DP1
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/100#DP1
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP1
Decision question
Should Engineer A retain the wall defect observation solely in private field notes, produce a written memorandum to VWX documenting the observation and his surmise, or include the finding in the final report despite the client's suppression instruction?
Focus
Engineer A, having incidentally observed a pre-existing wall defect during a pavement inspection and professionally surmised it may have contributed to Police Officer B's fatal crash, must decide how to document that observation — whether to retain it only in private field notes, convert it into a written memorandum transmitted to VWX and the public agency, or include it in the final report despite the suppression instruction.
Option1
Preserve the wall defect observation exclusively in private engineering field notes, complying with the suppression instruction for the final report and making no separate written communication to VWX or the public agency.
Option2
Convert the verbal safety report into a written memorandum transmitted to VWX documenting the observation, the professional surmise of causal connection to the fatality, and the suppression instruction received — creating a durable record without including the finding in the final report.
Option3
Include the wall defect observation in the final report with appropriate epistemic qualification — noting it as a speculative, out-of-scope observation warranting expert structural review — despite the client's suppression instruction, on the grounds that the confirmed-fatality context makes omission ethically impermissible.
Role
Engineer
TTL
@prefix case100: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/100#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case100:DP1 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP1" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP1" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer A retain the wall defect observation solely in private field notes, produce a written memorandum to VWX documenting the observation and his surmise, or include the finding in the final report despite the client's suppression instruction?" ;
proeth:focus "Engineer A, having incidentally observed a pre-existing wall defect during a pavement inspection and professionally surmised it may have contributed to Police Officer B's fatal crash, must decide how to document that observation — whether to retain it only in private field notes, convert it into a written memorandum transmitted to VWX and the public agency, or include it in the final report despite the suppression instruction." ;
proeth:option1 "Preserve the wall defect observation exclusively in private engineering field notes, complying with the suppression instruction for the final report and making no separate written communication to VWX or the public agency." ;
proeth:option2 "Convert the verbal safety report into a written memorandum transmitted to VWX documenting the observation, the professional surmise of causal connection to the fatality, and the suppression instruction received — creating a durable record without including the finding in the final report." ;
proeth:option3 "Include the wall defect observation in the final report with appropriate epistemic qualification — noting it as a speculative, out-of-scope observation warranting expert structural review — despite the client's suppression instruction, on the grounds that the confirmed-fatality context makes omission ethically impermissible." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T09:05:10.685072"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 100 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-03-01T09:05:10.685072
Generated by
ProEthica Case 100 Extraction