Last year, Vioxx, which is one of Merck’s most profitable drugs, was pulled from the market due to extensive research which lead the company to believe that it was unsafe for human consumption. This is a good example of the lack of social responsibility on Merck’s end; they put the profits first, over the safety of people. The first lawsuit was lost by Merck in August. A Texas woman named Carol Ernst claimed Vioxx killed her husband back in 2001. She claimed that Merck willingly knew the effects of Vioxx. Her husband was a 59 year old athlete and a Wal-Mart employee who was in perfect health at the time. The jury proceeded with $250 million in damages including $24 million for mental and emotional effects from her husband’s death. This landmark case will “open the flood gates” for more lawsuits to take place, expectations are for 7,000 but could reach much more that in years to come. Wall Street analysts expect that all the lawsuits put together could cost Merck up to $50 billion in the coming years. The company had reserve cash to use in case of a problem like this.

As stated earlier, the company showed a lack of business ethics and social responcibility. Social responcibility are the effects of management decisions on social and economic effects. In this case Merck failed to consider the risks of the customers who used Vioxx. September 12th is when the case continues in court with an appeal from Merck to lower the amount given to Ms. Ernst for compensation. The company plans to take each case on individually as opposed to a global settlement.

On part, the FDA shouldn’t have been so quick to put Vioxx out on the market for Merck, they have part to blame and should be more careful in the future not to rush drugs down the pipeline for quick profits for the companies. That way, future lawsuits could be avoided by other drug companies. This case will certainly hurt Merck’s reputation as well as those companies across the entire pharmaceutical sector. The company also had a responcibility to post clearer warnings on the side of the bottle in which they did not do. Taking Vioxx greatly increased one’s chances of getting a heart attack or arrhythmia caused by heart attacks.

Merck made approximately $2.5 billion off Vioxx and ignored the side effects due to the money it was making, they wanted to keep it on the market for as long as possible, until the lawsuits came foreword. Social responsibility is a huge part for how people would think of a company as well as consumer satisfaction and having good social responsibility can reward companies if they put the people in front of the profits. Its common sense but the company decided that money was more important than saving lives. Hopefully in the future, more drugs companies will take a closer look, and also keep drugs in trials longer to make sure the side effects are kept to a minimum before being released for prescription or over the counter.