2010). Business ethics. Oxford University Press Southern Africa.

Wolbring, G. (2012). Ethical theories and discourses through an ability expectations and ableism lens: The case of enhancement and global regulation. Asian Bioethics Review, 4(4), 293-309.