H.B. Fuller and the Street Children of Central America

Name

Institution

H.B. Fuller and the Street Children of Central America

H.B. Fuller Company is an internationally renowned manufacturer, formulator, and marketer of specialty chemicals such as paints, adhesives, coatings, and sealants, and other related products. Harvey Benjamin Fuller, Sr. founded the company in 1887 and ventured into concocting and selling glue (Colle & York, 2008). It was the first company of its kind in Minnesota. It has global recognition in over 40 countries worldwide to companies in various industries such as the automotive, assembly, woodwork, and packaging. The aforementioned industries rely on industrial adhesives, which is the company’s core product. A significant product that is widely used by street children is shoe glue called Resistol. It makes an annual profit in the range of half a million dollars from glue sales.

The Resistol shoe glue is manufactured from a sweet-smelling hydrocarbon neurotoxin called toluene. Many street children, close to one million in number, prefer inhaling the glue as the drug of choice, thus gaining the name resistoleros with reference to the glue. The street kids find solace in inhaling the glue because it offers temporary escape from loneliness, abuse, and poverty by switching off the brain from reality, pain, stress, and fear. The children try to seek affection and comfort that they lack in their lives. Although the glue relieves the kids from temporary problems, it has long-term and detrimental effects. Prolonged use of Resistol causes addiction, paralysis, liver and kidney failure, neurological disorders, and death.

A Guatemalan teenager succumbed to inhalation of the glue in 1993, and H.B. Fuller Company was blamed for the demise. The company has regularly been blamed for the deaths and negative effects faced by street children consuming the product. However, in its defense, the company was quick to dismiss the allegations by stating that the deaths were a social problem and not a problem of the product. Fuller explained that the glue was manufactured for the primary use in shoes and not for irresponsible street children. He added that the target of their market was mature and legitimate consumers and would not take responsibility for product abuse although it was a matter of concern (Colle & York, 2008). Therefore, in my judgment, I do not blame the company for the addiction of street children to the glue. This is because the company does not manufacture the product with the aim of supplying it to the street children but selling it to legitimate consumers such as shoe companies. If the glue finds its way to the noses of the kids, it is not the company’s fault.

I believe that the social conditions in Guatemala and Honduras are significant contributing factors to the misuse of Fuller’s products. The two countries are poverty-stricken and are among the worst hit in Central America with dismal living conditions. Vices such as organized crime and drug trafficking are common in the society. Therefore, most families are disintegrated, and children face hostile and harsh conditions (Stieb, 2002). Consequently, they turn to the streets where they start sniffing the glue to seek temporary solutions to their adversities. Unfortunately, Fuller’s Resistol glue is the children’s favorite because of its sweet smell and they become addicted to it causing problems to their health. Therefore, the company and its products are not to blame for the children’s irresponsibility but the countries’ social conditions.

I disagree with the claim that a parent company should assume responsibility for a subsidiary company’s mistakes. This is because each company has independent operation rights and any irregularities performed should be blamed on the defaulter, not the parent company.

In order to check the problem, the company could have adopted the idea of adding mustard oil to the Resistol glue. The oil has a harsh smell, and it could discourage the children from sniffing the product. However, the company dismissed the idea as useless and did not implement it.

References

Colle, S., & York, J. (2008). Why Wine is not Glue? The UnresolvedProblem of Negative Screening in SociallyResponsible Investing. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(1), 83-95. doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9949-z

Stieb, J. (2002). Social Responsibility Within and Without Self-Interest: Emergent Technologies and Situations. Business and Society Review, 106(3), 241-253. doi: 10.1111/0045-3609.00114