To Accept or Reject a Client

            The decision to accept or reject a client is not always easy.  Some clients are simple because no controversy or conflict of interest is involved.  However, sometimes a client presents something of an ethical dilemma or some kind of controversy, which makes representing them difficult.  Money is a very powerful sway for some people, but money does not buy a person’s conscience and ethical convictions.  If a client came to me with an ethically questionable case I would analyze the case from a utilitarian perspective, with an existential twist.  The case presented here is a well-known ball player accused of using performance-enhancing drugs.  This is not the first time a ball player is accused of using performance-enhancing drugs, so a comparison on past athletes is helpful in making my decision. 

            The situation presented to me is that the athlete is still under investigation and he and his agent would like some positive publicity to build his reputation.  The athlete may be exonerated, but he may be formally charged with permanent damage to his career and image.  The athlete’s agent intimated that he did indeed ingest a substance, but did not know what it was.  The fact that the athlete is admitting to taking a substance is what I find most troubling.  I personally do not believe that a person would just take something without full knowledge of what it is, especially not someone who makes their living and entire lifestyle revolves around personal fitness.  The implication of this information has a huge impact on my decision.

            On a global scale, performance enhancement drugs have been less of an issue than recreational drugs such as cocaine.  However, Adrian Mutu and Jaap Stam and Abel Xavier were called down for performance enhancing drugs.  All three players were fined and had to serve a ban from playing soccer in the European circuits (Walsh & Forsyth, 2005).  While these performance enhancing drug usage accounts affected the European scene, I believe these should be taken into account for US audiences.  My personal sense of ethics does not allow me to represent drug users, regardless of money or career advancement.

            The ethics of the situation, as I see them, are representing an athlete who used performance-enhancing drugs.  The athlete claims to not have been aware of using any steroids or performance-enhancing drugs, but he did knowingly and willingly ingest something, although he claims he did not know what it was.  This athlete would like me to paint a positive picture for the mass public in order to enhance his positive side.  I personally believe that he would not have taken something without knowledge of what he ingested. 

            I recommend against taking this client.  The client admitted taking something to his agent, while claiming he did not know what he took.  As I previously stated, I do not believe a professional athlete would agree to take a substance without knowledge of what the substance was.  If I am wrong, and he was truly unaware, it shows a great deal of irresponsibility in his behavior.  This lack of honesty or lack of responsibility will affect the client relationship in a negative way.  I do not trust that this potential client will represent himself in an ethical or honorable way, which will have a negative impact on my relationship with the client.  The PRSA’s code of ethics requires honesty (Cameron, Wilcox, Reber, & Shin, 2008).  I do not trust the potential client’s honesty, because of this I again, recommend against representing this client.

            The potential client is questionable when it comes to honesty, the number one value of the PRSA (Cameron, Wilcox, Reber, & Shin, 2008).  The client willfully ingested some sort of substance that he claims he did not know what.  This shows either dishonesty of lack of keen decision-making.  I do believe that painting a positive spin on the athlete’s character for the general public and media may reflect negatively on the public relations agency I belong to.  I understand the ethics of the situation and the situation as I understand it is not going to benefit my agency or me.  In conclusion, I refer to the PRSA’s code of ethics.  If I represent this client, regardless of what it will do for my career or my financial wellbeing, it will lower my personal credibility and is not worth the challenge.  For the sake of the athlete, I hope he will be exonerated, but I do not believe he will be nor do I want my career or agency associated with him.

References

Cameron, G. T., Wilcox, D. L., Reber, B. H., & Shin, J. (2008). Public relations today: Managing competition and conflict. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

David Walsh and Paul Forsyth.  (2005, November 6). Xavier 'positive for steroid' :[Final 1 Edition]. Sunday Times,p. 1.  Retrieved November 14, 2011, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 928226091).