Whistle blowing and Sarbanes-Oxley

WHISTLE BLOWING AND SARBANES-OXLEY 4

Whistle blowing is aspect of revealing secrets which are beinghidden by perpetrators of wrong doing. Whistle blowers provide thisinformation to the public. The whistle blower might revealinformation about a love affair between a senior manager and a junioremployee or some corrupt dealings in a company or governmentinstitution (Alford, 2015). Whistle blowers have some characteristicsin common which drive their actions to reveal the hidden information.To start with, whistle blowers are extremely brave people. Theyreveal information that might be affecting the secret service withoutfear of the consequences. Additionally, the whistle blower mightreveal information about his or her boss without the fear of losinghis or her job. Secondly, whistle blowers have the character ofnotwithstanding the wrongdoings they witness. Research has indicatedthat most of them are shocked when they realize what goes on in thegovernment or their place of work hence whistle blowing (Alford,2015). Another characteristic of whistle blowers is that they aim torectify the malpractice that goes on in the organization they workfor through revealing the information.

A recent case of whistle blowing involved Indiana University Healthmedical system where one of the employees reported fraud at theMethodist Hospital. According to the former director in the hospital,the high risk pregnant women were cheated and were attended bymidwives rather than doctors as required by the law (Jane, 2015).Whereas the whistleblower does not want in any way to disrespect themidwives, Judy Robinson argues that the high risk pregnant womenneeded the services of a doctor. The IU health medical system deniedthe allegations vehemently and asserted that all the high riskpregnant mothers were attended to by doctors and the ones attended bymidwives were not high risk pregnancies. The whistle blowing incidentresulted in the dismissal of Judy Robinson from her position in theline of hospitals. The case had tremendous effect on the reputationof the hospital (Jane, 2015). The lawsuit consumed enormous amount oftime and resources for the company. It is evident that formerpregnant patients to the hospital might find it extremely hard tovisit the hospital again.

I would totally agree that the whistleblower was indeed justified toblow the whistle on the wrongdoings associated with the hospital. Itis worth noting that the case involved the lives of a mother and achild and it is essential for the doctors and the management of thehospital to be extremely careful when handling pregnant mothers whoare considered to be at risk.

Judy Robinson was terminated from her position as a result of heraction of exposing the wrong doing in the hospital. In section 806 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the whistleblower protected from dismissal,suspension or even demotion from work as a result of the informationhe shares publicly about a wrong doing in the organization. It istherefore clear that Robinson would have been protected by the lawand this would have saved her the job. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act wasenacted to encourage the employees to report fraud either internallyor externally in an organization without the fear of intimidation orharassment from the management of the organization. The Act protectsthe employee who is the whistleblower from being disclosed publiclyby the employer. Retaliation acts are prohibited under this Act.

References

Alford, C. F. (2015).&nbspWhistleblowers: Broken lives andorganizational power. Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press.

Jane, L. (2015). Whistleblower: Indiana health system endangeredbabies for profit. America Tonight. Retrieved from:http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america- tonight/articles/2015/6/11/indiana-university-health-lawsuit-maternity.html

Close Menu