Background and History of the Project

The case study Effects of DDT on animal and bird population: Silent Spring by Rachel Carson sought to unearth the reality of how the environment, in specific birds across the United States suffered owing to the rampant application of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, DDT, a synthetic pesticide which was meant for insects and mosquito control. In the case study, Carson found that birds were laying thin-shelled eggs and consequently premature hatching which in turn too resulted to high decline in bird population after ingestion of DDT. Carson cited that the continued use of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane was only but a swift means to the extinction of birds, some of which were national symbols of the country, for instance the bald eagles (Carson, 20).

Carson argued and with proof felt that the continued use of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane was putting the bird population at risk and to a brink of extinction. In reaction to this, Carson therefore proposed that the use of DDT was harmful to the bird population and the only remedy was banning it. The case study Silent Spring successfully hit the eyes of many and carries the accolades even to date of the modern environmental movement with the resurgence and recovery of the bald eagle being a perfect example of how the environmental laws have restored what was once a diminishing national symbol (Carson, 61).

Ethical questions or problems that came up

The Silent Spring highlighted the hostility of chemical companies and the harmful selfish use of pesticides, DDT for this case, causing a major shift in the way the public perceived them and too brought about some needed consciousness concerning the environment (Hustad, 33).  It was therefore for the country to choose between continuing to extinguish the bird population or to find an alternative remedy for the use of DDT.As much as the pesticide was helping control mosquitoes and other insects, was it going to risk the bird population in the country? It was therefore considered selfish and unethical to continue using DDT at the expense of the bird population. But again the banning of DDT was coming as a conflict in the sense that the bird population was yes going to be saved, but what happens to mosquitoes which were too harmful to human health? (Hustad, 51; Carson 93).

What was actually done in the project?

The project ideally sensitized the general public and brought them to consciousness about what DDT was doing to the bird population in the country. The project acted as an eye opener showing the damages that the bird population was incurring courtesy of the use of DDT and other pesticides (Carson, 79).

How would you address the ethical questions and problems?

Though the DDT mosquito control is of great importance to human health, it will be selfish to continue using it at the expense of bird population. Therefore, I would advocate that it is banned and a remedy to mosquitoes which I know is achievable sought. DDT is not the only remedy to mosquitoes and since there can be an alternative to it which is not harmful to the bird population, then the alternative should be adopted to ensure a win-win situation for both the bird population and the human health (Hustad, 40).

 

 

The ASCE Canons stipulate that engineers in their profession “shall hold paramount the safety, health general welfare of the public” with professional competence acting objectively and in truth in issuing public statements. In addition, engineers should be faithful and have high fidelity in their profession maintaining good reputation without unfair competition enhancing honor, integrity and professional dignity and acting with zero-tolerance to corruption, fraud and bribery. The NSPE code of ethics too upholds the safety, health and welfare of general public from engineers whose competence should not be compromised by any form of infidelity, corruption, fraud or bribery or any act of deception (Whitbeck, 24-44).

The ASCE Canons and NSPE Code of Ethics are of great help in answering the ethical questions for they show the operational professional grounds of engineers. For instance, engineers should not assume the general health and fate of the environment, in this case the birds, as they make the pesticides but should be careful not to hurt any part of the ecosystem at the expense of another to profit themselves. The DDT pesticide was violating the ASCE Canons and NSPE Code of Ethics for it selfishly profited the human health not caring about the lethality of the pesticide, DDT, to the bird population (Whitbeck, 36-50).