Although breastfeeding is encouraged among mothers, there are instances when breastmilk may not be harmful or risky for the infant. In these cases, mothers must consult with a physician to know whether or not she should pursue with breastfeeding. If the physician advises against breastfeeding, such as when the mother has a medical condition or when the mother is advised to regularly take a certain drug, Nestle would be able to provide an alternative so that infants would still be able to get their nutrient requirements.
This is also the true when the infant has insufficient suck reflex or if the mother does not have enough milk. b) One of the disadvantages of breastfeeding is that it only allows the mother to participate in the feeding of the child. Using infant formulas such as those provided by Nestle allows other members of the family to participate in such activity with the child. c) The infant formulas of such as those provided by Nestle are digested more slowly than breastmilk. The child will have less necessity to eat more often.
d) Parents will have the exact knowledge of the nutrients that the child is receiving in case they feel the need to monitor the child’s intake. CONS a) Mothers who have been given infant formula packs are less likely to breastfeed. This may be nutritionally disadvantageous because no infant formula has duplicated the completeness of the nutrient content of breastmilk. b) Especially for poor families, starting with infant formulas may not be beneficial because needless to say, formulas are more expensive than breastmilk.
If the mother’s milk dries up, families will have no choice but to use formulas despite economic instability. As a result, families tend to dilute formulas in order to sustain its use. c) Infants miss out on the antibodies provided by breastmilk. d) Some infants tend to be allergic to infant formulas. 2. Ceasing to do business in Africa altogether. PROS a) Mothers will have less choice for an alternative to breast milk. This increases the chances that mothers will resort to breastfeeding. Mothers will also have no choice but to become healthier in order to adequately sustain the needs of their child.
b) Parents will not find themselves at the treadmill of expenses caused by the marketing and introduction of infant formulas by Nestle. As it is shown in the case, the introduction of formulas has caused mothers’ breastmilk to dry up, leading to dependency in infant formulas. c) Needless to say, the idea of feeding the child through other means than breastfeeding wouldn’t have occurred to mothers who did not need it if not for the marketing done by Nestle. Breastfeeding would have been more successful. CONS a) Businesses introduced would give a boost in Africa’s economy.
Ceasing to do business in Africa would result in loss of jobs, investment and even opportunities for some. The size of Nestle, being an International company determines what Africa might lose in terms of economic benefits. b) If Nestle ceases to do business in Africa, informed parents who are aware of the advantages and disadvantages of infant formulas would be forced to choose breastmilk. They would be deprived of their freedom to choose how their infants would be fed, and mothers, whether to breastfeed or not to breastfeed.
This is despite the fact that some mothers really have resort to infant formulas as imposed by certain medical conditions or physical limitations. 3. Pros and cons of intervention of organizations in marketing rules PROS a) The intervention of WHO, in this case, was able to force Nestle to take into consideration the disadvantages of abusive marketing methods on both infants and mothers. As disadvantages of infant formulas were discovered, rules were created to limit the means of marketing in order to prevent abusive methods.
b) Hospitals and health care practitioners who are supposed to protect the health of patients particularly in this case, mothers and infants became limited in their participation in the marketing of infant formulas. This is important because families trust that the health care institutions see to their welfare and are not primarily motivated by economic benefits. CONS a) Marketing is a means by which consumers get information about products. It provides consumers with the needed knowledge to enable them to weigh in their options.
By limiting companies’ means, consumers might not be able to have an informed decision, and make an informed choice on the feeding method they want to use. In a way, it is a form of coercion when a person’s choice is deliberately limited by certain rules that limit his/her access to information. b) Imposition of rules on marketing may discourage similar investments in the country as marketing is necessary in companies in order to sell their products. Too much unsold products means loss in profits and therefore loss in incentive to pursue businesses.
Infant formulas, although less ideal than breastfeeding are needed by some infants who have physical disabilities or those whose mothers are unable to breastfeed due to certain conditions. 4. To disclose or not to disclose The issue in this case is whether or not I should disclose to the boss the availability of a better technology despite the fact that I have just caused the company to spend thousands of dollars for another technology. This is an issue because it might cause me not only the risk of being admonished, but also the risk of being dismissed.
For five reasons, the better course of action is no doubt, to disclose to the superior the availability of a better technology. First, my superior, has the right to information that relates to the company, whether it is advantageous or disadvantageous. Information is necessary if the employer is to make good decision which would ultimately benefit not only him as an employer but also the other employees and the company itself. As an employee, it is supposed to be my duty to inform him of any knowledge that relates to the company.
Second, my employer and I, with respect to the company are supposed to have the same interest, which is to contribute to the growth of the company. My issues are personal and should not involve the company. This is what professionalism is all about. Third, anything I say will only be recommendatory. It is still the boss who will decide whether or not to pursue with a new purchase, in effect, discarding the previous purchase and suffering a loss. Not disclosing the information will be tantamount to making the decision myself of not allowing the company to benefit from the new technology.
Fourth, even if the boss thinks the other way, it is not my fault if I am able to get hold of the information only after the purchase. As far as I know, my recommendation to purchase water presses is based from the knowledge that it is the most advanced technology at that time. My initiative not to withhold information to the boss only signifies my lack of bad faith. Lastly, the company may lose a huge sum if it decides to purchase the laser presses but in the long run, it would prove to be beneficial. A sum of $150,000 is huge if evaluated based on short-term consequences but is small if long-term benefits are considered.