ACCOUNTABILITY
As we read the newspaper and watch or listen to the news on any given day, we see The Oz Principle applied and ignored each day. In fact, we decided to test this theory by choosing a day and then searching the paper to see how The Oz Principle would be manifested.
The day we chose was income tax filing day, April 15, 1993, in The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The (London) Times, The Globe, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times.
In the Los Angeles Times, we found a story about L-tryptophan and Betsy DiRosa. As you read the following excerpt, you might take a minute to think about who was accountable and who could have been more accountable in this story:
“Two years after taking the over-the-counter sleeping aid L- tryptophan, schoolteacher Betsy DiRosa began suffering skin blotches, joint and muscle cramps, tingling in her arms and legs, even damage to her heart and lungs. The symptoms remain with DiRosa and with thousands of other victims of L-tryptophan, which was lifted from shelves across the country in 1989 and is now the focal point of about 1500 lawsuits brought by victims of the debilitating disease EMS, for which L-tryptophan is blamed. This week, DiRosa, 42, became the first plaintiff in the nation to win a lawsuit against Showa Denko K.K., the Japanese manufacturer of the pill, but DiRosa and her attor-
ney reacted with disappointment Wednesday, saying they had hoped for more than the jury’s award of slightly more than $1 million.” The article goes on to say, “She was ‘upset’ about the jury’s verdict, saying she continued taking L-tryptophan after watching a news report that said a handful of people in New Mexico had developed mild symptoms as a result of using the pills.” DiRosa exclaimed, “There was no men- tion of recalls, and I never saw another report. L-tryptophan was still on the shelves, with no warning sign anywhere in sight. I don’t feel the least bit responsible for causing all of the horrible things that have happened to me. Was it really my fault?” DiRosa had been seeking $144 million but received less than even the $1.5 million offered in a proposed settlement by Showa Denko K.K. The jury found DiRosa partially at fault because she continued taking the pill after news accounts warning of its dangers. After the case was ended, Showa Denko’s attorney John Nyhan said, “The result should tell the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs’ lawyers that jurors do not believe the company should be punished for its conduct.” But then, according to DiRosa’s attorney Patrick McCormick, “Fault has been established.
We clearly showed that Showa Denko K.K. manufactured a defective product, one that never obtained FDA approval, and which has had a devastating impact.”
As with most victim stories, there are clearly two sides to this case:
both DiRosa and Showa Denko could have done more to avoid the tragedy. Showa Denko could have performed more testing and gained FDA approval before marketing its product. DiRosa could have stopped taking the pill as soon as she learned there might be a problem with the product. The jury rightly faulted Showa Denko for producing a bad product, but, honestly, the amount DiRosa received seems inad- equate compensation for the difficulties she has faced and will con- tinue to face throughout her life because of L-tryptophan. However, the jury based its decision on the principle of “what else might DiRosa have done.” Think of the situation in light of the Tylenol-tampering scare of a few years ago. How many people, when they first heard of the tampering problems, stopped buying and using the product? How many people waited for the recall before they stopped using Tylenol?
In our opinion, accountable consumers immediately discarded their Tylenol capsules and waited until Johnson & Johnson assured them that it had removed the risk of product tampering before they resumed using the product. DiRosa’s story highlights an important aspect of
The Oz Principle: a person can find herself or himself truly victimized, as Betsy DiRosa did, but at the same time that person can and should remain accountable for certain aspects of the situation.
In The Washington Post we found two interesting stories, one about President Clinton’s promise to Martha Raye and the other about the decline of the Washington Bullets. During the presidential campaign, then candidate Bill Clinton wrote a letter to Martha Raye saying that, if elected, he would be honored to award her the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her many contributions. Martha is now 76 years old and her health is beginning to fail, but she has not yet received her award. After attempting all the traditional ways to prompt the presid- ent to keep his word, Martha’s husband, Mark, ran a full-page ad in Daily Variety with a copy of the letter from President Clinton to Martha. While this may not produce the result Mark envisions, it does provide an example of someone applying The Oz Principle in a cir- cumstance many would consider “beyond their control.”
The sports section of most newspapers usually assigns blame for the final outcome of a game or season, and The Washington Post did so on April 15, 1993, in an article entitled, “Unseld: Icon or Bygone?”
The article reviewed the five-year decline of the Washington Bullets that began in 1988 with the appointment of Wes Unseld as coach.
“Who would have thought that after all the changes - after Williams, King, Jeff Malone, Ledell Eackles and Darrell Walker were sent out - that the Bullets would be so much worse? Who bears the burden of this?” The article goes on to suggest several reasons for the Bullets’
decline, but after several paragraphs, only one thing becomes clear:
the future of the Bullets does not depend on determining who should bear the bulk of the blame. A much more meaningful question oc- curred to us halfway through the article’s finger-pointing: “What else can Unseld and the Bullets do to achieve the results they want?” Such a focus might help everybody get Above The Line.
In The Globe we found the insightful story of two sixth grade con- flict managers, Cheryl Mauthe and Carrie McManus: “When Grade 6 students Cheryl Mauthe and Carrie McManus put on their pink baseball hats and head out to patrol the playground at Betty Gibson school, they go looking for trouble. The two girls are conflict managers, part of a program at the Brandon elementary school where students medi- ate non-physical disputes among their fellow schoolmates during re- cess. ‘It’s a good feeling knowing that you’re putting effort into
making our playgrounds a safer place,’ Cheryl says. ‘We’re helping people instead of them just getting into fights,’ adds Carrie…. The conflict managers, who have been patrolling the school’s playground since March 8, are not supposed to try to solve problems themselves, take sides or break up fights. Instead, they’re taught to ask the children involved how the problem can be solved, how to avoid future fights and attempt to get an agreement from everyone involved.” What marvelous Above The Line behavior! How would schools today change if kids on all our playgrounds helped children talk rather than fight, encouraged those with conflicts to find their own solutions, and identified conflict as something that does not need to mar school life?
All these examples appeared in the news on April 15, 1993. As you read or watch the news today, look yourself for examples of people reaping or failing to reap the benefits of accountability. It won’t take long for you to see the need for The Oz Principle in virtually every corner of American life.